Obviously you don't have children. When you spend 2 hours trying to get your kid to sleep, and then turn on your favorite show while you finally have some down time, the last thing you want is Billy Mays waking your kid up before you can mute the TV.
Has the UI improved at all? I remember playing that back in about '03 and I couldn't even figure out how to play the damn game. I decided Sid deserved my money, and quit trying to save a buck by playing the free knock off.
Haha I can relate there.. I've got a 5 month old. Luckily he seems to enjoy watching the game:)
But anyway, there's some very nice abilities gained if you follow a social policy tree down to the end. One of the commercial ones lets you buy buildings for 25% off. Just getting Rationalism gives you a free golden age, and then two more nodes down gives you +15% research. Also, one of the early policies lets you build settlers for half cost, and another causes your cities to be halfway to expanding at the time they're founded. If you plan it out right, these bonuses are huge. Contrast this to building wonders, which often have a much smaller effect for the same wonder as they did in previous games. The Great Library, for instance, barely does anything now.
I didn't have it at work with me. So yeah, okay, if you get a $1 raise per year you lose out. So, you get a $1 raise per year? Are you really that bad at your job? Really?
It can affect your witholdings, but cannot actually increase your (federal) taxes. Can't say for certainty about all 50 states, but I think most if not all use either flat tax or graduated tax, so it should apply there as well.
Also, don't you think it's a little ridiculous for a person making $10k a year to pay the same in taxes as someone making $10m per year?
So the guy making $10k/yr pays 15% = $1500, and the guy making $10m/yr pays 15% = $1.5M
How is that unfair? Oh, you thought "Flat Tax" was a static amount, not static rate.....
From the GGP post:
Why can't everyone just pay the same amount, no matter how much they make?
It's pretty clear that the poster was referring to the amount, not the rate.
I call BS. You can't pay more due to a raise, because you only pay the new bracket's taxes on what you make within that tax bracket. Look up graduated income tax for a more complete explanation. Also, don't you think it's a little ridiculous for a person making $10k a year to pay the same in taxes as someone making $10m per year? Also, to match the current tax income, that total would be well over $10k per person. Talk about an incentive not to work!
Economics is certainly a science (at least with some schools of thought), producing a priori true propositions that withstand rigorous logical analysis - like mathematics. The law of diminishing marginal utility, for example, is not a 'pattern', neither is it subject to empirical verification/falsification - it is a priori true as much, or moreso than (depending on which philosopher your talk to), the Pythagoras triangle theorem.
But it's that inherent inability to verify or falsify that makes it a non-science. And for the record, math is not a science, either. Being able to make up a system and then write equations that hold up within that system does not mean that your system in any way models reality. Unless you can empirically test a hypothesis, you're not doing science.
Not completely off topic, but this isn't the first time this idea of "infinite supply doesn't work with conventional/classical economic models" has come up before.
Does anyone know of any theorists or heavy thinkers in the field who are working on something like this? I mean, if the new products don't work with the old model, don't we need a new model? What would that model look like? I'd be interested in reading about work being done in this area if anyone has any suggestions.
Communism actually deals with the topic quite neatly..
Make, spend, whatever.. Where is the money? Where did it come from? Where did it go? Money is something we have collectively willed into existence. It has no inherent value, and it's only worth is what we THINK we can exchange for it.
Your problem here is you're thinking of economics as a science (and beyond that, a hard science). Economics doesn't have rules. At best, economics has patterns.
But economics is not actually a zero sum game.. There's lots of imaginary money (stocks, bonds, loans, etc.) that pops into existence from time to time, and disappears just as quickly. Economics is like alchemy, in that it doesn't actually have to work, only make others think it works.
You've got it slightly wrong.. It's not that Engineering students don't care or can't understand, it's that they try to simplify it into a problem they can solve. This is where the massive Libertarian leanings come from on slashdot -- smart people who prefer a simplified, solvable world view in lieu of a complicated reality. It's a real shock for many of us to learn that some systems cannot be simplified. I'm lucky to have learned it early on.
That really has little to do with being a Linux user.. I have never actually bought a "computer", but only the parts to build it.. But I'd say today it's probably cheaper to buy the whole bundle. I still refuse to do so, but on the grounds that I lose control of what parts go into my computer.
Yeah, but let's not forget the crapware that used to (still does?) ship with pre-build computers. You end up spending hours just getting rid of the crap Dell, HP, or eMachines decided should belong on your computer, all because they each wanted to have a custom install. I'm sure many users would have gladly paid even more to just get a vanilla copy of Windows.
Slashdot Mirror
Obviously you don't have children. When you spend 2 hours trying to get your kid to sleep, and then turn on your favorite show while you finally have some down time, the last thing you want is Billy Mays waking your kid up before you can mute the TV.
But it's not counting the energy that's actually generating the heat. Not saying it's energy you care about, but it's still energy.
In pure energy terms, heat pumps are approx 300% to 400% efficient (energy out to energy in ratio).
Wohoo! Perpetual motion machine!
Has the UI improved at all? I remember playing that back in about '03 and I couldn't even figure out how to play the damn game. I decided Sid deserved my money, and quit trying to save a buck by playing the free knock off.
Haha I can relate there.. I've got a 5 month old. Luckily he seems to enjoy watching the game :)
But anyway, there's some very nice abilities gained if you follow a social policy tree down to the end. One of the commercial ones lets you buy buildings for 25% off. Just getting Rationalism gives you a free golden age, and then two more nodes down gives you +15% research. Also, one of the early policies lets you build settlers for half cost, and another causes your cities to be halfway to expanding at the time they're founded. If you plan it out right, these bonuses are huge. Contrast this to building wonders, which often have a much smaller effect for the same wonder as they did in previous games. The Great Library, for instance, barely does anything now.
This and many other reviews downplay the effect of social policies. If done right, I'd say each social policy is worth between 1 and 3 wonders built..
I didn't have it at work with me. So yeah, okay, if you get a $1 raise per year you lose out. So, you get a $1 raise per year? Are you really that bad at your job? Really?
Not according to this site The taxes came out to $6,187 for $39,999 and $6,188 for $40,000.
That would be great, let's just stop all the activity that was so in demand that these high earners became high earners.
And by "activity", you mean outsourcing jobs to India, right?
It can affect your witholdings, but cannot actually increase your (federal) taxes. Can't say for certainty about all 50 states, but I think most if not all use either flat tax or graduated tax, so it should apply there as well.
Also, don't you think it's a little ridiculous for a person making $10k a year to pay the same in taxes as someone making $10m per year?
So the guy making $10k/yr pays 15% = $1500, and the guy making $10m/yr pays 15% = $1.5M How is that unfair? Oh, you thought "Flat Tax" was a static amount, not static rate.....
From the GGP post:
Why can't everyone just pay the same amount, no matter how much they make?
It's pretty clear that the poster was referring to the amount, not the rate.
I call BS. You can't pay more due to a raise, because you only pay the new bracket's taxes on what you make within that tax bracket. Look up graduated income tax for a more complete explanation. Also, don't you think it's a little ridiculous for a person making $10k a year to pay the same in taxes as someone making $10m per year? Also, to match the current tax income, that total would be well over $10k per person. Talk about an incentive not to work!
Really? You're going to tell me you beat MM1? Without cheating, and without dying at least a hundred times? I call BS.
While much of what you say is true, you're dead wrong about old games not being hard. Load up Mega Man 1 or Contra if you don't believe me.
And I suggest you read your 5th grade text book on the scientific method.
I think you're mixing up 'money' with 'natural resources'. It's way more complicated than you think it is..
Economics is certainly a science (at least with some schools of thought), producing a priori true propositions that withstand rigorous logical analysis - like mathematics. The law of diminishing marginal utility, for example, is not a 'pattern', neither is it subject to empirical verification/falsification - it is a priori true as much, or moreso than (depending on which philosopher your talk to), the Pythagoras triangle theorem.
But it's that inherent inability to verify or falsify that makes it a non-science. And for the record, math is not a science, either. Being able to make up a system and then write equations that hold up within that system does not mean that your system in any way models reality. Unless you can empirically test a hypothesis, you're not doing science.
Not completely off topic, but this isn't the first time this idea of "infinite supply doesn't work with conventional/classical economic models" has come up before. Does anyone know of any theorists or heavy thinkers in the field who are working on something like this? I mean, if the new products don't work with the old model, don't we need a new model? What would that model look like? I'd be interested in reading about work being done in this area if anyone has any suggestions.
Communism actually deals with the topic quite neatly..
Make, spend, whatever.. Where is the money? Where did it come from? Where did it go? Money is something we have collectively willed into existence. It has no inherent value, and it's only worth is what we THINK we can exchange for it.
Your problem here is you're thinking of economics as a science (and beyond that, a hard science). Economics doesn't have rules. At best, economics has patterns.
But economics is not actually a zero sum game.. There's lots of imaginary money (stocks, bonds, loans, etc.) that pops into existence from time to time, and disappears just as quickly. Economics is like alchemy, in that it doesn't actually have to work, only make others think it works.
You've got it slightly wrong.. It's not that Engineering students don't care or can't understand, it's that they try to simplify it into a problem they can solve. This is where the massive Libertarian leanings come from on slashdot -- smart people who prefer a simplified, solvable world view in lieu of a complicated reality. It's a real shock for many of us to learn that some systems cannot be simplified. I'm lucky to have learned it early on.
Now I can network with all 3 people that care about both FOSS principles and social networking!
That really has little to do with being a Linux user.. I have never actually bought a "computer", but only the parts to build it.. But I'd say today it's probably cheaper to buy the whole bundle. I still refuse to do so, but on the grounds that I lose control of what parts go into my computer.
Yeah, but let's not forget the crapware that used to (still does?) ship with pre-build computers. You end up spending hours just getting rid of the crap Dell, HP, or eMachines decided should belong on your computer, all because they each wanted to have a custom install. I'm sure many users would have gladly paid even more to just get a vanilla copy of Windows.