Often the government consists of the richest people, look at feudal times. And even when government claims to be for the people, it is really for the rich (sometimes power is expressed in slightly different ways such as in communist states but the rulers still had way more privileges similar to the rich). Look at the American Revolution, all the principal actors were wealthy or very wealthy with George Washington being perhaps the richest man ever in N. America (based on land). Sure to get the average person to go along they pushed the rights being violated angle but really they wanted to get rid of the British government supported competition and have the freedom to steal a huge land mass.
Simplest is to base it on the number of votes in the last election. A little bit slow but it'll motivate people to vote for minor parties who will then get more financing. This is how the Green Party managed to get a member elected in Canada and worked fine until a government decided they didn't want competition and got rid of public financing. This is the real problem with public financing, eventually it'll go away as it allows other then the rich to be involved in government and as the primary purpose of government is to support the rich...
Often it is the citizens who are financial idiots as they'd rather have low taxes rather then pay off the debt or often even balance the budget. It's like a household where as soon as their earnings equals their expenses, they take a vacation while their house needs a new roof and interest payments eat 25% of their income.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M... describes the reasons etc for there still being small issues of silver pennies, tuppence, threepence, and four pence.
The internet is getting consolidated. Perhaps one day Verizon will be rewarded with a monopoly as they have the most money. Then they can just refuse to let the average internet user access to web pages they don't agree with. The same thing with most other media. Those thousands of TV channels are now owned by a few companies who also own the newspapers, the radio stations and access to the internet. Not only do they have their loud megaphone but can also actively silence opinion that they don't like. Whether people can be educated to ignore propaganda is very questionable. Just notice that advertising is becoming such a big business, something that wouldn't happen if it didn't work.
A newspaper is more like the soapbox on the corner. Think more of if the rich buy all the means of distributing newspapers so your newspaper can't get much circulation. Or in modern times, if one ISP like Verizon manages to monopolize the ISP business then refuses to transport blogs they don't agree with. Sure you can write your blog and perhaps even distribute via sneaker net but the blogs that you can read by clicking a link will get more exposure.
Things like the earned income tax credit helps the rich get richer by allowing wages to be lower though I guess it's more redistributating the middle classes wealth then the poor who don't have enough to redistribute but the idea is still the same, use the force of government to ensure riches.
I was talking about the devaluations that started with Henry IV and really accelerated under Henry VIII. The silver penny didn't change with decimalism, staying the same design as introduced in 1822 and weight as the same as 1816 just its value changed from 240th of a pound to 100th of a pound.
Unofficially, the Pound started to be backed by gold in 1663 with the introduction of the gold guinea and the guinea varied a lot until fixed at 21s in 1717. Officially the UK went on the gold standard in 1816 and the sovereign was introduced the next year. Splitting a pound of silver into 240 pennies was standard until the reign of Henry IV.
Traditionally, Pounds Sterling were backed by silver, eg 5 pound note equals 5 pounds of sterling silver (the pound was slightly different then today I believe) with a Penny worth 240th of a pound. Of course the currency has hundreds of years of being debased.
Updating Win 3.1 to 3.11 was just a matter of downloading a couple of files (as a package IIRC) from MS and installing them. Never owned Windows for Workgroups but do own WinOS2 which is a fork of Win3.1.
We tried something similar in Canada, only individuals can contribute with a limit of about $1000 and public campaign financing based on results from the last election. Worked until the Conservatives got a majority, then the first thing they did was get rid of the public campaign financing in the name of fiscal responsibility and now through the "Fair Elections Act" they're trying to introduce loopholes, take power away from Elections Canada (traditionally non-partisan) to investigate campaign spending amongst other things including educating people about voting and a bunch of other crap to disenfranchise a good number of citizens.
While many (most?) people don't change their political beliefs, what does change is their will to get out and vote. This is really how most elections work now, get the opposition voters to stay home and your voters to get out and vote.
When a government becomes a tool to redistribute wealth, it is natural that people will spend money to prevent the products of their lives from being redistributed to someone else. That is the problem with huge government - it is merely a tool to take from one to give to another by the ballot box. Get the government out of that business and you'll get PACs out of the way too.
Government has always been a tool to redistribute wealth, why else do the wealthy want it. Huge government just means that the poor can finance having their money redistributed to the wealthy.
So what you are saying is that whoever can buy the largest megaphone and drown out all other voices deserves to be heard more? Seems that has the same problem as the idea that people should be allowed to swing their fist anywhere. Freedom always consists of trade-offs.
Another big driver of universal education was to give the now unneeded child labourers something to do as automation made them unnecessary for labour. Up until 100+ years ago kids started working at about 5 years old, on the farm originally, then in factories, mines, in the service industries etc. This is still going on with the expectation now that kids will stay in school until their mid-twenties with the added caveat that now the banks are making money as the kids are forced to borrow to pay for their continuing education and there is a movement to make all schools for profit.
It's not just the radiation. The slurry had a PH of something like 1.2 which causes chemical burns and allows the alpha and beta emitters through the skin. Uranium mining also involves lots of exposure to radon gas which possibly is one of the reasons uranium minors have elevated rates of cancers, especially lung cancers. I just get pissed with the people who claim that nuclear has never killed anybody, then as often as not list industrial accidents (I'm sure at least one worker has been killed during construction of nuclear plants) to show how dangerous everything else is. Uranium mining is hazardous just like coal mining with the benefit that less is needed. Didn't realize that polonium also comes from radon decay, always thought it was just a by-product of phosphorous (or is that potassium). No one ever mentions that the insecticide of choice on tobacco at one time was lead arsenic which does not break down.
c) why should a private company be forced to buy and resell your product and assume all the delivery expenses?
You forgot, why should private property owners be forced to let private companies run their infrastructure over their property and why should private companies get sole use of right aways along public roads etc? Or perhaps your one of those socialists who believe that only the rich should get benefits as they obviously deserve them.
Residents who waded in the river after the spill went to the hospital complaining of burning feet and were misdiagnosed with heat stroke.[14] Burns acquired by some of those who came into contact with the contaminated water developed serious infections and required amputations.[21] Herds of sheep and cattle died after drinking the contaminated water, and children played in pools of contaminated water.[22][32] The spill contaminated shallow aquifers near the river that residents drank and used to water livestock.
As long as you bullshit, your points, some of which are good, are going to be ignored.
Do you think that mining uranium is safe? Radon exposure, heavy metal poisoning, then there are the acids etc that are used. Don't be misled by the people who claim that nuclear is perfectly safe without mentioning accidents such as Church Rock as if someone is lying, why believe anything they say.
Slashdot Mirror
Often the government consists of the richest people, look at feudal times. And even when government claims to be for the people, it is really for the rich (sometimes power is expressed in slightly different ways such as in communist states but the rulers still had way more privileges similar to the rich). Look at the American Revolution, all the principal actors were wealthy or very wealthy with George Washington being perhaps the richest man ever in N. America (based on land). Sure to get the average person to go along they pushed the rights being violated angle but really they wanted to get rid of the British government supported competition and have the freedom to steal a huge land mass.
Simplest is to base it on the number of votes in the last election. A little bit slow but it'll motivate people to vote for minor parties who will then get more financing. This is how the Green Party managed to get a member elected in Canada and worked fine until a government decided they didn't want competition and got rid of public financing.
This is the real problem with public financing, eventually it'll go away as it allows other then the rich to be involved in government and as the primary purpose of government is to support the rich...
Often it is the citizens who are financial idiots as they'd rather have low taxes rather then pay off the debt or often even balance the budget. It's like a household where as soon as their earnings equals their expenses, they take a vacation while their house needs a new roof and interest payments eat 25% of their income.
Yes, it's the language. I meant that the pound was not 454 grams when a penny was defined as 1/240th of a pound of silver.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M... describes the reasons etc for there still being small issues of silver pennies, tuppence, threepence, and four pence.
One of the first steps on the way to the holocaust was to deny Jews and other undesirables the right to a bank account.
The internet is getting consolidated. Perhaps one day Verizon will be rewarded with a monopoly as they have the most money. Then they can just refuse to let the average internet user access to web pages they don't agree with. The same thing with most other media. Those thousands of TV channels are now owned by a few companies who also own the newspapers, the radio stations and access to the internet. Not only do they have their loud megaphone but can also actively silence opinion that they don't like.
Whether people can be educated to ignore propaganda is very questionable. Just notice that advertising is becoming such a big business, something that wouldn't happen if it didn't work.
A newspaper is more like the soapbox on the corner. Think more of if the rich buy all the means of distributing newspapers so your newspaper can't get much circulation. Or in modern times, if one ISP like Verizon manages to monopolize the ISP business then refuses to transport blogs they don't agree with. Sure you can write your blog and perhaps even distribute via sneaker net but the blogs that you can read by clicking a link will get more exposure.
Things like the earned income tax credit helps the rich get richer by allowing wages to be lower though I guess it's more redistributating the middle classes wealth then the poor who don't have enough to redistribute but the idea is still the same, use the force of government to ensure riches.
I was talking about the devaluations that started with Henry IV and really accelerated under Henry VIII.
The silver penny didn't change with decimalism, staying the same design as introduced in 1822 and weight as the same as 1816 just its value changed from 240th of a pound to 100th of a pound.
Unofficially, the Pound started to be backed by gold in 1663 with the introduction of the gold guinea and the guinea varied a lot until fixed at 21s in 1717. Officially the UK went on the gold standard in 1816 and the sovereign was introduced the next year.
Splitting a pound of silver into 240 pennies was standard until the reign of Henry IV.
Traditionally, Pounds Sterling were backed by silver, eg 5 pound note equals 5 pounds of sterling silver (the pound was slightly different then today I believe) with a Penny worth 240th of a pound. Of course the currency has hundreds of years of being debased.
Any history book.
Updating Win 3.1 to 3.11 was just a matter of downloading a couple of files (as a package IIRC) from MS and installing them. Never owned Windows for Workgroups but do own WinOS2 which is a fork of Win3.1.
We tried something similar in Canada, only individuals can contribute with a limit of about $1000 and public campaign financing based on results from the last election. Worked until the Conservatives got a majority, then the first thing they did was get rid of the public campaign financing in the name of fiscal responsibility and now through the "Fair Elections Act" they're trying to introduce loopholes, take power away from Elections Canada (traditionally non-partisan) to investigate campaign spending amongst other things including educating people about voting and a bunch of other crap to disenfranchise a good number of citizens.
992M vs 985M is basically the same amount.
While many (most?) people don't change their political beliefs, what does change is their will to get out and vote. This is really how most elections work now, get the opposition voters to stay home and your voters to get out and vote.
When a government becomes a tool to redistribute wealth, it is natural that people will spend money to prevent the products of their lives from being redistributed to someone else. That is the problem with huge government - it is merely a tool to take from one to give to another by the ballot box. Get the government out of that business and you'll get PACs out of the way too.
Government has always been a tool to redistribute wealth, why else do the wealthy want it. Huge government just means that the poor can finance having their money redistributed to the wealthy.
So what you are saying is that whoever can buy the largest megaphone and drown out all other voices deserves to be heard more? Seems that has the same problem as the idea that people should be allowed to swing their fist anywhere. Freedom always consists of trade-offs.
Another big driver of universal education was to give the now unneeded child labourers something to do as automation made them unnecessary for labour. Up until 100+ years ago kids started working at about 5 years old, on the farm originally, then in factories, mines, in the service industries etc.
This is still going on with the expectation now that kids will stay in school until their mid-twenties with the added caveat that now the banks are making money as the kids are forced to borrow to pay for their continuing education and there is a movement to make all schools for profit.
It's not just the radiation. The slurry had a PH of something like 1.2 which causes chemical burns and allows the alpha and beta emitters through the skin.
Uranium mining also involves lots of exposure to radon gas which possibly is one of the reasons uranium minors have elevated rates of cancers, especially lung cancers.
I just get pissed with the people who claim that nuclear has never killed anybody, then as often as not list industrial accidents (I'm sure at least one worker has been killed during construction of nuclear plants) to show how dangerous everything else is. Uranium mining is hazardous just like coal mining with the benefit that less is needed.
Didn't realize that polonium also comes from radon decay, always thought it was just a by-product of phosphorous (or is that potassium). No one ever mentions that the insecticide of choice on tobacco at one time was lead arsenic which does not break down.
Wouldn't the benefit of not having to construct another expensive power plant and recoup the expense be good for everyone?
c) why should a private company be forced to buy and resell your product and assume all the delivery expenses?
You forgot, why should private property owners be forced to let private companies run their infrastructure over their property and why should private companies get sole use of right aways along public roads etc?
Or perhaps your one of those socialists who believe that only the rich should get benefits as they obviously deserve them.
Residents who waded in the river after the spill went to the hospital complaining of burning feet and were misdiagnosed with heat stroke.[14] Burns acquired by some of those who came into contact with the contaminated water developed serious infections and required amputations.[21] Herds of sheep and cattle died after drinking the contaminated water, and children played in pools of contaminated water.[22][32] The spill contaminated shallow aquifers near the river that residents drank and used to water livestock.
As long as you bullshit, your points, some of which are good, are going to be ignored.
Do you think that mining uranium is safe? Radon exposure, heavy metal poisoning, then there are the acids etc that are used. Don't be misled by the people who claim that nuclear is perfectly safe without mentioning accidents such as Church Rock as if someone is lying, why believe anything they say.