It seems like the vast majority of people think that education and job training are the same thing or at least should be the same thing. My opinion has been that this is actually the root of the problem. If this actually is true then making schools "accountable" actually makes the problem worse.
I know talking with those older than me that companies didn't used to expect people to know everything before they could be hired. Now companies don't want to hire except when the person is perfect. It's not only education that has changed.
I don't believe either, but I am not sure why the "everyone does it" defence is relevant. NewsCorp is the one with evidence against it on the table right now. If Time/Warner or NBC or Gannett or whoever has similar evidence it will hopefully come out as well, but that doesn't have anything to do with this situation right now.
In the U.S. we continue to have this myth that the super-rich got there only by being smart and making "good decisions" and that failures became that way solely because they made "bad decisions." Anyone that is super-rich in the U.S. that isn't trying to sell you something will tell you that getting that far is a combination of being smart and being in the right place in the right time.
Anyone with that much money is at least smart enough, however, to have enough contingencies in place that they will have a soft landing when something goes badly wrong. He won't be going hungry any time soon even though they seem to have obviously made a crap-load of "bad decisions."
Therefore "both" parties and presidents deserve to be criticised.
Unfortunately this is what "both" sides have wrong. Both "sides" are only one side: the corporatists. The corporate economy is BOOMING, which why none of the middle class problems are going to change.
Exactly. I know there were a lot non-tech people who didn't see Internet expansion as a stimulus, but you can't have any decent sized business without having decent Internet today. Hell, you can't have most SMALL businesses. It basically limits everyone there to advertising by flyers for lawn-mowing businesses.
Question from a lazy person: does anyone have any idea what was said about the TVA back in the day. Getting rural broadband to me seems to have a lot in common with rural electrification... including all the people saying that it isn't a necessity, people who crying about "market forces" and all that.
I know everyone seems to have their biases, but it seems like every study that has come out over the last 2 years is two biased to consider no matter what "side" it supports.
You have a point. Corporations are run by people. LLC stands for "Limited Liability Corporation." Corporations protect owners and employees from blame and lawsuits when something goes wrong. The corporation keeps owners from suffering the consequences when something goes wrong or even when someone does something wilfully negligent. This is why the modern corporation is a great enabler of evil... when something is done wrong, like the poisoning of a body of water or the financial ruining of thousands of people, the is no one but a "legal fiction" to punish.
I agree. If the county or city is allowing use of its right-of-way or equipment there should be no reason why it can't regulate it and require any company using it to be neutral. Charters for such things occur at the local level.
But I see no way a community could have any say about corporate personhood. The only way we are ever going to get rid of corporate personhood is constitutional amendment... and it's a constitutional amendment we most desperately need. Corporate rights were deliberately left out of the constitution because the founders did not want to give corporations too many rights (because of the East India Company). The only reason we have corporate rights is because of judicial activism in the mid-1800s. Every time the "strict constitutionalist" judges vote for corporate rights the hypocrisy is almost palpable.
Actually as I understand it, in Fascism the government uses the corporations for consolidation of power and to build the war machine.
What we have in the U.S. is slightly different. It's the Corporations using the government as a puppet to rule. So I have often called it "Reverse Fascism," but Corporatism is the same thing. Both are about corporations having so much influence in the government that they're affectively ruling the country. If we aren't there yet we will be there shortly.
1) There ought to be a difference between speech by individuals and corporations as corporations are a "legal fiction" and not real persons. When you elevate corporations to "people" you essentially give them MORE rights than real people because they can be such a potent concentration of power. The writers of the constitution actually knew this... it was never their intent for companies to have more power than individuals. They were very wary of corporations because of their dealings with the East India Company.
2) Freedom of Speech is more about freedom to speak opinion, not freedom to know someone's personal facts. It appears people bent over backwards to try to make medical facts fit into that hole.
This is wrong... both parties are bought out by corporations... it's just they are slightly different groups of corporations. Also the Republicans are more open (and often proud) about it.
Almost everything in the corporate media is focuses on the liberal vs. conservative sideshow... they have an interest in the country turning into a corporate state.
The ONLY strategy shown to work (by Arizona incidentally) is to crack down on business owners using an illegal workforce.
*That* is the bogus strain of all these laws and crackdowns that no one talks about. No new laws are required... all that is needed is that the government actually enforces and fines businesses. But these people are paying millions to lobbyist firms and election campaigns, so nothing is ever enforced. If these businesses need to break the law to make money then their business model is wrong. Again, we've got a "debate" that isn't actually a debate... put sanctions against these companies on the table and forget about the raids.
Slashdot Mirror
It seems like the vast majority of people think that education and job training are the same thing or at least should be the same thing. My opinion has been that this is actually the root of the problem. If this actually is true then making schools "accountable" actually makes the problem worse.
I know talking with those older than me that companies didn't used to expect people to know everything before they could be hired. Now companies don't want to hire except when the person is perfect. It's not only education that has changed.
I don't believe either, but I am not sure why the "everyone does it" defence is relevant. NewsCorp is the one with evidence against it on the table right now. If Time/Warner or NBC or Gannett or whoever has similar evidence it will hopefully come out as well, but that doesn't have anything to do with this situation right now.
In the U.S. we continue to have this myth that the super-rich got there only by being smart and making "good decisions" and that failures became that way solely because they made "bad decisions." Anyone that is super-rich in the U.S. that isn't trying to sell you something will tell you that getting that far is a combination of being smart and being in the right place in the right time.
Anyone with that much money is at least smart enough, however, to have enough contingencies in place that they will have a soft landing when something goes badly wrong. He won't be going hungry any time soon even though they seem to have obviously made a crap-load of "bad decisions."
The laws, however, are subject to the highest bidder....
Therefore "both" parties and presidents deserve to be criticised.
Unfortunately this is what "both" sides have wrong. Both "sides" are only one side: the corporatists. The corporate economy is BOOMING, which why none of the middle class problems are going to change.
But..but...but...but... an MBA CEO is worth 4 million a year!
That's quite a good point...
Exactly. I know there were a lot non-tech people who didn't see Internet expansion as a stimulus, but you can't have any decent sized business without having decent Internet today. Hell, you can't have most SMALL businesses. It basically limits everyone there to advertising by flyers for lawn-mowing businesses.
Question from a lazy person: does anyone have any idea what was said about the TVA back in the day. Getting rural broadband to me seems to have a lot in common with rural electrification... including all the people saying that it isn't a necessity, people who crying about "market forces" and all that.
I know everyone seems to have their biases, but it seems like every study that has come out over the last 2 years is two biased to consider no matter what "side" it supports.
If you cross reference the "vigorous sexual activity" and the amount a person posts to Slashdot you can find the liars!
Wow.. and YOU have no political bias at all, do you? Go away.
You have a point. Corporations are run by people. LLC stands for "Limited Liability Corporation." Corporations protect owners and employees from blame and lawsuits when something goes wrong. The corporation keeps owners from suffering the consequences when something goes wrong or even when someone does something wilfully negligent. This is why the modern corporation is a great enabler of evil... when something is done wrong, like the poisoning of a body of water or the financial ruining of thousands of people, the is no one but a "legal fiction" to punish.
I agree. If the county or city is allowing use of its right-of-way or equipment there should be no reason why it can't regulate it and require any company using it to be neutral. Charters for such things occur at the local level.
But I see no way a community could have any say about corporate personhood. The only way we are ever going to get rid of corporate personhood is constitutional amendment... and it's a constitutional amendment we most desperately need. Corporate rights were deliberately left out of the constitution because the founders did not want to give corporations too many rights (because of the East India Company). The only reason we have corporate rights is because of judicial activism in the mid-1800s. Every time the "strict constitutionalist" judges vote for corporate rights the hypocrisy is almost palpable.
Actually as I understand it, in Fascism the government uses the corporations for consolidation of power and to build the war machine.
What we have in the U.S. is slightly different. It's the Corporations using the government as a puppet to rule. So I have often called it "Reverse Fascism," but Corporatism is the same thing. Both are about corporations having so much influence in the government that they're affectively ruling the country. If we aren't there yet we will be there shortly.
Could it mean there were more "real" problems with Android vs. more "I'm a dumbass and can't RTFM" problems with other platforms?
Is it me, or is the FUD campaigns on Android on a dramatic increase? It seems coordinated.
1) There ought to be a difference between speech by individuals and corporations as corporations are a "legal fiction" and not real persons. When you elevate corporations to "people" you essentially give them MORE rights than real people because they can be such a potent concentration of power. The writers of the constitution actually knew this... it was never their intent for companies to have more power than individuals. They were very wary of corporations because of their dealings with the East India Company.
2) Freedom of Speech is more about freedom to speak opinion, not freedom to know someone's personal facts. It appears people bent over backwards to try to make medical facts fit into that hole.
The liberals love to promote laws written by the RIAA and Hollywood. How is that not corporatist?
This is wrong... both parties are bought out by corporations... it's just they are slightly different groups of corporations. Also the Republicans are more open (and often proud) about it.
Almost everything in the corporate media is focuses on the liberal vs. conservative sideshow... they have an interest in the country turning into a corporate state.
The Boston Tea Party was a protest against the East India Company as much as it was against British Rule and taxes.
That's something they don't like to teach at school any more...
Pay enough and people will do any job.
In GA there is a shortage of farm workers who will accept slave wages.
The ONLY strategy shown to work (by Arizona incidentally) is to crack down on business owners using an illegal workforce.
*That* is the bogus strain of all these laws and crackdowns that no one talks about. No new laws are required... all that is needed is that the government actually enforces and fines businesses. But these people are paying millions to lobbyist firms and election campaigns, so nothing is ever enforced. If these businesses need to break the law to make money then their business model is wrong. Again, we've got a "debate" that isn't actually a debate... put sanctions against these companies on the table and forget about the raids.
In America, the Lobbyists are the Government!
Wake up and smell the coffee. You're living in the past.
Fining the ass off of Employers that are hiring illegal aliens?
Oh, I forgot who has the bigger lobby.
This country is seriously screwed...
"I didn't even notice he was Hispanic, judge! I swear!" heh heh.
Law Enforcement has NEVER lied to make themselves look better.