Actually the people realized that the government no longer had power over them and they were by defacto free. However they did not actually *understand* freedom and did nothing to limit government power.
The same thing will might happen here.. and my god.. could you even imagine trying to write a new constitution today and what might be put in it? It would be the target of every special interest group in existence.. it would be thousands of pages long..
No.. like the Russians, the Americans by in large don't understand freedom and until we do.. we are FAR better off with the broken system we have now, then we would ever be if we tried to start a new government..
Of course as a nation we really are insane; most people still don't see the problem with putting the richest corporations in charge of absolutely everything and calling it "freedom". ..And just who would you like to put in charge? I would counter that in order for it to be freedom nobody can be "in charge".
A corporation is "legal fiction". It is a legal person that is created by government law and provides legal protection to the members that created it. This allows them to engage in questionable business practices. They can not exist without government laws and if they did not.. suddenly business *men* would be responsible for their actions. CEO's are not going to do whats right because they have no risk.. In may cases if they DON'T do "the wrong thing" they can be sued by the shareholders because of the way is was "legally constructed". The answer to corporations and Corporatism as a form of government, is to simply get rid of the laws that allow people to incorporate.
However..the socialists are out and yet again they are attempting to fix the problem government laws created with more government laws.. if that poison doesn't kill you... just have more poison.
The MOST important thing is he is a tried and true socialist in the same vein as Noam Chomsky.
He tells you what is wrong, and he is rather accurate in doing so.. then he gives you a solution that is absolute tyranny. His solution is ALWAYS to have government FIX the problem, often when it was government that caused the problem to begin with. The solution is not more government it is more liberty.
Here in Soviet Amerika, Microsoft and Haliburton write our laws. This is Corporatism, its Mercantilism, and its evil.. If we let it continue we will find ourselves homeless in the country our forefathers conquered.
This is right on the ball here.. one thing I want to add is a corporation itself is "legal fiction" it's nothing more than government sanctioned legal protection for business. If you get rid of the laws that allow them to incorprate, then you just have a business with real people behind it who are really liable for the actions they take.
When people argue politics with me, my first question is: "In the last election, did you vote?". If the answer is no, then I refuse to discuss politics, after telling them "I don't care what you think, your opinion doesn't matter!". Your saying.. "I can use force on you not based on if its right or wrong but based on if you voted." I don't stand on one leg when I vote.. does that matter to you?
Government is legal fiction, it is not moral, or right, or just.. its just men using force on other men. Every single year if I could, I would vote to disband the federal government entirely. I can not and probably never will win, but I continue to try.. really though..? does it matter if I vote or not?
The system of tyranny of the majority we call Democracy is just as brutal as any other government if you find yourself and your ideas not in the so called majority. Every year this majority creates new laws backed by brutal force against a minority, sometimes the markup of the minority will change so that gives us a change to pass laws against a new minority also.
Nice of you to be so authoritarian that you wont even talk to those in the minority that have given up hope..
This is where my karma goes down, but I don't think Net Neutrality will be a good thing.
ISP have been allotting more bandwidth to "preferred" sites since the beginning, they even allow companies to pay for more of a preference by means of buying more bandwidth. I do not believe that there will be a time that you can only surf big sites on the internet, I think its fear mongering and I think the very worst thing we can do with the internet is allow government to regulate it.
Let's just regulate the piss out of it.. regulate what kind of traffic you can send, and who you can send it to, and if you can gamble on pornographic games with it, and what types of fraud and child protections must be mandated by law, Let's mandate a tax for every e-mail too. We do all that.. and I'm SURE we will absolutely ruin the net.
I believe it has been the LACK of government law and regulation that caused it to become what it is.
This is amusing watching how business believe theft of IP as a loss in sales. There is a dangerous aspect to this however and that is how government is willing to enforce their failed business model on us. The market no longer wants to walk into a record store or a theater to buy their media products and currently to do so legally, there are few good options to this. One of the bad options given to us by the industry is to "rent" a copy of the movie or music, that we may use a limited number of time on a limited number of devices in a limited way.
Eventually I believe that they will have the ability to check to see what you own and government will allow them to do this..
In 1765 King George III created The Stamp Act. By his degree all documents, papers, books, letters, posters, newspapers, and even playing cards, had to carry a tax stamp. In order to make sure if your papers were taxed.. British officers could write themselves their own search warrant and come into your house to check. As you can see there was a great outcry from this abuse of powers and this would absolutely be illegal by all of todays standards... or would it..
Can the government digitally search your papers and effects to see if you payed the proper "tax" ? Things seem to be going in this direction.
It's not if I *CAN* do it.. I cerntly COULD do that. What I'm complaning about is my government does not believe I'm allowed to.
You can't fight for your rights by "getting around" the law.. you eventually need to dig in your heals and say "No, you do not have the authority to do this!"
Yeah, you can't actually monitor police activies ESPECIALLY if they are doing something wrong...and if you TELL someone about it your obstructing justice and harming the nation.
This is an afront to everything a free country is about! They are suposta serve us!
At first they told us we needed a national ID card for Security. When it came to light that people holding ID cards can STILL commit crimes. Terrorists foregn and national can get legal ID's *then* set off there bombs.
So they changed the story now we need this for illegals.. and ONLY illegals will get this.. what a crock.. they are illegal.. they are breaking the current laws.. why on earth would they follow this one law? Laws are not magic.. they dont make criminals disapear.
I'm so angry at my government I'm frothing at the mouth.
They are going to put cops in movie theaters to protect corporate profits?! What a joke!
"Our law that we wrote says its illegal to use a camcorder in a theaters, and we have had local athorities install automated gun turrets installed to enforce it." -- The MPAA
Your correct, I am talking about London, and no I'm talking about seprate camera's, trafic cams, private security cams, etc.
It does not say random however you know as well as I do that a cop can pull you over if you "bobble the line" even if you dont, if you are intrested in you they can just "say" you did.. That's the ability to stop you for no reason at all, and they can do it to whoever they like.
That would freak me out and I probably wouldn't answer them unless they were arresting me for something. I've lived in lots of little and big cities.. the police have never knocked on my door and asked me who I was.. nor would I believe they have the authority to do so unless they were investigating a crime.
There is something really wrong with that.. It should not matter WHO you are, you just can't assume someone is of a criminal nature by any criteria. You could have told her "I'm a former pedophile, bank robber, gun smuggler, and drug dealer from the US.. I'm here to start a new peaceful life, you got a problem with that?"
I think asking you who you are and "checking you out" is a form of thought police.. they want to make sure your a "normal" guy.. if your not, they may watch you.. or hea if they can't find something.. why not plant something on you and get rid of you..? It's not like thats never happend before.
I don't really believe police keep us safe.. the police are there to clean up, write tickets, protect the state, and enforce our oppression, we keep ourselves safe.
No its not a government conspiracy, they really ARE watching you. The average brit is photographed 200 to 400 times per day.
Hea, waat the hell, why not just pull random people over for.. no reason at all.. and take fingerprints. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6170070.stm Alread on it in the UK, the worlds leading police state.
Yes, it's very advanced, if it finds there is a security exploit in the wild it will just travel back in time before the exploit is known to the general public. The method is known as security through time compression.
All of those contracts clearly state "up to" a certain speed. No consumer service I've ever seen has a guaranteed speed claim.
There's probably not much the consumer can do except vote with their money and cancel the service.
This is why net neutrality laws are important -- because existing service contracts do NOT protect the consumer from this sort of action. You seem a little confused here. You say new laws are important because private contracts between private parties do not say something you would like it to?
In the US you have an unlimited right to contract, you can agree to pay for internet service where as the other company agrees to provide it. The terms of this contract are voluntarily agreed upon by the people involved, laws are opposite of this.. they are mandatory. The simple solution here (as you pointed out) is, if you don't like the contract details, don't agree to it.
The trouble is when government gets involved. The reason you are limited in the number of ISP's is because of state and federal government regulations and city governments renting their property to telecom's. Now the limited amount of choice that is caused by government sponsored monopolies is causing business to present unfair contracts and you want to ahem.. fix..this with even more government regulation?
That's not the answer.. just stop paying for it. Some people have found a way around government regulations though and done something we desperately need.. they have started there own ISP's, Clearwire is an example of the market fighting against government regulation.
Good lord, I'm just jokeing. You dont have to rebute my fats of how Vista sucks balls. You really are a dull one arn't you. Hell even if Microsoft was the biggest shiniest software companey in the world I would still rag on them.;)
You can't count giving 850,000 away for free as a "sale".
Microsoft does this all the time, They say "see Vista already outsold XP in its first month. (I have only seen 1 person with a Vista system and he hates it.) it's widely addopted.. why dont you have it? your falling behind in REAL technology."
Its not that people cant make good armature quality videos.. its that there product is so utterly dull nobody wants to.
Let me try some slogans here:
Does your food taste bad? Heinz Ketchup, taste good. Put it on your food that taste bad. Leroy's last meal was covered in Heinz... Let's do this! Our Ketchup is less boring than John Kerry AND more drunk than Teresa Heinz Kerry! Our product makes learning how to use the computer fun and enjoyable.. please.. try my product. Ketchup Soup? (oh yeah, creeemy smoooooth) We salute you "Mr. Stoned twenty-something apartment dweller."
they write a law that says "It is a federal crime to commit military troops to the nation of Iraq." They have the votes to do this *if* they wanted to... they don't want to do this however.. they WANT the war to continue so they can use it against the Republicans in the next election. Even when they win it still wont end because they wont want failure on there watch so they are going to pull back SOME of the troops and downplay their actions. That is what "re-deploy" means.
Besides this, why are the Democrats voting to renew the Patriot Act? Both Obama and Hillary voted FOR it. They vote for it because they want it. Pay more attention to what they DO and not what they SAY.
You say the government is the largest employer in the US but the government does not produce anything. If you pay people money yet nothing is created from their labor.. isn't that a giant waste? I heard a story from Montana where one town had 1 manager job for every 2 employee jobs. Do we really need this many bureaucrats?
Slashdot Mirror
Actually the people realized that the government no longer had power over them and they were by defacto free. However they did not actually *understand* freedom and did nothing to limit government power.
The same thing will might happen here.. and my god.. could you even imagine trying to write a new constitution today and what might be put in it? It would be the target of every special interest group in existence.. it would be thousands of pages long..
No.. like the Russians, the Americans by in large don't understand freedom and until we do.. we are FAR better off with the broken system we have now, then we would ever be if we tried to start a new government..
A corporation is "legal fiction". It is a legal person that is created by government law and provides legal protection to the members that created it. This allows them to engage in questionable business practices. They can not exist without government laws and if they did not.. suddenly business *men* would be responsible for their actions. CEO's are not going to do whats right because they have no risk.. In may cases if they DON'T do "the wrong thing" they can be sued by the shareholders because of the way is was "legally constructed". The answer to corporations and Corporatism as a form of government, is to simply get rid of the laws that allow people to incorporate.
However..the socialists are out and yet again they are attempting to fix the problem government laws created with more government laws.. if that poison doesn't kill you... just have more poison.
The MOST important thing is he is a tried and true socialist in the same vein as Noam Chomsky.
He tells you what is wrong, and he is rather accurate in doing so.. then he gives you a solution that is absolute tyranny. His solution is ALWAYS to have government FIX the problem, often when it was government that caused the problem to begin with. The solution is not more government it is more liberty.
I'm going to blow my mod points here and reply..
It's a mess because its NOT a private system.. its a "partly" government funded / "partly" government controlled system.
The state owned everything.
I'm shooting from the hip alright.
Here in Soviet Amerika, Microsoft and Haliburton write our laws. This is Corporatism, its Mercantilism, and its evil.. If we let it continue we will find ourselves homeless in the country our forefathers conquered.
This is right on the ball here.. one thing I want to add is a corporation itself is "legal fiction" it's nothing more than government sanctioned legal protection for business. If you get rid of the laws that allow them to incorprate, then you just have a business with real people behind it who are really liable for the actions they take.
Government is legal fiction, it is not moral, or right, or just.. its just men using force on other men. Every single year if I could, I would vote to disband the federal government entirely. I can not and probably never will win, but I continue to try.. really though..? does it matter if I vote or not?
The system of tyranny of the majority we call Democracy is just as brutal as any other government if you find yourself and your ideas not in the so called majority. Every year this majority creates new laws backed by brutal force against a minority, sometimes the markup of the minority will change so that gives us a change to pass laws against a new minority also.
Nice of you to be so authoritarian that you wont even talk to those in the minority that have given up hope..
This is where my karma goes down, but I don't think Net Neutrality will be a good thing.
ISP have been allotting more bandwidth to "preferred" sites since the beginning, they even allow companies to pay for more of a preference by means of buying more bandwidth. I do not believe that there will be a time that you can only surf big sites on the internet, I think its fear mongering and I think the very worst thing we can do with the internet is allow government to regulate it.
Let's just regulate the piss out of it.. regulate what kind of traffic you can send, and who you can send it to, and if you can gamble on pornographic games with it, and what types of fraud and child protections must be mandated by law, Let's mandate a tax for every e-mail too. We do all that.. and I'm SURE we will absolutely ruin the net.
I believe it has been the LACK of government law and regulation that caused it to become what it is.
This is amusing watching how business believe theft of IP as a loss in sales. There is a dangerous aspect to this however and that is how government is willing to enforce their failed business model on us. The market no longer wants to walk into a record store or a theater to buy their media products and currently to do so legally, there are few good options to this. One of the bad options given to us by the industry is to "rent" a copy of the movie or music, that we may use a limited number of time on a limited number of devices in a limited way.
Eventually I believe that they will have the ability to check to see what you own and government will allow them to do this..
In 1765 King George III created The Stamp Act. By his degree all documents, papers, books, letters, posters, newspapers, and even playing cards, had to carry a tax stamp. In order to make sure if your papers were taxed.. British officers could write themselves their own search warrant and come into your house to check. As you can see there was a great outcry from this abuse of powers and this would absolutely be illegal by all of todays standards... or would it..
Can the government digitally search your papers and effects to see if you payed the proper "tax" ? Things seem to be going in this direction.
It's not if I *CAN* do it.. I cerntly COULD do that. What I'm complaning about is my government does not believe I'm allowed to.
You can't fight for your rights by "getting around" the law.. you eventually need to dig in your heals and say "No, you do not have the authority to do this!"
Yeah, you can't actually monitor police activies ESPECIALLY if they are doing something wrong. ..and if you TELL someone about it your obstructing justice and harming the nation.
This is an afront to everything a free country is about! They are suposta serve us!
At first they told us we needed a national ID card for Security. When it came to light that people holding ID cards can STILL commit crimes. Terrorists foregn and national can get legal ID's *then* set off there bombs.
So they changed the story now we need this for illegals.. and ONLY illegals will get this.. what a crock.. they are illegal.. they are breaking the current laws.. why on earth would they follow this one law? Laws are not magic.. they dont make criminals disapear.
I'm so angry at my government I'm frothing at the mouth.
Yeah, The Free State Project is going to work. It's going to make our government listen to us again.
They are going to put cops in movie theaters to protect corporate profits?! What a joke!
"Our law that we wrote says its illegal to use a camcorder in a theaters, and we have had local athorities install automated gun turrets installed to enforce it." -- The MPAA
Your correct, I am talking about London, and no I'm talking about seprate camera's, trafic cams, private security cams, etc.
It does not say random however you know as well as I do that a cop can pull you over if you "bobble the line" even if you dont, if you are intrested in you they can just "say" you did.. That's the ability to stop you for no reason at all, and they can do it to whoever they like.
Really?
That would freak me out and I probably wouldn't answer them unless they were arresting me for something. I've lived in lots of little and big cities.. the police have never knocked on my door and asked me who I was.. nor would I believe they have the authority to do so unless they were investigating a crime.
There is something really wrong with that.. It should not matter WHO you are, you just can't assume someone is of a criminal nature by any criteria. You could have told her "I'm a former pedophile, bank robber, gun smuggler, and drug dealer from the US.. I'm here to start a new peaceful life, you got a problem with that?"
I think asking you who you are and "checking you out" is a form of thought police.. they want to make sure your a "normal" guy.. if your not, they may watch you.. or hea if they can't find something.. why not plant something on you and get rid of you..? It's not like thats never happend before.
I don't really believe police keep us safe.. the police are there to clean up, write tickets, protect the state, and enforce our oppression, we keep ourselves safe.
No its not a government conspiracy, they really ARE watching you. The average brit is photographed 200 to 400 times per day.
w atching.htm
Hea, waat the hell, why not just pull random people over for.. no reason at all.. and take fingerprints. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6170070.stm Alread on it in the UK, the worlds leading police state.
Sound Orweallian..? guess what, it *looks* that way too. Check out the "it's for your 'safty'" ads. http://www.infowars.net/articles/april2006/170406
Yes, it's very advanced, if it finds there is a security exploit in the wild it will just travel back in time before the exploit is known to the general public. The method is known as security through time compression.
There's probably not much the consumer can do except vote with their money and cancel the service.
This is why net neutrality laws are important -- because existing service contracts do NOT protect the consumer from this sort of action. You seem a little confused here. You say new laws are important because private contracts between private parties do not say something you would like it to?
In the US you have an unlimited right to contract, you can agree to pay for internet service where as the other company agrees to provide it. The terms of this contract are voluntarily agreed upon by the people involved, laws are opposite of this.. they are mandatory. The simple solution here (as you pointed out) is, if you don't like the contract details, don't agree to it.
The trouble is when government gets involved. The reason you are limited in the number of ISP's is because of state and federal government regulations and city governments renting their property to telecom's. Now the limited amount of choice that is caused by government sponsored monopolies is causing business to present unfair contracts and you want to ahem.. fix
That's not the answer.. just stop paying for it. Some people have found a way around government regulations though and done something we desperately need.. they have started there own ISP's, Clearwire is an example of the market fighting against government regulation.
I had a lot of hopes for Novell.. but.. they thought they could work around that pesky GPL. Let that be a lesson to em..
Good lord, I'm just jokeing. You dont have to rebute my fats of how Vista sucks balls. You really are a dull one arn't you. Hell even if Microsoft was the biggest shiniest software companey in the world I would still rag on them. ;)
You can't count giving 850,000 away for free as a "sale".
Microsoft does this all the time, They say "see Vista already outsold XP in its first month. (I have only seen 1 person with a Vista system and he hates it.) it's widely addopted.. why dont you have it? your falling behind in REAL technology."
No kidding,
Its not that people cant make good armature quality videos.. its that there product is so utterly dull nobody wants to.
Let me try some slogans here:
Does your food taste bad? Heinz Ketchup, taste good. Put it on your food that taste bad.
Leroy's last meal was covered in Heinz... Let's do this!
Our Ketchup is less boring than John Kerry AND more drunk than Teresa Heinz Kerry!
Our product makes learning how to use the computer fun and enjoyable.. please.. try my product.
Ketchup Soup? (oh yeah, creeemy smoooooth) We salute you "Mr. Stoned twenty-something apartment dweller."
The democrats could end the war tomorrow.
they write a law that says "It is a federal crime to commit military troops to the nation of Iraq." They have the votes to do this *if* they wanted to... they don't want to do this however.. they WANT the war to continue so they can use it against the Republicans in the next election. Even when they win it still wont end because they wont want failure on there watch so they are going to pull back SOME of the troops and downplay their actions. That is what "re-deploy" means.
Besides this, why are the Democrats voting to renew the Patriot Act? Both Obama and Hillary voted FOR it. They vote for it because they want it. Pay more attention to what they DO and not what they SAY.
You say the government is the largest employer in the US but the government does not produce anything. If you pay people money yet nothing is created from their labor.. isn't that a giant waste? I heard a story from Montana where one town had 1 manager job for every 2 employee jobs. Do we really need this many bureaucrats?