A few billion? Do you have source on that? Perhaps it is.
And anyway, my point still stands. Unless you want to get rid of copyright laws (which crappy GPLed software uses to protect itself against big bad corporations) then the government will have a division to enforce copyright laws. Perhaps it's overfunded and that's something to be looked at. It still doesn't justify paying for Lake Wobegon.
Anyone who yells "Nazi Germany" and calls Bush Hitler or Ashcroft Hitler is just so ridiculous that the government/public will never take you seriously. I didn't say you did that, but there is a gaggle of people on this website that do it, and they're moron quite frankly.
Shrill hysterical prepubescent rantings only make your case harder to make. So grow a brain and stop screaming Nazi Germany every 2 seconds. Then maybe someone in government will actually take slashdot seriously.
Ah yes, the immortal slashdot enemies... RIAA, MPAA, and that other one whatever it is. never mind that even the GPL uses copyright to prevent big bad microsoft to cut and paste crappy GPL code into their OS's (from my understanding).
So because the federal government is paying to enforce copyright standards it's therefor completely appriate to fund a radio program?
Actually no we don't. All judges were ratified by Congress. The left actually controls the Supreme Court, it's just that in this case the Gore camp was wrong. The president is elected by electors and Florida's appointed electors were ready to vote for Bush, no matter how many recounts occur.
Clearly we're subsidizing public radio. As for copyright law, I always thought that was a function of civil courts rather than criminal. In other words there is a plaintiff and defendent, rather than a prosecutor and defense in a criminal court.
So unless you want to get rid of the entire litigation process your point is moot.
From my understanding, evolution in higher organisms takes thousands of years. So unless you can actually observe a species evolving over thousands of years, it remains a theory.
Incidentally I agree with evolution. But unless you are actually there to witness an event (like the first fish climbing onto land), I would maintain that it has to remain a theory, no matter how well you can support it with evidence and logic.
You're analogy is flawed. SDI could've worked, remember that they're not shooting bullets at us, they're shooting missiles. If we could shoot bullets at missiles it very well could have worked, which is where the whole railgun idea got started. You're shooting slugs at these huge lumbering ICBMs.
Even in terms of a full strike, it could still be possible to develop defense systems which target all such missiles (even thousands of them) and knock them down.
The only problem with SDI was nuclear submarine strikes would still be hard to defend against.
NPR... bought with our taxdollars. Conservatives like me were salivating at the thought of killing it once and for all, unfortunately Bush ain't got the balls to do it yet. There's always 2005 I guess.
Their interpretation of the Constitution allows attempt to circumvent the separation of church and state by giving your tax dollars to faith-based programs.
Where in the constitution do you see the seperation of church and state? You might want to read that constitution while you're blithely commenting on it in this hideous forum.
The view the same job market and economy reports we do, and yet see 250 million new jobs being created this year, and that the economy is doing just fine, thank you.
Well almost all indicators for the economy are fairly good, save job creation, and we base those on two reports which are showing different things.
Well the fact that evolutions supposedly takes thousands or millions of years makes it hard to accept that it's 'scientifically' observable. Perhaps to micro-organisms it is, but not in advanced life.
No you should check your's. He's right, it's called the Theory of Evolution for a reason. Accepting that it's a theory is not equivalent to being a creationist.
Yeah I dunno about using those stats for quality of care, it seems like comparing 2 health care systems is pretty impossible. But I think at the very least it's safe to assume most people wouldn't get *better* quality, and they really don't want to pay higher taxes to get the the same/worse care. We have too many FICA taxes as it is.
It's smarter to try and get the cost of health care down with mixed-market-based solutions (public and private), IMO.
But hey, they'll have another referendum on it in 2004, maybe it'll pass.
Not every job is offshorable. I thought I heard that about 40% are, but not even all of those jobs will be offshored.
As our jobs are offshored our currency will drop to make up the difference. All nations must pay for their imports with their exports in the end. We will either find something to export to the rest of the world or our currency will drop to the point in which it's not longer beneficial to offshore to other countries.
This is the argument for free trade anyway. And either you will find something that they cannot do in another country or salaries will drop. We as individuals must find something that we can do better and cheaper than Indians, perhaps on site technical support.
In the meantime prices should fall to where cost of living falls here in the US, and this should make our shores more competitive.
Protectionism simply will not work in this case. You cannot put a tariff on bytes. And what's to stop small business owners from finding a clandestine site that offers blackmarket cheap overseas programmers? The only way protectionism would work would be to disconnect our internet from the rest of the world's.
There simply is no turning back here. Our workers have got to be so much better than Indians that offshoring isn't a good solution.
I cannot believe that Pinochet would allow an enterprise to either criticize him or economically challenge those backing his power. He may have employed some capitalist policies, but I just cannot see how a dictatorship could be a capitalist country.
Think about it this way, in a true capitalist system a limitness strata of competition is allowed to challenge any dominant players. A dictatorship usually requires support from the oligarchs of society, the heads of major industry etc. and in a capitalist society those would be continuously challenged, economically.
I haven't read to much into Pinochet's economic system other than the wikipedia system which mentioned that he employed freidman's monetary policies. I'd just question if it was a true free market society, though.
On the other hand I'm speaking in absolutes, even in a democracy there are no perfectly capitalist countries, nor am I arguing that there should be. But in general democracies are more capitalist than dictatorships, and totalitarian "capitalist" countries are almost always more oligarchies in nature.
Slashdot Mirror
A few billion? Do you have source on that? Perhaps it is.
And anyway, my point still stands. Unless you want to get rid of copyright laws (which crappy GPLed software uses to protect itself against big bad corporations) then the government will have a division to enforce copyright laws. Perhaps it's overfunded and that's something to be looked at. It still doesn't justify paying for Lake Wobegon.
Anyone who yells "Nazi Germany" and calls Bush Hitler or Ashcroft Hitler is just so ridiculous that the government/public will never take you seriously. I didn't say you did that, but there is a gaggle of people on this website that do it, and they're moron quite frankly.
Shrill hysterical prepubescent rantings only make your case harder to make. So grow a brain and stop screaming Nazi Germany every 2 seconds. Then maybe someone in government will actually take slashdot seriously.
Bwahahaha, yeah right.
Ah yes, the immortal slashdot enemies... RIAA, MPAA, and that other one whatever it is. never mind that even the GPL uses copyright to prevent big bad microsoft to cut and paste crappy GPL code into their OS's (from my understanding).
So because the federal government is paying to enforce copyright standards it's therefor completely appriate to fund a radio program?
Oh please, grow up. There are about a million of you fools on slashdot and you sing in the same shrill chorus. It's past your bedtime.
Actually no we don't. All judges were ratified by Congress. The left actually controls the Supreme Court, it's just that in this case the Gore camp was wrong. The president is elected by electors and Florida's appointed electors were ready to vote for Bush, no matter how many recounts occur.
My implied point was that you do not know dick about how we elect the president in this country.
Maybe like those statues in "The Neverending Story". :)
Oh stop with the histrionics. What happened was a violation but it really isn't Nazi Germany here yet. Slashdrones are so silly.
Ok this is silly. Make your case explaining your reasoning or you're simply just another slashdrone, lots of talk but nothing to back it up with.
Clearly we're subsidizing public radio. As for copyright law, I always thought that was a function of civil courts rather than criminal. In other words there is a plaintiff and defendent, rather than a prosecutor and defense in a criminal court.
So unless you want to get rid of the entire litigation process your point is moot.
From my understanding, evolution in higher organisms takes thousands of years. So unless you can actually observe a species evolving over thousands of years, it remains a theory.
Incidentally I agree with evolution. But unless you are actually there to witness an event (like the first fish climbing onto land), I would maintain that it has to remain a theory, no matter how well you can support it with evidence and logic.
Clearly the Constitution still matters, or Al Gore would be president today.
You're analogy is flawed. SDI could've worked, remember that they're not shooting bullets at us, they're shooting missiles. If we could shoot bullets at missiles it very well could have worked, which is where the whole railgun idea got started. You're shooting slugs at these huge lumbering ICBMs.
Even in terms of a full strike, it could still be possible to develop defense systems which target all such missiles (even thousands of them) and knock them down.
The only problem with SDI was nuclear submarine strikes would still be hard to defend against.
NPR... bought with our taxdollars. Conservatives like me were salivating at the thought of killing it once and for all, unfortunately Bush ain't got the balls to do it yet. There's always 2005 I guess.
And that public is hideously misinformed 80 percent of the time. So sad. :)
Where in the constitution do you see the seperation of church and state? You might want to read that constitution while you're blithely commenting on it in this hideous forum.
The view the same job market and economy reports we do, and yet see 250 million new jobs being created this year, and that the economy is doing just fine, thank you.
Well almost all indicators for the economy are fairly good, save job creation, and we base those on two reports which are showing different things.
Hey, slashdrone, read the constitution sometime.
Actually it serves leftist anti-capitalist ideology quite well.
Well the fact that evolutions supposedly takes thousands or millions of years makes it hard to accept that it's 'scientifically' observable. Perhaps to micro-organisms it is, but not in advanced life.
No you should check your's. He's right, it's called the Theory of Evolution for a reason. Accepting that it's a theory is not equivalent to being a creationist.
Yeah I dunno about using those stats for quality of care, it seems like comparing 2 health care systems is pretty impossible. But I think at the very least it's safe to assume most people wouldn't get *better* quality, and they really don't want to pay higher taxes to get the the same/worse care. We have too many FICA taxes as it is.
It's smarter to try and get the cost of health care down with mixed-market-based solutions (public and private), IMO.
But hey, they'll have another referendum on it in 2004, maybe it'll pass.
Not every job is offshorable. I thought I heard that about 40% are, but not even all of those jobs will be offshored.
As our jobs are offshored our currency will drop to make up the difference. All nations must pay for their imports with their exports in the end. We will either find something to export to the rest of the world or our currency will drop to the point in which it's not longer beneficial to offshore to other countries.
This is the argument for free trade anyway. And either you will find something that they cannot do in another country or salaries will drop. We as individuals must find something that we can do better and cheaper than Indians, perhaps on site technical support.
In the meantime prices should fall to where cost of living falls here in the US, and this should make our shores more competitive.
Protectionism simply will not work in this case. You cannot put a tariff on bytes. And what's to stop small business owners from finding a clandestine site that offers blackmarket cheap overseas programmers? The only way protectionism would work would be to disconnect our internet from the rest of the world's.
There simply is no turning back here. Our workers have got to be so much better than Indians that offshoring isn't a good solution.
I cannot believe that Pinochet would allow an enterprise to either criticize him or economically challenge those backing his power. He may have employed some capitalist policies, but I just cannot see how a dictatorship could be a capitalist country.
Think about it this way, in a true capitalist system a limitness strata of competition is allowed to challenge any dominant players. A dictatorship usually requires support from the oligarchs of society, the heads of major industry etc. and in a capitalist society those would be continuously challenged, economically.
I haven't read to much into Pinochet's economic system other than the wikipedia system which mentioned that he employed freidman's monetary policies. I'd just question if it was a true free market society, though.
On the other hand I'm speaking in absolutes, even in a democracy there are no perfectly capitalist countries, nor am I arguing that there should be. But in general democracies are more capitalist than dictatorships, and totalitarian "capitalist" countries are almost always more oligarchies in nature.
How "free" is a market when goods that criticize the government cannot be sold?