You left out the biggest issue: Money. Frankly if money is considered free speech, then the person with the most money has the most free speech. You can't have a democracy that works for the good of the people if the conversation is more about propaganda than it is about ideas. In the US we have a massively corrupt government and if you want to stop the corruption you must stop the money.
(The definition of corruption I'm using is asking how much does money influence our government in it's decision making process. Weather it's campaign contributions, piles of cash in congressman's freezers, or the guarantee of cushy lobbing jobs when they're done doesn't matter. If someone an interested party can throw money at our government and effect the decision making process then the government is corrupt. The more the money effects the decision making process the more corrupt the government is, and by using that metric, the US government is woefully corrupt.)
Congratulations sir, for your undying deference to the truth as stated by the man, you have been promoted to the rank of "Government Flunky". Please attach this sticker to your forehead and wear it proudly!
I'm sorry, but this is stupid. The court is supposed to make the judgment if someone is innocent or guilty and then give out the appropriate punishment. Guilt, in theory is determined by the truth of weather or not you committed the crime. Here in the US, we have these things called courts and laws. Some people, like Jared Loughner are pretty obviously guilty, yet they still have a right to a speedy trial. Manning's guilt may be a forgone conclusion in your eyes because I'm sure the government would never tell you things that were untrue. But the fact that he hasn't gone to trial raises a lot of flags. Flags about his guilt or at the very least it raises a lot of flags on how they are planning on using him against Wikileaks. In either case, he is a US citizen and he has the right to a speedy trial, political games be damned.
In the US, people have the right to a swift and open justice system. Manning may not have the specific right to the "open" part because he's part of the US military and because he's being accused of leaking state secrets, but he still has the right to a trial, military or otherwise before being punished. Right now you have an un-convicted US citizen being locked up in this country for nearly a year without a trial or trial date set. That's not right and that's not ok. Just because you say he's guilty doesn't really matter. Just because the media says he's guilty doesn't really matter. Just because the US government says he's guilty also shouldn't matter until he's proven guilty in a court of law. Here in the US people are supposed to have rights and I happen to believe people's rights are still important.
Your phone can connect to a powerful set of rack computers and pass your recorded verbal request to them and then receive back the interrupted result. Your phone is just a conduit.
Have you ever been near a modern windmill? Stood under one? Listened to how much noise they make? I have, and I couldn't even hear it when I was standing in front of it but there was a wooshing from the blades you could when standing behind. You obviously dont' have a clue what you're talking about. And then to worry about this tiny sound when they're miles to sea?
And low frequency sound is harmful to humans and other animals? That's why all the gang bangers driving around in low riders with their bass thumping have all develop problems with their.... wait, what the fuck are you talking about?
What I don't get is why the promo video made it look SOOO boring! If this is a way to live out childhood fantasies, fly around a little. Do something more than just hang in the air like you were attached to a rope!
Interesting except you're leaving off the efficiency of electricity engine in the car vs the efficency of a gas engine. The EPA put the Leaf at somewhere around 99 miles per gallon of gas (MPGe) becuase it's much more efficient to convert the energy in a battery into movement compared to converting the energy of gas into movement. With gas you turn a lot more of that energy into heat instead of motion.
So if in both cases you put ~34kW of energy into a gas car vs an electric car, with the electric car will go around 3 times as far. So instead of break even economics you're now driving at 1/3 the fuel cost with the all electric vehicle.
Taxes. It was a compromise that didn't need to be made. Arguably there may have been some backroom deals there that we didn't see (a lot of legislation passed in the lame duck session right after that), but seriously just say "no tax cuts for the top 2%" and don't bend. Introduce a bill that reduces taxes for the other 98% and leave the top 2 off the table. What, you think the republicans would hold out on tax cuts for the other 98% because of that? It was a winning issue politically even if they fought him on it. Polls were heavily against the tax cuts for the top 2% and it would have been easy to stand strong on that issue.
If Obama is a pragmatist progressive then he really sucks at negotiating. He's always giving away the juiciest cuts of steak and THEN he starts negotiating.
You can't judge a politicians by his words, you judge them by their actions. Obama's actions just haven't been overly progressive. Keep in mind, he had strong majorities in both the house and senate for 2 years. We can start making excuses for him, but the reality is that he just didn't fight for a lot of issues very hard and didn't tackle many issues that progressives were wanting him to take on. The issues he did take on we ended up with weak sauce legislation that was heavy on compromise and weak on things progressives care about. (Any way too much of that compromise was with big corporate lobbies that screwed us citizens for the sake of their pocket books.) I want a president who will stand up for the middle class and not bow to corporations or republican insanity. If this makes me a "purist progressive" then fine, label me as that.
Ok, let's try to throw out some examples because I'd love to hear your counter examples and maybe I'm wrong.
Obamacare: This is Obama's signature issue and this is a massively watered down version of anything I would have liked. Cost controls are nearly non-existant and there are only a few bullet points that they like to touwt but it's really not that interesting. The public option, a weak compromise at the beginning for a single payer system, was actually killed at the very end when it looked like it started having enough support in the Senate to pass (this was while it was in reconciliation so it only needed 50 votes to pass). It has some MASSIVE give aways to corporations. Extending medical patents, removing the ability to negotiate, can't bring in drugs from Canada, etc.
This is a "universal health care bill", but it's not very progressive. Yes compromises are necessary, but at every turn Obama starts in the middle of the debate and then gets pulled to the conservative side during negotiations so instead of 50% progressive, 50% conservative it's more like 25% progressive and 75% conservative.
What other significant progressive issues has Obama dealt with?
Cap and trade? DOA End warrentless wiretaps? Pretty much DOA. He didn't do anything to punish the people who violate the laws which pretty much gives people a free hand to do it again. Torture? Same Gitmo? Still there. Patriot Act? Still screwing us just as bad as before. Taxing the super rich? They're the only people in this economy who have not significantly suffered yet there's no problem with giving them massive tax cuts and just adding it to the federal deficit. Campaign Fiance reform? Haven't heard it touched. Internet net neutrality? I give them about 50% on this one. The FCC is trying, but their compromise is pretty weak sauce and Obama has not made a case that sticks with the american public. I think his administration wants to do the right thing but it just isn't a priority. Don't Ask, Don't Tell? When this was finally passed polls showed support for repeal in the high 60%'s to low 70% numbers. Anyone who couldn't get that passed isn't trying very hard. Solar power subsides? This one actually he's on the progressive side of. A tiny tiny tiny part of the federal budget, but it's still cool. I'll give this one to him.
He does not stand up to republicans or fox news to any significant degree, but if liberals want something they basically get told to piss off. I mean, ground zero mosque, Shirley Sherrod? Rom Emanual called the liberal's who were coming to argue for a more progressive health care bill "retarded". Can you think of any name calling against the conservatives? Hell, after his state of the union address one of the republican lawmakers said "he almost sounded like a republican". Name one time, one time, where people said "wow, Bush almost sounded like a liberal." Obama hardly seems to have a progressive bone in his body. Again, ask any progressive who's paying attention. I fail to see a progressive president here.
I used to believe this, except the past 10 years have convinced me otherwise. Now just think all republicans are just bat-shit crazy.
If you tell me your a conservative, I don't have any problem with that. I can have a good sit down rational conversation a smart conservative (usually this means libertarian), and in the end walk away disagreeing but parting as friends. But if someone tells me they're a republican I instantly bin them with hyper partition, hypocritical, and too angry to form a logical thought or have a reasonable discussion.
I think rational discourse has left the building in parallel with the rise of fox new's ratings and the politicians have evolved to fit the new media world. Reality and facts are not needed as long as you get a big enough echo chamber of name calling and lies.
I would love to get back to the point where I felt the other side has logical rational reasons for doing things and that they can express them in a logical way that backs up their beliefs, I just feel that train has left the building a long time ago. In my opinion that's because the republican party has focused on "wedge" anger based issues to rally votes for too long. Anti-gay, religion based, "anti-abortion", "THEY'RE COMING FOR YOUR GUNS!", and "the black guy in charge is coming to take all your money" issues. Emotion driven/no rational thought occurring arguments as they pander to corporations, give away your rights as fast as they can, and borrow and spend like there's no tomorrow. If you spend so much time on emotion driven arguments then you lose the ability to argue your side like adults.
I don't want to be cynical, but that's where I'm at with that other political party...
Wow, that's REALLY wishful thinking crossing over into la-la land. The big banks crashed the world economy... exactly how many of their execs have ended up in jail?
Face it, corporations own the US government and they don't get in trouble for putting citizens over the barrel and going to town. Big corporations are not more efficient at producing stuff, they are more efficient at lobbing. Good luck with your voice being heard of theirs.
Anyone who thinks Obama is progressive isn't actually paying attention and just believes what fox news tells them. The *ONLY* people Obama has stood up to while in office has been the progressives while telling them to pound sand. Quit listening to propaganda from talking heads and try asking a progressive if Obama is on their side, because he isn't.
I for one would LOVE Franken for president because he seems like he would actually stand up for the people instead of corporations.
We build a fleet to go to the moon. We build enough of a base to mine rocks and bring along enough lift capability to throw/launch these big rocks into orbit (no small task). Right now we're probably talking about a manned base, so there's food, water, supplies, etc. You've got to bring the base and bring along enough lift capability to return the people to the earth. What's the cost of this? Trillions of dollars. And for all this money and energy you gain exactly what? The ability to destroy the earth? The ability to destroy towns, blow up countries at will and shit like that? We can already do that...and for MUCH less money!
Saying the moon has strategic value is like saying that a small town in china has strategic value in a war between the US and Canada... except it's 100,000 times farther away. While I think it would be god damn cool to have a moon base, to the best of my knowledge, there is nothing on the moon that we can't get easier and vastly cheaper here on earth. At this time there is simply no reason to be there, militarily or economically.
"what is very annoying is the Japan's fibre rollout is faaar from complete and there are still many built up urban areas that do not yet have access to fibre."
LOL! I live in America now. What is this fibre thing you speak of??? I don't think we've even STARTED a fibre roll out....
When I was there I was getting 100Mbps fiber for LESS than 5Mbps cost me here in the US. And that was fiber in the Japanese countryside vs cable modem in the Los Angeles suburbs so no BS arguments about "the US is so damn big".
I'd take the Japanese internet system over the US one every day of the week. And don't get me started about Japanese health care......
The real problem is when shows that we like are canceled and shows that blow chunks fill up all 150 channels. That short of thing makes us a tad bitter....
um... fuck no. Steve Jobs is a corporate executive that competes in a market place to earn money. He has done nothing bad in this world that I'm aware of and has headed a company that has produced some great products. I am the farthest thing from an apple drone you can find, but I have no problem honoring the man.
However some of the people on the list have caused great harm, death, and spread lies that have harmed the lives of millions of people. There are people on your list who I would love to hear are diagnosed with cancer and I will be silently happy when they die. I have no moral qualms about this.
The adults would more often hang back, saving their skin, calling for medics, etc. Following RL rules, it makes sense, but the game was a different world, and the kids' tactics were correct.
not really. The way to win in the BF2 games is to take flags. the "kids" who simply run in and kill a few people *lose* to people who are holding flags, capping flags, and playing as a team. The ticket system is does cause you to lose tickets when people die, but it's biased for people who cap flags vs. people who kill the enemy more. IMHO, that's what makes the whole Battlefield series of games so great. It's the first and best series of FPS's for team play as opposed to games like the Call of Duty series which is much more about individual heros than teamwork.
... and since exactly when has the ham radio lobby been grown so powerful? Nobody gives two shakes of a rats ass about them.
If there's every any debate, follow the money. Grow-ops provide jobs and revenue (at the very least people spend what they make in the county even if it's not reported on taxes) so that's 10x more likely to be the influencing factor.
Yes, but they had no power back then. NOW they have power and very shortly they will have significant military power that will probably rival the US in 10 or 20 years.
That's the core of my concern, a country with power going through hard times can and will do things a country without power can't, namely fabricate enemies and start wars. Because if you're have problems it must be someone else's fault....
The Chinese and American economies are too interlocked RIGHT NOW. I agree that there is nothing on the immediate horizon to indicate any change in that, but so far in the Chinese rise as a world powerhouse and major economy they have suffered very little in the way of hard times. I for one am worried about their governments ability to deal with things well when the bad times hit. At some point there is going to be some butting heads between the US who thinks the world should bow down to them and to the Chinese who feel the same.
All governments/countries tend to get xenophobic and look for outside enemies when times are hard and lets face it, the Chinese (and Americans but to a lesser degree) tend to do that even when times are good. Let's hope calm and level heads can keep the hawks in check in both countries when the tensions rise.
I think you're right on this one. I think this is the only real power that youtube and other big services like wikipedia have over the ISPs. If an ISP tried to play these games and it really came down to them slowing down or cutting off a key service i would switch so fast their heads would spin.
(But that's only because I have the option of switching. At my last house I had one high speed provider available, so I would express my outrage in other ways.)
Slashdot Mirror
You left out the biggest issue: Money. Frankly if money is considered free speech, then the person with the most money has the most free speech. You can't have a democracy that works for the good of the people if the conversation is more about propaganda than it is about ideas. In the US we have a massively corrupt government and if you want to stop the corruption you must stop the money.
(The definition of corruption I'm using is asking how much does money influence our government in it's decision making process. Weather it's campaign contributions, piles of cash in congressman's freezers, or the guarantee of cushy lobbing jobs when they're done doesn't matter. If someone an interested party can throw money at our government and effect the decision making process then the government is corrupt. The more the money effects the decision making process the more corrupt the government is, and by using that metric, the US government is woefully corrupt.)
d
Congratulations sir, for your undying deference to the truth as stated by the man, you have been promoted to the rank of "Government Flunky". Please attach this sticker to your forehead and wear it proudly!
I'm sorry, but this is stupid. The court is supposed to make the judgment if someone is innocent or guilty and then give out the appropriate punishment. Guilt, in theory is determined by the truth of weather or not you committed the crime. Here in the US, we have these things called courts and laws. Some people, like Jared Loughner are pretty obviously guilty, yet they still have a right to a speedy trial. Manning's guilt may be a forgone conclusion in your eyes because I'm sure the government would never tell you things that were untrue. But the fact that he hasn't gone to trial raises a lot of flags. Flags about his guilt or at the very least it raises a lot of flags on how they are planning on using him against Wikileaks. In either case, he is a US citizen and he has the right to a speedy trial, political games be damned.
In the US, people have the right to a swift and open justice system. Manning may not have the specific right to the "open" part because he's part of the US military and because he's being accused of leaking state secrets, but he still has the right to a trial, military or otherwise before being punished. Right now you have an un-convicted US citizen being locked up in this country for nearly a year without a trial or trial date set. That's not right and that's not ok. Just because you say he's guilty doesn't really matter. Just because the media says he's guilty doesn't really matter. Just because the US government says he's guilty also shouldn't matter until he's proven guilty in a court of law. Here in the US people are supposed to have rights and I happen to believe people's rights are still important.
d
Your phone can connect to a powerful set of rack computers and pass your recorded verbal request to them and then receive back the interrupted result. Your phone is just a conduit.
d
The law didn't seem to much teeth when it came to rambus.....
You, sir, are an idiot.
Have you ever been near a modern windmill? Stood under one? Listened to how much noise they make? I have, and I couldn't even hear it when I was standing in front of it but there was a wooshing from the blades you could when standing behind. You obviously dont' have a clue what you're talking about. And then to worry about this tiny sound when they're miles to sea?
And low frequency sound is harmful to humans and other animals? That's why all the gang bangers driving around in low riders with their bass thumping have all develop problems with their .... wait, what the fuck are you talking about?
I think you have to work hard to be this stupid.
d
What I don't get is why the promo video made it look SOOO boring! If this is a way to live out childhood fantasies, fly around a little. Do something more than just hang in the air like you were attached to a rope!
d
Interesting except you're leaving off the efficiency of electricity engine in the car vs the efficency of a gas engine. The EPA put the Leaf at somewhere around 99 miles per gallon of gas (MPGe) becuase it's much more efficient to convert the energy in a battery into movement compared to converting the energy of gas into movement. With gas you turn a lot more of that energy into heat instead of motion.
So if in both cases you put ~34kW of energy into a gas car vs an electric car, with the electric car will go around 3 times as far. So instead of break even economics you're now driving at 1/3 the fuel cost with the all electric vehicle.
d
Taxes. It was a compromise that didn't need to be made. Arguably there may have been some backroom deals there that we didn't see (a lot of legislation passed in the lame duck session right after that), but seriously just say "no tax cuts for the top 2%" and don't bend. Introduce a bill that reduces taxes for the other 98% and leave the top 2 off the table. What, you think the republicans would hold out on tax cuts for the other 98% because of that? It was a winning issue politically even if they fought him on it. Polls were heavily against the tax cuts for the top 2% and it would have been easy to stand strong on that issue.
If Obama is a pragmatist progressive then he really sucks at negotiating. He's always giving away the juiciest cuts of steak and THEN he starts negotiating.
You can't judge a politicians by his words, you judge them by their actions. Obama's actions just haven't been overly progressive. Keep in mind, he had strong majorities in both the house and senate for 2 years. We can start making excuses for him, but the reality is that he just didn't fight for a lot of issues very hard and didn't tackle many issues that progressives were wanting him to take on. The issues he did take on we ended up with weak sauce legislation that was heavy on compromise and weak on things progressives care about. (Any way too much of that compromise was with big corporate lobbies that screwed us citizens for the sake of their pocket books.) I want a president who will stand up for the middle class and not bow to corporations or republican insanity. If this makes me a "purist progressive" then fine, label me as that.
d
They had a lawyer class?
Ok, let's try to throw out some examples because I'd love to hear your counter examples and maybe I'm wrong.
Obamacare: This is Obama's signature issue and this is a massively watered down version of anything I would have liked. Cost controls are nearly non-existant and there are only a few bullet points that they like to touwt but it's really not that interesting. The public option, a weak compromise at the beginning for a single payer system, was actually killed at the very end when it looked like it started having enough support in the Senate to pass (this was while it was in reconciliation so it only needed 50 votes to pass). It has some MASSIVE give aways to corporations. Extending medical patents, removing the ability to negotiate, can't bring in drugs from Canada, etc.
This is a "universal health care bill", but it's not very progressive. Yes compromises are necessary, but at every turn Obama starts in the middle of the debate and then gets pulled to the conservative side during negotiations so instead of 50% progressive, 50% conservative it's more like 25% progressive and 75% conservative.
What other significant progressive issues has Obama dealt with?
Cap and trade? DOA
End warrentless wiretaps? Pretty much DOA. He didn't do anything to punish the people who violate the laws which pretty much gives people a free hand to do it again.
Torture? Same
Gitmo? Still there.
Patriot Act? Still screwing us just as bad as before.
Taxing the super rich? They're the only people in this economy who have not significantly suffered yet there's no problem with giving them massive tax cuts and just adding it to the federal deficit.
Campaign Fiance reform? Haven't heard it touched.
Internet net neutrality? I give them about 50% on this one. The FCC is trying, but their compromise is pretty weak sauce and Obama has not made a case that sticks with the american public. I think his administration wants to do the right thing but it just isn't a priority.
Don't Ask, Don't Tell? When this was finally passed polls showed support for repeal in the high 60%'s to low 70% numbers. Anyone who couldn't get that passed isn't trying very hard.
Solar power subsides? This one actually he's on the progressive side of. A tiny tiny tiny part of the federal budget, but it's still cool. I'll give this one to him.
He does not stand up to republicans or fox news to any significant degree, but if liberals want something they basically get told to piss off. I mean, ground zero mosque, Shirley Sherrod? Rom Emanual called the liberal's who were coming to argue for a more progressive health care bill "retarded". Can you think of any name calling against the conservatives? Hell, after his state of the union address one of the republican lawmakers said "he almost sounded like a republican". Name one time, one time, where people said "wow, Bush almost sounded like a liberal." Obama hardly seems to have a progressive bone in his body. Again, ask any progressive who's paying attention. I fail to see a progressive president here.
d
I used to believe this, except the past 10 years have convinced me otherwise. Now just think all republicans are just bat-shit crazy.
If you tell me your a conservative, I don't have any problem with that. I can have a good sit down rational conversation a smart conservative (usually this means libertarian), and in the end walk away disagreeing but parting as friends. But if someone tells me they're a republican I instantly bin them with hyper partition, hypocritical, and too angry to form a logical thought or have a reasonable discussion.
I think rational discourse has left the building in parallel with the rise of fox new's ratings and the politicians have evolved to fit the new media world. Reality and facts are not needed as long as you get a big enough echo chamber of name calling and lies.
I would love to get back to the point where I felt the other side has logical rational reasons for doing things and that they can express them in a logical way that backs up their beliefs, I just feel that train has left the building a long time ago. In my opinion that's because the republican party has focused on "wedge" anger based issues to rally votes for too long. Anti-gay, religion based, "anti-abortion", "THEY'RE COMING FOR YOUR GUNS!", and "the black guy in charge is coming to take all your money" issues. Emotion driven/no rational thought occurring arguments as they pander to corporations, give away your rights as fast as they can, and borrow and spend like there's no tomorrow. If you spend so much time on emotion driven arguments then you lose the ability to argue your side like adults.
I don't want to be cynical, but that's where I'm at with that other political party...
d
Wow, that's REALLY wishful thinking crossing over into la-la land. The big banks crashed the world economy... exactly how many of their execs have ended up in jail?
Face it, corporations own the US government and they don't get in trouble for putting citizens over the barrel and going to town. Big corporations are not more efficient at producing stuff, they are more efficient at lobbing. Good luck with your voice being heard of theirs.
d
Anyone who thinks Obama is progressive isn't actually paying attention and just believes what fox news tells them. The *ONLY* people Obama has stood up to while in office has been the progressives while telling them to pound sand. Quit listening to propaganda from talking heads and try asking a progressive if Obama is on their side, because he isn't.
I for one would LOVE Franken for president because he seems like he would actually stand up for the people instead of corporations.
d
So let me get this straight...
We build a fleet to go to the moon. We build enough of a base to mine rocks and bring along enough lift capability to throw/launch these big rocks into orbit (no small task). Right now we're probably talking about a manned base, so there's food, water, supplies, etc. You've got to bring the base and bring along enough lift capability to return the people to the earth. What's the cost of this? Trillions of dollars. And for all this money and energy you gain exactly what? The ability to destroy the earth? The ability to destroy towns, blow up countries at will and shit like that? We can already do that ...and for MUCH less money!
Saying the moon has strategic value is like saying that a small town in china has strategic value in a war between the US and Canada... except it's 100,000 times farther away. While I think it would be god damn cool to have a moon base, to the best of my knowledge, there is nothing on the moon that we can't get easier and vastly cheaper here on earth. At this time there is simply no reason to be there, militarily or economically.
d
"what is very annoying is the Japan's fibre rollout is faaar from complete and there are still many built up urban areas that do not yet have access to fibre."
LOL! I live in America now. What is this fibre thing you speak of??? I don't think we've even STARTED a fibre roll out....
lmao.
d
When I was there I was getting 100Mbps fiber for LESS than 5Mbps cost me here in the US. And that was fiber in the Japanese countryside vs cable modem in the Los Angeles suburbs so no BS arguments about "the US is so damn big".
I'd take the Japanese internet system over the US one every day of the week. And don't get me started about Japanese health care......
d
The real problem is when shows that we like are canceled and shows that blow chunks fill up all 150 channels. That short of thing makes us a tad bitter....
d
um... fuck no. Steve Jobs is a corporate executive that competes in a market place to earn money. He has done nothing bad in this world that I'm aware of and has headed a company that has produced some great products. I am the farthest thing from an apple drone you can find, but I have no problem honoring the man.
However some of the people on the list have caused great harm, death, and spread lies that have harmed the lives of millions of people. There are people on your list who I would love to hear are diagnosed with cancer and I will be silently happy when they die. I have no moral qualms about this.
d
The adults would more often hang back, saving their skin, calling for medics, etc. Following RL rules, it makes sense, but the game was a different world, and the kids' tactics were correct.
not really. The way to win in the BF2 games is to take flags. the "kids" who simply run in and kill a few people *lose* to people who are holding flags, capping flags, and playing as a team. The ticket system is does cause you to lose tickets when people die, but it's biased for people who cap flags vs. people who kill the enemy more. IMHO, that's what makes the whole Battlefield series of games so great. It's the first and best series of FPS's for team play as opposed to games like the Call of Duty series which is much more about individual heros than teamwork.
d
Level 1: Learn to eat ....
Level 2: Learn to babble
Level 3: crawl
Level 4: walk
Level 5: learn to talk +1 skill communication
Level 6: toilet trained
Level 34; Graduate High School ....
Level 35: Graduate College
Level 36: Get job (level 1)
etc
So what level are you?
... and since exactly when has the ham radio lobby been grown so powerful? Nobody gives two shakes of a rats ass about them.
If there's every any debate, follow the money. Grow-ops provide jobs and revenue (at the very least people spend what they make in the county even if it's not reported on taxes) so that's 10x more likely to be the influencing factor.
d
Yes, but they had no power back then. NOW they have power and very shortly they will have significant military power that will probably rival the US in 10 or 20 years.
That's the core of my concern, a country with power going through hard times can and will do things a country without power can't, namely fabricate enemies and start wars. Because if you're have problems it must be someone else's fault....
d
The Chinese and American economies are too interlocked RIGHT NOW. I agree that there is nothing on the immediate horizon to indicate any change in that, but so far in the Chinese rise as a world powerhouse and major economy they have suffered very little in the way of hard times. I for one am worried about their governments ability to deal with things well when the bad times hit. At some point there is going to be some butting heads between the US who thinks the world should bow down to them and to the Chinese who feel the same.
All governments/countries tend to get xenophobic and look for outside enemies when times are hard and lets face it, the Chinese (and Americans but to a lesser degree) tend to do that even when times are good. Let's hope calm and level heads can keep the hawks in check in both countries when the tensions rise.
d
I think you're right on this one. I think this is the only real power that youtube and other big services like wikipedia have over the ISPs. If an ISP tried to play these games and it really came down to them slowing down or cutting off a key service i would switch so fast their heads would spin.
(But that's only because I have the option of switching. At my last house I had one high speed provider available, so I would express my outrage in other ways.)
d