Do the American parties differ so much? I am from Brazil and I can't see that much difference between democrats and republicans; not enough to take make or break someone's life anyway. In Brazil we can see more differences between any parties' inner factions, and between parties they go all the way from communist to fascist.
Which is why I think the real discussion has not even begun: we need more and better public transportation. It is not possible for everyone on the planet to have his own vehicle no matter how efficient or small it is (except if it's a bicycle). Big cities are already all clogged up and polluted. America has turned private transport into the norm, when it should be the exception.
You are ignoring all the reds that have a bit of blue or green. Take a look at the CIE colour space diagram and see if you can see any bands, even with 16 bits: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:CIExy1931.svg
Just as in the Iraq war, the threat in Vietnam was contrived. The Vietnamese were seeking independence from France and actually sought help from the US. The US on the other hand, was afraid of losing the French to the USSR, because De Gaulle threatened to switch sides and join the communists (and the US couldn't see through this stupid bluff). So the US went along and helped the French, and when the French saw they could not win, they left the US with a war against a people who should have been their ally to begin with. How stupid can it be for "The Land of the Free" to aid France (Liberté, ectera, ectera...) in a colonial war?? Lots more juicy details can be had in Barbara Tchumann's excellent "The March of Folly".
In my school (England in the 80s), we had different groups according to maths skills. I don't know if it still works this way, but I think this is the best way to go 'cause everyone gets the minimum and the best/motivated get what they want.
I'm not contemplating absolute economic equality. And some measure of social investment does not hinder anyone's freedom. Canadian's are no less free than Americans, and their government invests a lot in social wealfare.
In the western world, American workers are the at the top of the list of hours worked. They are also the sickest. So I really don't know who the libertarian/conservative types are refering to when they say they don't want their money to go to undeserving people.
Maybe leftists simply recognize that you pay one way or the other. You can have less inequality or you have to pay for more policing. You can have a public health service or you can have people who are sick and less productive.
I can picture her in a press conference concurrent to Obama's inauguration saying "I'm not making any decisions tonight; I still have a few cards to play".
Communism (although aligning corporate interests with society's is _not_ communism) was not at all unsuccessful. It brought Russia from a feudal (agrarian) society to an industrialized one in less than 70 years (having been also destroyed by WWII during this period). England took 300 years to achieve this. It had many faults, but it was also not without some success.
A lot faster if people were not taught the latest and greatest at college. If people's first language were Lisp, their expectations of computer languages would be a lot higher AND they would be better programmers.
I'm from Brazil and we used to have the world's worst income distribution. The problem is that it creates serious social divisions that tend to drive the government to make wrong decisions. For instance, the middle-class effectively stopped pressing for better primary education and health-care because it could afford private care and wanted to distance themselves from the lower classes. The poor simply didn't have the power to push these issues. You have great public school systems and health care in Europe because it is in _everyone's_ interest.
The problem is that you can't trust alcoholics to not drink and you can't keep a smoker away from a cigarette for very long (and they smell bad). So it makes sense for an employer not to hire them. It is a public health issue, though, so we should not deny them medical assistance and we should work more on prevention (the minimum age for buying cigarettes should get progressively higher, for instance).
It's amazing what an illiterate society can achieve. I bet they don't reveal to each other that they can't read because they are ashamed of it, so everybody keeps scribbling just to keep face.
I doubt people would object to wind turbines the way they do to nuclear or coal plants. They don't have nasty emissions nor dangerous fuel. And the whole clean energy revolution does seem to veer towards local production (solar panels being one example of a technology people are happy to put in their property).
I doubt that he got credit for doing your work, but rather he must have got credit for supervising/managing/coordinating the development of the website. Mostly supervisers and managers have very different chores than coders do, so it would be strange if somebody thought he actually did your work.
If you still can't interpret it this way, then find another boss.
I know not all places are good for wind turbines, but wouldn't it be better to put them closer to where the energy is needed instead of having one big farm? Distribution would be cheaper and more efficient. Maintenance might not be easier to organize, but you have to have maintenance for your distribution lines anyway.
Why don't you just give them read-only access, and if they do f**k up, then you have a perfectly valid argument. Otherwise, you're just being a jealous geek.
People are being freed from Guantamo after 6 years without ever even having being charged with anything. Can you imagine the torture of not even knowing when you are going to get out?
This is simply false. The brazilian constitution exempts books, magazines, newspapers, and the paper they are printed on from all taxes. It's in article 150 (VI - d). If you buy books from abroad, you don't pay a centavo of import duties. This I can also attest to from personal experience.
Another important difference is that the Wright brother's flight was witnessed only by themselves and their crew whereas Dummont's flight was a very public event.
Don't you mean Yunus? Anyway, I don't think this is a failure of capitalism, but rather a failure of people to understand capitalism. In my country, Brazil, capitalism is equated with large sums of money, enormous corporations, flashy cars, etc. I simply cannot fathom why we don't have cheap vehicles such as the ones you see in India (Bajaj and such). Government economic policies are always related to some big multinational; you never see a concerted effort to improve the environment for small businesses. This is simply myopic. A person who sells tomatoes at the market is as much a capitalist as the stock market broker.
Slashdot Mirror
Do the American parties differ so much? I am from Brazil and I can't see that much difference between democrats and republicans; not enough to take make or break someone's life anyway. In Brazil we can see more differences between any parties' inner factions, and between parties they go all the way from communist to fascist.
Which is why I think the real discussion has not even begun: we need more and better public transportation. It is not possible for everyone on the planet to have his own vehicle no matter how efficient or small it is (except if it's a bicycle). Big cities are already all clogged up and polluted. America has turned private transport into the norm, when it should be the exception.
You are ignoring all the reds that have a bit of blue or green. Take a look at the CIE colour space diagram and see if you can see any bands, even with 16 bits: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:CIExy1931.svg
Just as in the Iraq war, the threat in Vietnam was contrived. The Vietnamese were seeking independence from France and actually sought help from the US. The US on the other hand, was afraid of losing the French to the USSR, because De Gaulle threatened to switch sides and join the communists (and the US couldn't see through this stupid bluff). So the US went along and helped the French, and when the French saw they could not win, they left the US with a war against a people who should have been their ally to begin with. How stupid can it be for "The Land of the Free" to aid France (Liberté, ectera, ectera...) in a colonial war?? Lots more juicy details can be had in Barbara Tchumann's excellent "The March of Folly".
In my school (England in the 80s), we had different groups according to maths skills. I don't know if it still works this way, but I think this is the best way to go 'cause everyone gets the minimum and the best/motivated get what they want.
I'm not contemplating absolute economic equality. And some measure of social investment does not hinder anyone's freedom. Canadian's are no less free than Americans, and their government invests a lot in social wealfare.
In the western world, American workers are the at the top of the list of hours worked. They are also the sickest. So I really don't know who the libertarian/conservative types are refering to when they say they don't want their money to go to undeserving people.
Maybe leftists simply recognize that you pay one way or the other. You can have less inequality or you have to pay for more policing. You can have a public health service or you can have people who are sick and less productive.
I can picture her in a press conference concurrent to Obama's inauguration saying "I'm not making any decisions tonight; I still have a few cards to play".
Communism (although aligning corporate interests with society's is _not_ communism) was not at all unsuccessful. It brought Russia from a feudal (agrarian) society to an industrialized one in less than 70 years (having been also destroyed by WWII during this period). England took 300 years to achieve this. It had many faults, but it was also not without some success.
A lot faster if people were not taught the latest and greatest at college. If people's first language were Lisp, their expectations of computer languages would be a lot higher AND they would be better programmers.
I'm from Brazil and we used to have the world's worst income distribution. The problem is that it creates serious social divisions that tend to drive the government to make wrong decisions. For instance, the middle-class effectively stopped pressing for better primary education and health-care because it could afford private care and wanted to distance themselves from the lower classes. The poor simply didn't have the power to push these issues. You have great public school systems and health care in Europe because it is in _everyone's_ interest.
The problem is that you can't trust alcoholics to not drink and you can't keep a smoker away from a cigarette for very long (and they smell bad). So it makes sense for an employer not to hire them. It is a public health issue, though, so we should not deny them medical assistance and we should work more on prevention (the minimum age for buying cigarettes should get progressively higher, for instance).
It's amazing what an illiterate society can achieve. I bet they don't reveal to each other that they can't read because they are ashamed of it, so everybody keeps scribbling just to keep face.
I doubt people would object to wind turbines the way they do to nuclear or coal plants. They don't have nasty emissions nor dangerous fuel. And the whole clean energy revolution does seem to veer towards local production (solar panels being one example of a technology people are happy to put in their property).
I doubt that he got credit for doing your work, but rather he must have got credit for supervising/managing/coordinating the development of the website. Mostly supervisers and managers have very different chores than coders do, so it would be strange if somebody thought he actually did your work.
If you still can't interpret it this way, then find another boss.
I know not all places are good for wind turbines, but wouldn't it be better to put them closer to where the energy is needed instead of having one big farm? Distribution would be cheaper and more efficient. Maintenance might not be easier to organize, but you have to have maintenance for your distribution lines anyway.
"My precious tables"?
This is valid business mentality?
Why don't you just give them read-only access, and if they do f**k up, then you have a perfectly valid argument. Otherwise, you're just being a jealous geek.
At least they gave him a trial.
People are being freed from Guantamo after 6 years without ever even having being charged with anything. Can you imagine the torture of not even knowing when you are going to get out?
This is simply false. The brazilian constitution exempts books, magazines, newspapers, and the paper they are printed on from all taxes. It's in article 150 (VI - d). If you buy books from abroad, you don't pay a centavo of import duties. This I can also attest to from personal experience.
Another important difference is that the Wright brother's flight was witnessed only by themselves and their crew whereas Dummont's flight was a very public event.
Wal-Mart Brazil is also installing Linux in its stores (and they are going from DOS to Linux). And Lojas Renner (large clothes retailer) also uses it.
People tend not to find it friendly to name oneself "the chosen" and to have a word for everybody else (Goy).
Don't you mean Yunus? Anyway, I don't think this is a failure of capitalism, but rather a failure of people to understand capitalism. In my country, Brazil, capitalism is equated with large sums of money, enormous corporations, flashy cars, etc. I simply cannot fathom why we don't have cheap vehicles such as the ones you see in India (Bajaj and such). Government economic policies are always related to some big multinational; you never see a concerted effort to improve the environment for small businesses. This is simply myopic. A person who sells tomatoes at the market is as much a capitalist as the stock market broker.
Why wouldn't they want their competitors to hire him? :-P