And by the way, I forgot to address this, the Fair Tax DOES take into account this basic fact that the poor spend more of their money on just existing. The Fair Tax has a mechanism called the Prebate, that pays EVERY citizen (not illegal aliens, tho) an amount of money every month that will pay for the Fair Tax on goods purchased up to the poverty level. That is, if you're a single person and the poverty level is $11,000, the gov't is going to send you the Fair Tax's 23% of $11,000, or $2.530, in monthly installments of $210.83. IOW, the poor pay $0 Fair Tax. And, the Fair Tax is the ONLY truly progressive tax ever proposed, since someone making twice the poverty level would be paying half the Fair Tax rate, someone making 3X the poverty level would be paying 2/3rds the Fair Tax rate, someone making 4X the poverty level would be paying 3/4 of the Fair Tax rate, etc.
In contrast, the proposed "flat tax" is anything but flat, since it does NOT eliminate the the payroll taxes of 15.3%. So, after an exemption for low income, a person begins paying the flat tax of 17%, added to the payroll tax of 15.3%, for a total of 32.3%. To add insult to injury, the payroll taxes stop taxing at $118K, so the CEO making $10M essentially pays 17%, while the middle classer at $75K pays close to 32%. That's a regressive tax, period.
What companies would do by not having to pay income taxes is to lower their product prices to attempt to capture market share and therefore increase profits. That would be a good thing for the American people, since American-manufactured goods would rise little in price after the Fair Tax is applied, but foreign goods, whose prices would not decrease at all, would get more expensive. This would create a bias to cause industry to manufacture here, rather than overseas, which is good for the American people.
What is your problem with well-paid CEOs? At the time of the GM bankruptcy, the CEO's salary was $10M, and they were manufacturing 10 million cars. What's wrong with the CEO getting $1 / car? Would you not buy it if GM paid its CEO $15M and the car's price rose by 50 cents? And if the CEO's salary were instead divided amongst the laborers, we know that it takes about 33 labor hours for a Detroit factory to build a car, so you're going to divide that $1.00 or $1.50 into 33 hours and raise the laborers' wages by 3 - 5 cents? How does that help the working class?
No, what helps the working class is to incentivize job creation, which is what the Fair Tax would do like no other method. Factories would be built to the extent that a labor shortage would be created. Fair Tax researchers believe that we would have a 3% unemployment rate within 2 years, which is full employment. Then we can start employing immigrants, and increase the tax base while making more prosperity for more people.
It would rescue the middle class, by creating jobs for absolutely everyone that wants one. The reason for the wealth gap is that the middle class wages fall because there are far fewer jobs than there are people to do them, so those people compete with each other and "bid": those jobs down to the minimum wage. If we pass the Fair Tax, there will be a massive building of factories from both domestic investment and foreigners investing here to build things at the newest, bestest manufacturing tax haven on the planet. That will cause a labor shortage in short order, as industry rapidly outstrips the available help they can hire, and the wages will skyrocket. The middle class will be rapidly increased, and prosperity will be restored to the USA.
From Wikipedia: " Bill Archer, former head of the House Ways and Means Committee, asked Princeton University Econometrics to survey 500 European and Asian companies regarding the effect on their business decisions if the United States enacted the FairTax. 400 of those companies stated they would build their next plant in the United States, and 100 companies said they would move their corporate headquarters to the United States.[63] " That is in the Wikipedia entry for the Fair Tax. So, that shows that foreign investment is ready to build factories here. Our economy would be revitalized, and once again the envy of the world.
Not sure what you're trying to say by referencing the Dunning-Kruger effect, but I say that factory work is such that you do not need a college education to be an electrician, milwright, pipe fitter, boiler operator, or most other jobs in a factory. That is what will open up employment to much of the 47 million that are in poverty now for lack of work. The Fair Tax will fix that.
What are you talking about? We import tons of stuff, and that might be somewhat diminished, as we have had a fairly nasty trade deficit for a very long time. As for exports, those would definitely increase, as much of the embedded income tax, that businesses currently pay when they manufacture things in the USA, would be abolished. The Europeans have the good sense to remove the VAT taxes that are applied to their manufactured goods when they leave their ports for the USA, but we continue to ship out our products with a heavy burden of the highest corporate income taxes on the planet making them more expensive. The Fair Tax would fix that, and dramatically increase our exports since their prices would dramatically decrease, maybe as much as 11% - 18%.
And so, in order to not PO other countries, we should continue with 47 million people in poverty and a high unemployment rate? The Fair Tax would fix that, dramatically increase manufacturing in this country, (and decrease global warming gasses since we would do our manufacturing with natural gas, rather than as China does it, with coal) and thus provide jobs for anyone that wants one. We have a record 93 million people not in the work force, the worst situation in history, and the reason is that most of our manufacturing jobs have left the USA for lower-corporate-taxed places, which is now anywhere else other than the USA. The middle class would be increased dramatically, as people go back to work, in manufacturing, one of the only 3 real sources of wealth along with mining and agriculture, and fix our unemployment problem. Want to see great lakes freighters take iron ore from Duluth to Cleveland to be manufactured in Pittsburgh again, this time with shale gas from WVa and Ohio, instead of being exported to be made into steel overseas and then shipped back to us as an import? I do. We can get our economy back with the Fair Tax.
Hey, I've got an idea. Lets pass the Fair Tax. The Fair Tax abolishes all income taxes, and replaces it with a consumption tax on new goods for sale, and services. Businesses do not pay the consumption tax. So, all that money flowing into Ireland from the world's tax scams would instead come to the USA, and end up investing in American business, and eradicating things like unemployment and poverty. Yes, we can do this, just pass the Fair Tax. Repeal the 16th Amendment while we're at it, and make federal income taxes impossible forever.
I don't know how, but I know your math is off. The exercise machine I use says I'm most often in the 200 watt area of output. There's 745.699 watts per horsepower, so I most often put out a little over a quarter horsepower. The machine says that is 1000 "food calories" after about an hour. Somewhere there's a fail in the conversions.
Yeah, exercise daily is tough until you build up aerobic fitness, so doing the elliptical for an hour and 1000 calories becomes as easy as walking for that much time. I really do get strong enough to do that if I keep at it, and was like that last May. But it takes months of regular exercise on the elliptical to do that. And I can't do that _every_ day, but 4 days a week happened a lot. 4000 calories, if I can manage not to eat more than my 1800 calorie metabolism, will lose me a pound. If its nice out, I can add maybe 200 calories an hour for several hours outdoors, doing "stuff" like attacking my weeds, pruning trees (I do NOT climb... I have this piece of chansaw chain with a rope on each end, throw it up in the tree, pull on the ropes back and forth, and down comes the unwanted limb...) , fixing things that need it.
An hour of exercise is 1000 calories, indicated by the ergometer and confirmed by my spreadsheets. Eating much less than I do has only been successful with NitriSystem. I could do that, if there's absolutely no other way, but I'm going to try this for a while. Today was 1750 calories, 50 less than my calculated "burn". Adding 238 calories today, due to an exercise fail (ran out of energy, shoulda eaten _before_ going to the gym, but the whole day was screwed up because we had 7" of snow and you'd think, from the reaction around here, that the glaciers had returned. Movies closed, restaurants closed, gym closed at 8, poker venue even canceled. Geeezzz... so I go trotting into the gym with not enough energy, and was "all in" in about 14 minutes. Tomorrow will be better. I am approaching being able to do the whole 1000 calories in one "go", again. Last time was last May, but I got hurt, sick, hurt, sick, and sick which interrupted my exercise. Turned out I had a vitamin D deficiency. Now that that is cured, I'm trying to get back to my former fitness level. Last may, I even went for 1600 calories in one day. 1000 straight-thru, then 3 200-calorie sets. That makes a difference. But I'm far more adept at exercising at a high level than I am at restricting my eating, that ALWAYS fails. When the ice and snow goes away, there will also be biking and attacking my weeds out back, some of which are up to 3/4" diameter. I _will_ get the back of that lot cleared...
The beaches in what is not Texas were found to have tar balls on them by the 1st wooden ships to land there. There's all sorts of "pollution" all over the world, and yet we are not all dead. Stop dwelling on the Exxon Valdez, the runaway oil well in the gulf, the Keystone Pipeline, etc. etc. They will not "kill us all" and we need to make progress and lift people out of poverty. Now, POVERTY is killing millions. People lose about 6.5 years of life from living in poverty, on average. There's about 47 million people on food stamps, and therefore in poverty, so do the math and find out the real enemy of humans in this country and everywhere.
Yep, I have a bike and 8 miles is about it. I'm too fat and not quite up to much more than 8 miles. I also have a condition in my left hip, where statin drugs attempted to devour all the muscles in the left side of my body a few years ago, and that hip gets tired waaaay early, and is uncomfortable. It yells, "I'm tired... I'm tired.... I'm tired" in my brain even walking around a food store sometimes, and I have to take it easy. There's LOTS of people with some weirdity that keeps them from performing athletics like bike riding. BTW, if you can avoid taking statin drugs, do so, as the are ing dangerous.
I'm one of those that works every day to burn off the extra pounds. Have been working all week to amass a 3500 calorie deficit to lose a pound. Nope, hasn't happened. May happen Wednesday, as the gym is going to be closed tomorrow because there's 6" - 10" of snow coming tomorrow, and this is Virginia. I'm 66, and aerobically pretty good but not muscle-wise, so using my arms to burn that much energy is a non-starter. And... its bloody difficult just to end up with only eating my metabolism every day, now around 1800 calories.
And at any rate, 20 miles to work is impossible for several reasons. #1 is I'm retired, but even if I wasn't, the roads around here are like suicide to be out on with anything that doesn't weigh 2000#+. A bike is going to be a sudden object just over a hill crest or around a turn that drivers talking on cell phones or texting may or may not see in time. If you're brave enough to ride the roads around here, you're brave enough to take a job in one of our several war zones, where the pay is really good and you probably have to ride a bike anyway unless you are military and can get issued a Humvee to use. Afghanistan for the time being, and I understand we're in Africa really hush-hush right now, too. Yeah, you might get shot at, but its still not as dangerous as riding the roads around here on a bike.
Today is a fail... I was just to the grocery, and bought a bag of fat pills (peanuts.) Will have to make up some ground on losing that pound on Tuesday and Wednesday.
...to stop hogging the net with continuous streaming videos for hours. There's just a limit where some things become unreasonable, and laying millions of miles of fiber to support the delivery of crap like NetFlix delivers is just insane. If it were doing some _good_, like maybe carrying educational materials or something, that'd be different. But watching "Tremors" for the 14th time just because you can just isn't worth all that cable-laying. Its a waste. Buy the damn DVD or Blu-Ray and be done with it. C'mon...
How can the gov't be siding with the people when, again as in the Microsoft IE browser case, the company was giving me a FREE browser if I bought their OS? I mean, it was FREE! The gov't that tries to muck with that is NOT doing _ME_ any favors, its acting on some other company's behalf, quite possibly to my detriment depending on whether it turned out that Microsoft might have been forced to charge, say, $24.99 for their browser just to make things equal. Didn't turn out that way, but why screw with the giving away of something? Again, I say it doesn't work in MY interest.
Exactly so. A browser is just another program, and XP would allow the installation of another browser just fine.
Meanwhile, my own gov't was attempting to diminish my computing experience by having to either install IE manually, or some other browser manually, rather than having it just appear after the OS is installed. IOW, its tougher on _ME_ as a customer just to fix a non-problem, when other browser-makers could just have their stuff loaded manually on top of IE. Both IE and their browser would work. But no, the Gov't was after the honey-pot of a big fine over a triviality. That's what the Euros are likely up to, as well. And other makers are complaining? Sure they are, when they can get the gov't to "take down" their competition so that they can prevail in the market instead, sure they're going to dream up something to bitch about.
Like I said, I'm tired of it. Google / Microsoft / Etc. should just leave...
Except that the "behavior meant to keep the competition at bay" is too often offering more functionality for the same price, as was the Internet Explorer fiasco. The competition there couldn't build a better browser than IE, so they use the gov't to tear down IE so's that they can compete with it more easily. Total BS, in my opinion. You can think of it as you like. Such action, tho, is detrimental to the public, which is always looking for more performance for less money, and deserve to get it. Having gov't working at cross-purposes to the good of the citizens really, really sucks in my opinion.
The US Gov't, under leftist administration in the 90's, persecuted Microsoft for providing too much functionality in Windows, if you can believe it. They integrated Internet Explorer into the operating system, and that was somehow unfair to the competition. Boo-hoo... build a better browser and they will come, as has happened with Chrome and some others. Its not like the OS prohibited the installation of another browser, it just provided a free one. That was nonsense. I don't think I need to look at the particulars of this exercise in torturing the big "bad" businessmen to be able to simply assume it is BS. If it was really harmful, I'd think I'd be hearing a lot of complaints from people. I don't know anyone that complains about Google. They complain about Bing, which has been caught simply sending their search requests to Google, and then repackaging them with the Bing interface. But not Google. Google is just where the money is for these pirate gov'ts.
Doesn't help my mood on this even a little bit that the Euros perform piracy against their own big "bad" businessmen, either. Gov'ts should be _helping_ industries, not persecuting them. And we wonder what the huge unemployment rates are all about? I don't wonder at all, I expect it with behavior such as this from the gov't buccaneers.
Except the charges are, in all likelihood, as big of BS as those against Microsoft where leftist Clinton persecuted Microsoft all thru the 90's, only to have the whole thing quietly go away as soon as GWB was elected. Its just the left performing piracy against the big "bad" businessmen. Tired of it, I say.
Well, if the "there" is willing to attempt to take 10% of their gross receipts away from them, I'd say that they would probably abandon the "Land of the Pirates" and come back home and make some money.
As for sharing data with the gov't, you speak of it as if they had a choice... Hint: The choice is an illusion when you're dealing with something as powerful as the US Gov't. Yeah, we need to make the gov't smaller - at least the GOP / right wing of the gov't knows that. Talk to our leftists / communists that want to make the gov't big enough to rule the world.
For my part, I'm really tired of this Euro-trash attempting to wring billions of dollars out of American companies just because they can. Google, Microsoft, etc. should just pull out of there, and let them fend for themselves if they're going to get stolen from by corrupt governments looking for a quick buck.
I've got a problem that looks like a hard disk. Am I going to dump this $4K gaming system? No way, I'm getting a 250Gb SSD and a 2 TB black drive. Dang straight I'm keeping my 850 watt power supply with the amazing graphics card and the core i7 processor, as well as the 7 case fans to keep it all cool. Sounds like a B-29. But boy, its sweet to operate.
Simply making an assertion is insufficient. Show us how, in an affordable manner, we can stop using oil. You can't, because we don't have that technology.
Agree. Build it above ground. Building it above ground would likely be cheaper, too, by eliminating the digging cost. Build it elevated, say 20 feet in the air, and you don't even have right-of-way as a big issue, since the land underneath can still be farmed. Only real challenge would be keeping it warm enough to flow in the winter.
Slashdot Mirror
And by the way, I forgot to address this, the Fair Tax DOES take into account this basic fact that the poor spend more of their money on just existing. The Fair Tax has a mechanism called the Prebate, that pays EVERY citizen (not illegal aliens, tho) an amount of money every month that will pay for the Fair Tax on goods purchased up to the poverty level. That is, if you're a single person and the poverty level is $11,000, the gov't is going to send you the Fair Tax's 23% of $11,000, or $2.530, in monthly installments of $210.83. IOW, the poor pay $0 Fair Tax. And, the Fair Tax is the ONLY truly progressive tax ever proposed, since someone making twice the poverty level would be paying half the Fair Tax rate, someone making 3X the poverty level would be paying 2/3rds the Fair Tax rate, someone making 4X the poverty level would be paying 3/4 of the Fair Tax rate, etc.
In contrast, the proposed "flat tax" is anything but flat, since it does NOT eliminate the the payroll taxes of 15.3%. So, after an exemption for low income, a person begins paying the flat tax of 17%, added to the payroll tax of 15.3%, for a total of 32.3%. To add insult to injury, the payroll taxes stop taxing at $118K, so the CEO making $10M essentially pays 17%, while the middle classer at $75K pays close to 32%. That's a regressive tax, period.
What companies would do by not having to pay income taxes is to lower their product prices to attempt to capture market share and therefore increase profits. That would be a good thing for the American people, since American-manufactured goods would rise little in price after the Fair Tax is applied, but foreign goods, whose prices would not decrease at all, would get more expensive. This would create a bias to cause industry to manufacture here, rather than overseas, which is good for the American people.
What is your problem with well-paid CEOs? At the time of the GM bankruptcy, the CEO's salary was $10M, and they were manufacturing 10 million cars. What's wrong with the CEO getting $1 / car? Would you not buy it if GM paid its CEO $15M and the car's price rose by 50 cents? And if the CEO's salary were instead divided amongst the laborers, we know that it takes about 33 labor hours for a Detroit factory to build a car, so you're going to divide that $1.00 or $1.50 into 33 hours and raise the laborers' wages by 3 - 5 cents? How does that help the working class?
No, what helps the working class is to incentivize job creation, which is what the Fair Tax would do like no other method. Factories would be built to the extent that a labor shortage would be created. Fair Tax researchers believe that we would have a 3% unemployment rate within 2 years, which is full employment. Then we can start employing immigrants, and increase the tax base while making more prosperity for more people.
It would rescue the middle class, by creating jobs for absolutely everyone that wants one. The reason for the wealth gap is that the middle class wages fall because there are far fewer jobs than there are people to do them, so those people compete with each other and "bid": those jobs down to the minimum wage. If we pass the Fair Tax, there will be a massive building of factories from both domestic investment and foreigners investing here to build things at the newest, bestest manufacturing tax haven on the planet. That will cause a labor shortage in short order, as industry rapidly outstrips the available help they can hire, and the wages will skyrocket. The middle class will be rapidly increased, and prosperity will be restored to the USA.
From Wikipedia: " Bill Archer, former head of the House Ways and Means Committee, asked Princeton University Econometrics to survey 500 European and Asian companies regarding the effect on their business decisions if the United States enacted the FairTax. 400 of those companies stated they would build their next plant in the United States, and 100 companies said they would move their corporate headquarters to the United States.[63] " That is in the Wikipedia entry for the Fair Tax. So, that shows that foreign investment is ready to build factories here. Our economy would be revitalized, and once again the envy of the world.
Not sure what you're trying to say by referencing the Dunning-Kruger effect, but I say that factory work is such that you do not need a college education to be an electrician, milwright, pipe fitter, boiler operator, or most other jobs in a factory. That is what will open up employment to much of the 47 million that are in poverty now for lack of work. The Fair Tax will fix that.
What are you talking about? We import tons of stuff, and that might be somewhat diminished, as we have had a fairly nasty trade deficit for a very long time. As for exports, those would definitely increase, as much of the embedded income tax, that businesses currently pay when they manufacture things in the USA, would be abolished. The Europeans have the good sense to remove the VAT taxes that are applied to their manufactured goods when they leave their ports for the USA, but we continue to ship out our products with a heavy burden of the highest corporate income taxes on the planet making them more expensive. The Fair Tax would fix that, and dramatically increase our exports since their prices would dramatically decrease, maybe as much as 11% - 18%.
And so, in order to not PO other countries, we should continue with 47 million people in poverty and a high unemployment rate? The Fair Tax would fix that, dramatically increase manufacturing in this country, (and decrease global warming gasses since we would do our manufacturing with natural gas, rather than as China does it, with coal) and thus provide jobs for anyone that wants one. We have a record 93 million people not in the work force, the worst situation in history, and the reason is that most of our manufacturing jobs have left the USA for lower-corporate-taxed places, which is now anywhere else other than the USA. The middle class would be increased dramatically, as people go back to work, in manufacturing, one of the only 3 real sources of wealth along with mining and agriculture, and fix our unemployment problem. Want to see great lakes freighters take iron ore from Duluth to Cleveland to be manufactured in Pittsburgh again, this time with shale gas from WVa and Ohio, instead of being exported to be made into steel overseas and then shipped back to us as an import? I do. We can get our economy back with the Fair Tax.
Hey, I've got an idea. Lets pass the Fair Tax. The Fair Tax abolishes all income taxes, and replaces it with a consumption tax on new goods for sale, and services. Businesses do not pay the consumption tax. So, all that money flowing into Ireland from the world's tax scams would instead come to the USA, and end up investing in American business, and eradicating things like unemployment and poverty. Yes, we can do this, just pass the Fair Tax. Repeal the 16th Amendment while we're at it, and make federal income taxes impossible forever.
I don't know how, but I know your math is off. The exercise machine I use says I'm most often in the 200 watt area of output. There's 745.699 watts per horsepower, so I most often put out a little over a quarter horsepower. The machine says that is 1000 "food calories" after about an hour. Somewhere there's a fail in the conversions.
Yeah, exercise daily is tough until you build up aerobic fitness, so doing the elliptical for an hour and 1000 calories becomes as easy as walking for that much time. I really do get strong enough to do that if I keep at it, and was like that last May. But it takes months of regular exercise on the elliptical to do that. And I can't do that _every_ day, but 4 days a week happened a lot. 4000 calories, if I can manage not to eat more than my 1800 calorie metabolism, will lose me a pound. If its nice out, I can add maybe 200 calories an hour for several hours outdoors, doing "stuff" like attacking my weeds, pruning trees (I do NOT climb... I have this piece of chansaw chain with a rope on each end, throw it up in the tree, pull on the ropes back and forth, and down comes the unwanted limb...) , fixing things that need it.
An hour of exercise is 1000 calories, indicated by the ergometer and confirmed by my spreadsheets. Eating much less than I do has only been successful with NitriSystem. I could do that, if there's absolutely no other way, but I'm going to try this for a while. Today was 1750 calories, 50 less than my calculated "burn". Adding 238 calories today, due to an exercise fail (ran out of energy, shoulda eaten _before_ going to the gym, but the whole day was screwed up because we had 7" of snow and you'd think, from the reaction around here, that the glaciers had returned. Movies closed, restaurants closed, gym closed at 8, poker venue even canceled. Geeezzz... so I go trotting into the gym with not enough energy, and was "all in" in about 14 minutes. Tomorrow will be better. I am approaching being able to do the whole 1000 calories in one "go", again. Last time was last May, but I got hurt, sick, hurt, sick, and sick which interrupted my exercise. Turned out I had a vitamin D deficiency. Now that that is cured, I'm trying to get back to my former fitness level. Last may, I even went for 1600 calories in one day. 1000 straight-thru, then 3 200-calorie sets. That makes a difference. But I'm far more adept at exercising at a high level than I am at restricting my eating, that ALWAYS fails. When the ice and snow goes away, there will also be biking and attacking my weeds out back, some of which are up to 3/4" diameter. I _will_ get the back of that lot cleared...
... get the Hell over it!
The beaches in what is not Texas were found to have tar balls on them by the 1st wooden ships to land there. There's all sorts of "pollution" all over the world, and yet we are not all dead. Stop dwelling on the Exxon Valdez, the runaway oil well in the gulf, the Keystone Pipeline, etc. etc. They will not "kill us all" and we need to make progress and lift people out of poverty. Now, POVERTY is killing millions. People lose about 6.5 years of life from living in poverty, on average. There's about 47 million people on food stamps, and therefore in poverty, so do the math and find out the real enemy of humans in this country and everywhere.
Yep, I have a bike and 8 miles is about it. I'm too fat and not quite up to much more than 8 miles. I also have a condition in my left hip, where statin drugs attempted to devour all the muscles in the left side of my body a few years ago, and that hip gets tired waaaay early, and is uncomfortable. It yells, "I'm tired... I'm tired.... I'm tired" in my brain even walking around a food store sometimes, and I have to take it easy. There's LOTS of people with some weirdity that keeps them from performing athletics like bike riding. BTW, if you can avoid taking statin drugs, do so, as the are ing dangerous.
I'm one of those that works every day to burn off the extra pounds. Have been working all week to amass a 3500 calorie deficit to lose a pound. Nope, hasn't happened. May happen Wednesday, as the gym is going to be closed tomorrow because there's 6" - 10" of snow coming tomorrow, and this is Virginia. I'm 66, and aerobically pretty good but not muscle-wise, so using my arms to burn that much energy is a non-starter. And... its bloody difficult just to end up with only eating my metabolism every day, now around 1800 calories.
And at any rate, 20 miles to work is impossible for several reasons. #1 is I'm retired, but even if I wasn't, the roads around here are like suicide to be out on with anything that doesn't weigh 2000#+. A bike is going to be a sudden object just over a hill crest or around a turn that drivers talking on cell phones or texting may or may not see in time. If you're brave enough to ride the roads around here, you're brave enough to take a job in one of our several war zones, where the pay is really good and you probably have to ride a bike anyway unless you are military and can get issued a Humvee to use. Afghanistan for the time being, and I understand we're in Africa really hush-hush right now, too. Yeah, you might get shot at, but its still not as dangerous as riding the roads around here on a bike.
Today is a fail... I was just to the grocery, and bought a bag of fat pills (peanuts.) Will have to make up some ground on losing that pound on Tuesday and Wednesday.
Try that in downhill skiing, or snowboarding...
...to stop hogging the net with continuous streaming videos for hours. There's just a limit where some things become unreasonable, and laying millions of miles of fiber to support the delivery of crap like NetFlix delivers is just insane. If it were doing some _good_, like maybe carrying educational materials or something, that'd be different. But watching "Tremors" for the 14th time just because you can just isn't worth all that cable-laying. Its a waste. Buy the damn DVD or Blu-Ray and be done with it. C'mon...
How can the gov't be siding with the people when, again as in the Microsoft IE browser case, the company was giving me a FREE browser if I bought their OS? I mean, it was FREE! The gov't that tries to muck with that is NOT doing _ME_ any favors, its acting on some other company's behalf, quite possibly to my detriment depending on whether it turned out that Microsoft might have been forced to charge, say, $24.99 for their browser just to make things equal. Didn't turn out that way, but why screw with the giving away of something? Again, I say it doesn't work in MY interest.
Exactly so. A browser is just another program, and XP would allow the installation of another browser just fine.
Meanwhile, my own gov't was attempting to diminish my computing experience by having to either install IE manually, or some other browser manually, rather than having it just appear after the OS is installed. IOW, its tougher on _ME_ as a customer just to fix a non-problem, when other browser-makers could just have their stuff loaded manually on top of IE. Both IE and their browser would work. But no, the Gov't was after the honey-pot of a big fine over a triviality. That's what the Euros are likely up to, as well. And other makers are complaining? Sure they are, when they can get the gov't to "take down" their competition so that they can prevail in the market instead, sure they're going to dream up something to bitch about.
Like I said, I'm tired of it. Google / Microsoft / Etc. should just leave...
Except that the "behavior meant to keep the competition at bay" is too often offering more functionality for the same price, as was the Internet Explorer fiasco. The competition there couldn't build a better browser than IE, so they use the gov't to tear down IE so's that they can compete with it more easily. Total BS, in my opinion. You can think of it as you like. Such action, tho, is detrimental to the public, which is always looking for more performance for less money, and deserve to get it. Having gov't working at cross-purposes to the good of the citizens really, really sucks in my opinion.
The US Gov't, under leftist administration in the 90's, persecuted Microsoft for providing too much functionality in Windows, if you can believe it. They integrated Internet Explorer into the operating system, and that was somehow unfair to the competition. Boo-hoo... build a better browser and they will come, as has happened with Chrome and some others. Its not like the OS prohibited the installation of another browser, it just provided a free one. That was nonsense. I don't think I need to look at the particulars of this exercise in torturing the big "bad" businessmen to be able to simply assume it is BS. If it was really harmful, I'd think I'd be hearing a lot of complaints from people. I don't know anyone that complains about Google. They complain about Bing, which has been caught simply sending their search requests to Google, and then repackaging them with the Bing interface. But not Google. Google is just where the money is for these pirate gov'ts.
Doesn't help my mood on this even a little bit that the Euros perform piracy against their own big "bad" businessmen, either. Gov'ts should be _helping_ industries, not persecuting them. And we wonder what the huge unemployment rates are all about? I don't wonder at all, I expect it with behavior such as this from the gov't buccaneers.
Except the charges are, in all likelihood, as big of BS as those against Microsoft where leftist Clinton persecuted Microsoft all thru the 90's, only to have the whole thing quietly go away as soon as GWB was elected. Its just the left performing piracy against the big "bad" businessmen. Tired of it, I say.
Well, if the "there" is willing to attempt to take 10% of their gross receipts away from them, I'd say that they would probably abandon the "Land of the Pirates" and come back home and make some money.
As for sharing data with the gov't, you speak of it as if they had a choice... Hint: The choice is an illusion when you're dealing with something as powerful as the US Gov't. Yeah, we need to make the gov't smaller - at least the GOP / right wing of the gov't knows that. Talk to our leftists / communists that want to make the gov't big enough to rule the world.
For my part, I'm really tired of this Euro-trash attempting to wring billions of dollars out of American companies just because they can. Google, Microsoft, etc. should just pull out of there, and let them fend for themselves if they're going to get stolen from by corrupt governments looking for a quick buck.
Idiot!
I've got a problem that looks like a hard disk. Am I going to dump this $4K gaming system? No way, I'm getting a 250Gb SSD and a 2 TB black drive. Dang straight I'm keeping my 850 watt power supply with the amazing graphics card and the core i7 processor, as well as the 7 case fans to keep it all cool. Sounds like a B-29. But boy, its sweet to operate.
There is no collapsing climate, the earth is just fine, the global warming nonsense is a fraud. Come out and enjoy the sunshine.
We could, but that'd kill a lot of people. I wasn't aware you were OK with that. BTW, you first.
Simply making an assertion is insufficient. Show us how, in an affordable manner, we can stop using oil. You can't, because we don't have that technology.
Agree. Build it above ground. Building it above ground would likely be cheaper, too, by eliminating the digging cost. Build it elevated, say 20 feet in the air, and you don't even have right-of-way as a big issue, since the land underneath can still be farmed. Only real challenge would be keeping it warm enough to flow in the winter.