Your post isn't made up of "dark energy", so observing it doesn't shorten its' life - it makes it longer.
Same as a watched kettle takes longer to boil.
Now if your post was from the dark side (for example, you were an M$ employee going on about te lower TCO and energy savings of Vista as it converts your laptop into a toaster oven), your post WOULD have shortened visibility as it quickly sinks to -666.
"DX10. It's inevitable that games will eventually require it"
Why? To get an extra 10 fps? The normal hardware upgrade cycle will fix that, and let game manufacturers continue to ship with DX9. Heck, there are still games being sold that run fine under Win9x.
As Nintendo showed, its not necessary to require the latest and greatest hardware to have the best product.
Not everyone has gone wacko. For example, Canada's retirement fund is on an actuarily sound, fully funded basis for the next 75 years. AND they just reduced the federal GST tax from 7% to 6%, since the overall federal debt has gone down enough (after running more than a decade of surpluses) to "give up" some of the tax.
"Get a real raid card not a software one good hard ones cost $250 - $1000"
Don't be silly. Want to try recovering from a failed hardware raid card? Get ready to spend money - if the card is still even available 5 years from now, when you really really REALLY need it.
"I discovered that the Windows Install CD will not start the install and recovery process if you have ext2 / ext3 partitions on the disk. Also, I have had times when MBRs were so badly damaged that, once again, Windows Install CD wouldn't even start - it would crash after detecting hardware."
boot into linux from a cd
run fdisk
note the exact starting and ending cylinders of each non-windows partition
Take an old pentium that yu're not using any more (turn in your geek card if you don't have one hanging around), throw a couple of hds in it (you can buy 4 500-gig drives for $400), and rsync.
Advantages:
less than $400, so you're well within budget
LOTS of storage
bragging rights (I have 2 TB for backups)
If you're really worried, put the drives in drive caddies so you can remove them; 2 for daily backups, on for weekly backups, one for monthly. At most, you lose a months worth of data.
The programmer working as an employee isn't being asked to start charging sales tax.
The programmer working as a contract is - and as such, he's selling his code, which IS a product.
Now, in all fairness, everyone else involved in the sale of services, such as car repairs, lawn mowing, etc., should also be similarly required to do the same. This would probably have the side effect of allowing the tax to be set at a lower level overall, resulting in fewer cries of "the jobs will leave".
Yes, I know the difference between regressive and progressive taxation levels. However, as I pointed out, what we thought was a regressive taxation policy isn't as regressive as we thought. The lowest income levels receive subsidies and benefits that offset much or all of the tax bite, so that even "flat" or "regressive" tax policies are not really. Its the middle class that gets it socked to them. Too "rich" to benefit from the breaks the poor get, and not rich enough to have the extra disposable income so that taxes are just another inconvenience. (People who complain about having to pay millions in taxes... sheeh - I'd like to have that problem:-)
Taxation should be treated the same as Willy Sutton said when asked why he robbed banks - "It's where the money is." Its only logical to tax those with more disposable income "disproportionately"; unfortunately, even a 50% tax on the ultra rich won't solve the nation's debt problems - there aren't enough of them. And taxing the ultra-poor at anything like the same rates is just mean, never mind that its also pointless - it would be literally "taxing them to death." A uniform sales tax has one benefit - the more you spend, the more you pay. As such its a flat tax. Include the freebies for the lower income groups in the calculation, and its actually slightly progressive (since their real net tax burden as a percentage of income is less than average, or even zero).
Plus, a flat tax, no fancy loopholes, etc., is a lot easier to administer, and not as open to lobbying pressure.
" find a bit of genuine awkardness easier to deal with than the sort of falsely slick manipulative social skills learned by business majors, the "one minute managers"
We all hate it, and we can all smell it a mile away after a bit, because we see that they're all like George Bush - all hat, no cattle.
Come on, fess up... saying that "all else is seldom equal" is just a way to dodge the question. All else being equal, who would you trust more to make the pitch?
Besides, you indirectly answer the question when you write this:
the person more likely to have the knowledge to make the argument is, in my experience, more likely to be dressed casually
Its not a question of who has the most knowledge. Using such criteria, an idiot savant has the most knowledge, but would be totally useless. Knowledge by itself is useless. Its what you DO with the knowledge that counts.
Here's one example: convoluted uncommented undocumented spaghetti code. Sure, whoever wrote it has the intimate knowledge of it, but couldn't you just kill the fucktard who wrote it when you're stuck maintaining it? And when you study it enough to have the same intimate knowledge, don't you still feel "dirty"?
Now how do you communicate this problem to management, that its an ongoing concern, and that resources MUST be devoted to it, not just for the immediate patch, but also to make sure that, in future, its maintainable?
In other words, how do you say "this is a piece of shit" without also implying that they were idiots to have allowed this to get to that point in the first place, alienating the very people you have to convince?
They're more open to the message "this is shit; shit happens; let's work to get our shit together" (and notice the use of the term "our" to include all parties, so nobody is singled out for blame) from someone who doesn't look like they're dressed for a bout of dumpster diving. there's "business casual", then there's "casual", and then there's "slob".
Its not manipulation. Its about removing barriers that will prevent people from prejudging the message negatively. I'm not advocating a suit and neck-noose. Just saying that presentation is more than just what you say. Packaging is important, especially when you're trying to get people to go along with something that they instinctively don't trust, because they don't know enough about the details of the problem domain themselves (and remember - that's not their job, so don't throw rocks at them for that lack of knowledge).
Put yourself in their shoes for a moment. If they make the wrong decision, their career, or their business, could be on the line if they get it wrong. In such instances, people usually go with their gut feelings, because they don't have the wherewithal to evaluate the technical merits of the case (otherwise, they'd tell you how to write the code, etc., right?:-), so they look for the signals of assurance, stuff that's familiar, that they're making the right decision. Someone who's a bit less technically apt, but can make a good presentation both by their appearance, their demeanor, and their knowing when to speak and when to shut up will be trusted over some "slob" reciting the "obvious" technical points.
So what happens when the feds have to ram through a VAT (Value-Added Tax) in 2010 because of the deepening financial crisis?
If you think what the US is in is a financial crisis now, you haven't seen anything yet... analysts are divided between this being the second or 3rd inning, but they all agree its only be beginning, and are now making direct comparisons with the Great Depresseion, in terms of the long-term impact of the housing bubble collapse on the US.
They won't have a choice. Even if they decide to default on the debt (which isn't really an option anyway), they'd still need to go to a VAT on all goods and services, as anything else will just result in more lobbying by each side who doesn't want their particular ox gored.
Besides, as you indirectly point out, if they don't squeeze it out one way, they'll squeeze it out another. When push comes to shove, and the bills have to be paid, and there's no more credit available, they'll tax anything they can, voters be damned.
Your post misses one point. Nobody pays taxes on something they don't sell. You can write all you want, and never have to charge sales tax if you hve no sales.
Services should be taxed at the same rate as hard goods. This is a first step for that state, but its really quite common elsewhere in the world, and known by other names - VAT (Value Added Tax), GST (Goods and Services Tax), etc.
This would at least allow the US to get some semblance of order into its' finances. Taxes lower consumption, and with the average US consumer spending 103% of their income every year for the last decade, something has to give. The housing bubble crash is only the beginning.
You need more taxes, not less. The states and local governments are in the hole for trillions, the feds for 9 trillion plus another 50 trillion for future social security and medicare/medicaid.
Artificially lowering taxes increases spending and decreases savings, as people take advantage of the lower taxes to buy - same as artificially low interest rates caused the housing bubble.
Like anything else, a too-low rate now, in relation to obligations, means more pain further down the road.
Paying back all this mess would require each family to pay $31,000 per year, for the next 75 years. Your grandchildren are going to have to pay for your "largesse" - self-indulgence - in not setting tax rates that would put the system on a viable fiscal footing.
"Oh I don't Know About all that.... I think my second amendment rights would have something to say about it. I already live in the most dangerous city in America."
WASHINGTON, Nov. 20 The Supreme Court announced today that it would l decide whether the Constitution grants individuals the right to keep guns in their homes for private use, plunging the justices headlong into a divisive and long-running debate over how to interpret the Second Amendments guarantee of the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
The Supreme Court last looked at the Second Amendment nearly 70 years ago in United States v. Miller, a 1939 decision that suggested, without explicitly deciding, that the right should be understood in connection with service in a militia. The Second Amendment provides: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The justices chose their own wording for what they want to decide in the new case, District of Columbia v. Heller, No. 07-290. The question they posed is whether the provisions of the statute violate the Second Amendment rights of individuals who are not affiliated with any state-regulated militia, but who wish to keep handguns and other firearms for private use in their homes.
The state and municipal debt is also in the trillions.
Additionally, neither the Clinton nor the Bush debt includes the $50 trillion in future obligations that have been shifted "off-book" - the majors being social security and medicaid.
Bottom line: Taxpayers are now on the hook for a record $59.1 trillion in liabilities, a 2.3% increase from 2006. That amount is equal to $516,348 for every U.S. household. By comparison, U.S. households owe an average of $112,043 for mortgages, car loans, credit cards and all other debt combined.
Unfunded promises made for Medicare, Social Security and federal retirement programs account for 85% of taxpayer liabilities. State and local government retirement plans account for much of the rest.
This hidden debt is the amount taxpayers would have to pay immediately to cover government's financial obligations. Like a mortgage, it will cost more to repay the debt over time. Every U.S. household would have to pay about $31,000 a year to do so in 75 years.
Contrast this with your neighbor to the north. Social security actuarily sound for at least the next 75 years. Federal surpluses, and a declining federal debt (no deficit) - and projected to be "effective zero debt" - where current assets == current obligations + debts, in 15 to 20 years.
How did this happen? The government imposed a sales tax of 7% on almost everything. This includes new houses (and no, Canadians can't deduct their mortgage interest from their taxes). Almost all provinces add their own tax. It hurt, but it changed history - from increasing deficits and debt to regular budget surpluses and declining debts. Its the only way.
One side effect of the 7% tax on new house sales was that it discouraged speculation by "new home flippers". If you bought a new home from a builder with the intention of flipping it, that 7% is gone - its a sunk cost. Throw in the 7% agents' commission, and you have a 14% "anti-bubble disincentive".
(NOTE: The GST was recetly reduced to 6% to pass on some of the cost savings from the reduction in the federal deficit)
Go take a class in basic microeconomics. When taxes are increased, suppliers always bear at least some of the extra tax burden, and sometimes all of it. This comes from a straightforward application of the laws of supply and demand.
In the same tone, go take a class in politics. When one jurisdiction makes a tax grab, others follow suit, so eventually it ends up being mostly a wash, except that now its a bit more possible to actually start chipping away at the massive debt hangover. Its the same as the "race to the bottom" that we saw in the '80s, but now in reverse, and history will do what history always does - repeat itself, and make fools out of those who either don't know their history, or plumb forgot. Same as the current housing bubble/bust is just a repeat, though greatly exaggerated, of the earlier one in the early '80s, or the one in Japan in the '90s.
Keep in mind that ultimately, suppliers NEVER bear the burden of sales taxes, or any cost, for that matter - all costs are paid, one way or another, by the consumer. If they weren't the company would be out of business once the initial capital and all loan facilities were exhausted. You think that Company XYZ "bears the burden"? Get real. Company XYZ pays taxes based on sales. Ultimately, someone, somewhere, buys, and THEY provide the $$$ that pays the taxes. And the ultimate payor, the one who enables all this, is you, the consumer, either directly, or indirectly through government purchases or purchasing from a business that bought from a company that bought from another that...
If a company "absorbs" the tax, its only because they have enough margin to do so. Otherwise, they would either increase the price or go out of business. A lot of services aren't "portable". You can't outsource your pool care or lawn mowing or car repairs to India, so taxing them won't cause them to offshore. What it will do is spread the tax base more equitably. Why should only manufacturers and some service businesses have to pay a "manufacturing tax", making them uncompetitive investments compared to other businesses? Let everyone in the food chain pay their fair share.
Who said anything about a suit? Or a tie? Its been documented since the '80s that most neckties are worn too tight, restricting the flow of blood to the brain, with easily measurable side effects such as lower visual acuity. If you're going to wear a tie, make sure your shirt collar is the right size - almost everyone gets it too small, for some reason. Almost like they believe that it's SUPPOSED to feel like a noese:-)
As I point out elsewhere, people DO make judgments based on first impressions. You do to. You see two restaurants side-by-side. One is dingy, smelly, with a pile of garbage out front, and the other is clean. The dump might be the local equivalent of "the greasy spoon from heaven" but, unless someone clues you in, you're probably going to go next door instead.
"Anyone who will treat me differently based on whether I wear a shirt off the rack or one that's custom tailored, is not someone I care to work with."
Let's make it a bit more reasonable. Something you've probably had to do -argue your case to the "powers that be" for spending more time in initial design as opposed to just jumping the gun and "cutting code". There are two people who can make the "pitch"- one usually decked out in a grungy metal band t-shirt versus a well-made shirt. a pair of "religious blue jeans" ('cuz they're a bit "holy") versus almost anything, well-scuffed runners or sandals instead of shoes or loafers. All else being equal, who do YOU want to make the pitch?
Looking professional doesn't mean looking like a used-car or furniture salesman. It means looking better, and that includes looking and being more comfortable. Well-made, comfortable clothes pay for themselves. Its like selling a house, pre-bubble. No matter what you say or do, people will be able to tell if you're desperate. Or uncomfortable.
I don't know how many times a day you're interrupted while writing code, but I know that I spend a good chunk of my time talking with co-workers. So far this week (and its only Tuesday) , it included
following up with their beefing to each other about the lack of a ticket system (gave them a choice of 2 packages to check out and play with, after which I'll install the one they choose on one of the local servers, then talk "the powers that be" into making it publicly accesible),;
several discussions about how to organize, host, and podcast events on a regular basis that would be of interest to programmers, web designers, dbas, etc.;
a problem with the physical plant;
letting the woman in charge of testing my current project know what my expected timeline is for my code is, and how I expect it to play out, etc.;
explaining to a coworker that he won't invalidate his warranty if he installs his new mp3 player in his car himself, along with explaining (and showing) what a wiring harness is, reasonable 3rd-party charges for installation, etc;
the usual "make the coffee and make the rounds - here, want a donut, I bought some this morning?" social lubricant;
im and phone calls w the boss,
a bunch of other stuff that I can't be arsed to remember right now
As a group we underweigh social skills. It takes a lot of hard work to change that, but its important. The #1 reason for most failed projecs isn't a lack of technical skill, but crap communications caused by the "impedence mismatch" between the coders and management. Just think of how many times you've said "that part will take a month" and the next thing you know, a week later its "why isn't it finished?"
The "unaccounted debt" totals 50 trillion dollars, mostly to social security, medicaid, etc. You going to take away old people's pensions? What are they going to eat - cat food? Nope, too expensive when you've got no money. But that's okay = once they starve to death, they're no longer a burden to the system. And if you get really lucky, all the poor people who get sick will "do the right thing" and die quietly.
Yes, stop spending on stupidity like adventures in Iraq, but that won't make the debt go away - only taxes or default will do that. And you don't want to default. The consequences would make the depression look like a picnic.
So either run for office yourself, or support a candidate who has the same agenda as you wrt allocation of tax dollars, or beef loud and long to your reps.
Complaining on slashdot won't change it - buttonholing your rep and giving him or her an earful, accompanied by other like-minded concerned citizens, might.
And you think it would be better if there were no oversight? No CDC? No accountability? No accreditation of engineers? No standards for materials?
Instead of complaining about city managers' salaries, do something - run for office. Its not that hard or that expensive. I've done it 3 times - so far I'm 0 for 3, but it was still a worthwhile experience, and it made a small difference.
BTW - basic education is still supported by taxes last I looked. If you want to go private, you're free to do so and pay extra, but that's your decision.
When people write softwae, they ARE creating a product.
Similarly, when people put together a server, they ARE creating a product.
The proper question is, why should the mechanic and the lawn and nail people (or rather, the people who consume their services) get away with not paying their fair share?
Sales taxes used to be thought of as regressive - but when you consider that, as Leona Hemsley said wrt income taxes - "taxes are for poor people", and how they have the $$$ to pay less than what would be considered "their fair share", a sales tax isn't all that regressive. After all, if they spend it, it will be taxed. When they buy a Rolex, they'll pay more tax than you will for your Timex.
Hey, I did the "hippy grunge look" for ages - but you know something? We don't live in isolation. Part of communication with non-technical people is the way you look. Its a question of first impressions making lasting impressions.
Also, I am not recommending anyone "look like a sales person". We all know that look, and its not the same as business "slightly less than formal". For guys, it means a nice shirt (sans tie most of the time), comfortable, but not crappy, slacks (you know what I mean), good-quality shoes instead of sneakers. and lose the baseball cap except on weekends. A good leather winter coat instead of a parka. A leather briefcase or bag instead of a synthetic carry-all.
"Here is another thing that may surprise you, most "geeks" have no interest in becoming managers, sales people, or executives."
Here's a news flash - once you reach a certain level of responsibility wrt code, you are a salesman. You have to sell the idea of cutting a feature that's totally useless, or a time and manpower sink. You have to sell the idea that taking the time to do it right, when everyone is dying to give in to the temptation "cut code" (because writing code is what we do - I've been doing it for a quarter-century, and today was no exception, and it IS a lot more "fun" than planning, documenting, and spec'ing, but I spent the last 2 weeks on spec'ing the database tables before cutting the first few lines of test code).
How many times have you or someone you know complained "how come there's never enough time to do it right, but there's always enough time to do it over?" I'm tired of that, and I'm sure you are too. But here's the thing - how we dress shouldn't affect how our analysis is received by the powers that be - but that's not how the world works. And when you have other people depending on your code, you want it to be right, and that means "playing the game" so you can get that most important resource of all - time - to do it right.
We are all ultimately selling something - our talents, and our people skills. Without those "people skills", you're not as effective a "go-to" person, because people won't "go to" you except as a last resort. I don't want them to wait that long - which is why I make the rounds several times a day saying I'm making a fresh pot of coffee - who wants one? Its also why I'm bringing a box of donuts to the office tomorrow to share - doing the little things, showing the small considerations to coworkers, also helps keep the lines of communications open.
At the same time, when I go to see the owner of the building our offices are in to resolve an issue (like earlier today), I sit down and chat with him, and its "business as usual" on a first-name basis. I don't have to wait for my boss to show up, and have him play "broken telephone". I do the same with people in adjoining offices, because people skills are important, and they require practice - and because I like people.
So hey, if dressing respectably ultimately makes my job go smoother, and I want to do a good job, why not make the "investment"?
Be happy you're only getting hit with 6%. Where I live, he combined sales tax is 13.95%, applied to all goods and services with the exception of basic groceries and rents.
Slashdot Mirror
Your post isn't made up of "dark energy", so observing it doesn't shorten its' life - it makes it longer.
Same as a watched kettle takes longer to boil.
Now if your post was from the dark side (for example, you were an M$ employee going on about te lower TCO and energy savings of Vista as it converts your laptop into a toaster oven), your post WOULD have shortened visibility as it quickly sinks to -666.
"DX10. It's inevitable that games will eventually require it"
Why? To get an extra 10 fps? The normal hardware upgrade cycle will fix that, and let game manufacturers continue to ship with DX9. Heck, there are still games being sold that run fine under Win9x.
As Nintendo showed, its not necessary to require the latest and greatest hardware to have the best product.
"They didn't. Therefore they are hinting to you that the performance upgrade for Vista is still XP!"
Vista is so bad that even WinME is a "performance enhancer" by comparison.
All I've seen wrt Vista is:
Vista - the Un-Operating System.
Not everyone has gone wacko. For example, Canada's retirement fund is on an actuarily sound, fully funded basis for the next 75 years. AND they just reduced the federal GST tax from 7% to 6%, since the overall federal debt has gone down enough (after running more than a decade of surpluses) to "give up" some of the tax.
"Get a real raid card not a software one good hard ones cost $250 - $1000"
Don't be silly. Want to try recovering from a failed hardware raid card? Get ready to spend money - if the card is still even available 5 years from now, when you really really REALLY need it.
Software RAID is the way to go for a home setup.
"I discovered that the Windows Install CD will not start the install and recovery process if you have ext2 / ext3 partitions on the disk. Also, I have had times when MBRs were so badly damaged that, once again, Windows Install CD wouldn't even start - it would crash after detecting hardware."
Take an old pentium that yu're not using any more (turn in your geek card if you don't have one hanging around), throw a couple of hds in it (you can buy 4 500-gig drives for $400), and rsync.
Advantages:
- less than $400, so you're well within budget
- LOTS of storage
- bragging rights (I have 2 TB for backups)
If you're really worried, put the drives in drive caddies so you can remove them; 2 for daily backups, on for weekly backups, one for monthly. At most, you lose a months worth of data.The programmer working as an employee isn't being asked to start charging sales tax.
The programmer working as a contract is - and as such, he's selling his code, which IS a product.
Now, in all fairness, everyone else involved in the sale of services, such as car repairs, lawn mowing, etc., should also be similarly required to do the same. This would probably have the side effect of allowing the tax to be set at a lower level overall, resulting in fewer cries of "the jobs will leave".
Yes, I know the difference between regressive and progressive taxation levels. However, as I pointed out, what we thought was a regressive taxation policy isn't as regressive as we thought. The lowest income levels receive subsidies and benefits that offset much or all of the tax bite, so that even "flat" or "regressive" tax policies are not really. Its the middle class that gets it socked to them. Too "rich" to benefit from the breaks the poor get, and not rich enough to have the extra disposable income so that taxes are just another inconvenience. (People who complain about having to pay millions in taxes ... sheeh - I'd like to have that problem :-)
Taxation should be treated the same as Willy Sutton said when asked why he robbed banks - "It's where the money is." Its only logical to tax those with more disposable income "disproportionately"; unfortunately, even a 50% tax on the ultra rich won't solve the nation's debt problems - there aren't enough of them. And taxing the ultra-poor at anything like the same rates is just mean, never mind that its also pointless - it would be literally "taxing them to death." A uniform sales tax has one benefit - the more you spend, the more you pay. As such its a flat tax. Include the freebies for the lower income groups in the calculation, and its actually slightly progressive (since their real net tax burden as a percentage of income is less than average, or even zero).
Plus, a flat tax, no fancy loopholes, etc., is a lot easier to administer, and not as open to lobbying pressure.
" find a bit of genuine awkardness easier to deal with than the sort of falsely slick manipulative social skills learned by business majors, the "one minute managers"
We all hate it, and we can all smell it a mile away after a bit, because we see that they're all like George Bush - all hat, no cattle.
Come on, fess up ... saying that "all else is seldom equal" is just a way to dodge the question. All else being equal, who would you trust more to make the pitch?
Besides, you indirectly answer the question when you write this:
Its not a question of who has the most knowledge. Using such criteria, an idiot savant has the most knowledge, but would be totally useless. Knowledge by itself is useless. Its what you DO with the knowledge that counts.
Here's one example: convoluted uncommented undocumented spaghetti code. Sure, whoever wrote it has the intimate knowledge of it, but couldn't you just kill the fucktard who wrote it when you're stuck maintaining it? And when you study it enough to have the same intimate knowledge, don't you still feel "dirty"?
Now how do you communicate this problem to management, that its an ongoing concern, and that resources MUST be devoted to it, not just for the immediate patch, but also to make sure that, in future, its maintainable?
In other words, how do you say "this is a piece of shit" without also implying that they were idiots to have allowed this to get to that point in the first place, alienating the very people you have to convince?
They're more open to the message "this is shit; shit happens; let's work to get our shit together" (and notice the use of the term "our" to include all parties, so nobody is singled out for blame) from someone who doesn't look like they're dressed for a bout of dumpster diving. there's "business casual", then there's "casual", and then there's "slob".
Its not manipulation. Its about removing barriers that will prevent people from prejudging the message negatively. I'm not advocating a suit and neck-noose. Just saying that presentation is more than just what you say. Packaging is important, especially when you're trying to get people to go along with something that they instinctively don't trust, because they don't know enough about the details of the problem domain themselves (and remember - that's not their job, so don't throw rocks at them for that lack of knowledge).
Put yourself in their shoes for a moment. If they make the wrong decision, their career, or their business, could be on the line if they get it wrong. In such instances, people usually go with their gut feelings, because they don't have the wherewithal to evaluate the technical merits of the case (otherwise, they'd tell you how to write the code, etc., right? :-), so they look for the signals of assurance, stuff that's familiar, that they're making the right decision. Someone who's a bit less technically apt, but can make a good presentation both by their appearance, their demeanor, and their knowing when to speak and when to shut up will be trusted over some "slob" reciting the "obvious" technical points.
So what happens when the feds have to ram through a VAT (Value-Added Tax) in 2010 because of the deepening financial crisis?
If you think what the US is in is a financial crisis now, you haven't seen anything yet ... analysts are divided between this being the second or 3rd inning, but they all agree its only be beginning, and are now making direct comparisons with the Great Depresseion, in terms of the long-term impact of the housing bubble collapse on the US.
They won't have a choice. Even if they decide to default on the debt (which isn't really an option anyway), they'd still need to go to a VAT on all goods and services, as anything else will just result in more lobbying by each side who doesn't want their particular ox gored.
Besides, as you indirectly point out, if they don't squeeze it out one way, they'll squeeze it out another. When push comes to shove, and the bills have to be paid, and there's no more credit available, they'll tax anything they can, voters be damned.
Your post misses one point. Nobody pays taxes on something they don't sell. You can write all you want, and never have to charge sales tax if you hve no sales.
Services should be taxed at the same rate as hard goods. This is a first step for that state, but its really quite common elsewhere in the world, and known by other names - VAT (Value Added Tax), GST (Goods and Services Tax), etc.
This would at least allow the US to get some semblance of order into its' finances. Taxes lower consumption, and with the average US consumer spending 103% of their income every year for the last decade, something has to give. The housing bubble crash is only the beginning.
You need more taxes, not less. The states and local governments are in the hole for trillions, the feds for 9 trillion plus another 50 trillion for future social security and medicare/medicaid.
Artificially lowering taxes increases spending and decreases savings, as people take advantage of the lower taxes to buy - same as artificially low interest rates caused the housing bubble.
Like anything else, a too-low rate now, in relation to obligations, means more pain further down the road.
Paying back all this mess would require each family to pay $31,000 per year, for the next 75 years. Your grandchildren are going to have to pay for your "largesse" - self-indulgence - in not setting tax rates that would put the system on a viable fiscal footing.
"Oh I don't Know About all that.... I think my second amendment rights would have something to say about it. I already live in the most dangerous city in America."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/20/washington/20cnd-scotus.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
And when Virginia makes the same tax grab? Its not like anyone to want to leave money on the table - not with deficits climbing.
The state and municipal debt is also in the trillions.
Additionally, neither the Clinton nor the Bush debt includes the $50 trillion in future obligations that have been shifted "off-book" - the majors being social security and medicaid.
Contrast this with your neighbor to the north. Social security actuarily sound for at least the next 75 years. Federal surpluses, and a declining federal debt (no deficit) - and projected to be "effective zero debt" - where current assets == current obligations + debts, in 15 to 20 years.
How did this happen? The government imposed a sales tax of 7% on almost everything. This includes new houses (and no, Canadians can't deduct their mortgage interest from their taxes). Almost all provinces add their own tax. It hurt, but it changed history - from increasing deficits and debt to regular budget surpluses and declining debts. Its the only way.
One side effect of the 7% tax on new house sales was that it discouraged speculation by "new home flippers". If you bought a new home from a builder with the intention of flipping it, that 7% is gone - its a sunk cost. Throw in the 7% agents' commission, and you have a 14% "anti-bubble disincentive".
(NOTE: The GST was recetly reduced to 6% to pass on some of the cost savings from the reduction in the federal deficit)
In the same tone, go take a class in politics. When one jurisdiction makes a tax grab, others follow suit, so eventually it ends up being mostly a wash, except that now its a bit more possible to actually start chipping away at the massive debt hangover. Its the same as the "race to the bottom" that we saw in the '80s, but now in reverse, and history will do what history always does - repeat itself, and make fools out of those who either don't know their history, or plumb forgot. Same as the current housing bubble/bust is just a repeat, though greatly exaggerated, of the earlier one in the early '80s, or the one in Japan in the '90s.
Keep in mind that ultimately, suppliers NEVER bear the burden of sales taxes, or any cost, for that matter - all costs are paid, one way or another, by the consumer. If they weren't the company would be out of business once the initial capital and all loan facilities were exhausted. You think that Company XYZ "bears the burden"? Get real. Company XYZ pays taxes based on sales. Ultimately, someone, somewhere, buys, and THEY provide the $$$ that pays the taxes. And the ultimate payor, the one who enables all this, is you, the consumer, either directly, or indirectly through government purchases or purchasing from a business that bought from a company that bought from another that ...
If a company "absorbs" the tax, its only because they have enough margin to do so. Otherwise, they would either increase the price or go out of business. A lot of services aren't "portable". You can't outsource your pool care or lawn mowing or car repairs to India, so taxing them won't cause them to offshore. What it will do is spread the tax base more equitably. Why should only manufacturers and some service businesses have to pay a "manufacturing tax", making them uncompetitive investments compared to other businesses? Let everyone in the food chain pay their fair share.
Or is being "fair" the new "evil"?
Who said anything about a suit? Or a tie? Its been documented since the '80s that most neckties are worn too tight, restricting the flow of blood to the brain, with easily measurable side effects such as lower visual acuity. If you're going to wear a tie, make sure your shirt collar is the right size - almost everyone gets it too small, for some reason. Almost like they believe that it's SUPPOSED to feel like a noese :-)
As I point out elsewhere, people DO make judgments based on first impressions. You do to. You see two restaurants side-by-side. One is dingy, smelly, with a pile of garbage out front, and the other is clean. The dump might be the local equivalent of "the greasy spoon from heaven" but, unless someone clues you in, you're probably going to go next door instead.
"Anyone who will treat me differently based on whether I wear a shirt off the rack or one that's custom tailored, is not someone I care to work with."
Let's make it a bit more reasonable. Something you've probably had to do -argue your case to the "powers that be" for spending more time in initial design as opposed to just jumping the gun and "cutting code". There are two people who can make the "pitch"- one usually decked out in a grungy metal band t-shirt versus a well-made shirt. a pair of "religious blue jeans" ('cuz they're a bit "holy") versus almost anything, well-scuffed runners or sandals instead of shoes or loafers. All else being equal, who do YOU want to make the pitch?
Looking professional doesn't mean looking like a used-car or furniture salesman. It means looking better, and that includes looking and being more comfortable. Well-made, comfortable clothes pay for themselves. Its like selling a house, pre-bubble. No matter what you say or do, people will be able to tell if you're desperate. Or uncomfortable.
I don't know how many times a day you're interrupted while writing code, but I know that I spend a good chunk of my time talking with co-workers. So far this week (and its only Tuesday) , it included
- following up with their beefing to each other about the lack of a ticket system (gave them a choice of 2 packages to check out and play with, after which I'll install the one they choose on one of the local servers, then talk "the powers that be" into making it publicly accesible),;
- several discussions about how to organize, host, and podcast events on a regular basis that would be of interest to programmers, web designers, dbas, etc.;
- a problem with the physical plant;
- letting the woman in charge of testing my current project know what my expected timeline is for my code is, and how I expect it to play out, etc.;
- explaining to a coworker that he won't invalidate his warranty if he installs his new mp3 player in his car himself, along with explaining (and showing) what a wiring harness is, reasonable 3rd-party charges for installation, etc;
- the usual "make the coffee and make the rounds - here, want a donut, I bought some this morning?" social lubricant;
- im and phone calls w the boss,
- a bunch of other stuff that I can't be arsed to remember right now
As a group we underweigh social skills. It takes a lot of hard work to change that, but its important. The #1 reason for most failed projecs isn't a lack of technical skill, but crap communications caused by the "impedence mismatch" between the coders and management. Just think of how many times you've said "that part will take a month" and the next thing you know, a week later its "why isn't it finished?"The "unaccounted debt" totals 50 trillion dollars, mostly to social security, medicaid, etc. You going to take away old people's pensions? What are they going to eat - cat food? Nope, too expensive when you've got no money. But that's okay = once they starve to death, they're no longer a burden to the system. And if you get really lucky, all the poor people who get sick will "do the right thing" and die quietly.
Yes, stop spending on stupidity like adventures in Iraq, but that won't make the debt go away - only taxes or default will do that. And you don't want to default. The consequences would make the depression look like a picnic.
So either run for office yourself, or support a candidate who has the same agenda as you wrt allocation of tax dollars, or beef loud and long to your reps.
Complaining on slashdot won't change it - buttonholing your rep and giving him or her an earful, accompanied by other like-minded concerned citizens, might.
And you think it would be better if there were no oversight? No CDC? No accountability? No accreditation of engineers? No standards for materials?
Instead of complaining about city managers' salaries, do something - run for office. Its not that hard or that expensive. I've done it 3 times - so far I'm 0 for 3, but it was still a worthwhile experience, and it made a small difference.
BTW - basic education is still supported by taxes last I looked. If you want to go private, you're free to do so and pay extra, but that's your decision.
When people write softwae, they ARE creating a product.
Similarly, when people put together a server, they ARE creating a product.
The proper question is, why should the mechanic and the lawn and nail people (or rather, the people who consume their services) get away with not paying their fair share?
Sales taxes used to be thought of as regressive - but when you consider that, as Leona Hemsley said wrt income taxes - "taxes are for poor people", and how they have the $$$ to pay less than what would be considered "their fair share", a sales tax isn't all that regressive. After all, if they spend it, it will be taxed. When they buy a Rolex, they'll pay more tax than you will for your Timex.
Hey, I did the "hippy grunge look" for ages - but you know something? We don't live in isolation. Part of communication with non-technical people is the way you look. Its a question of first impressions making lasting impressions.
Also, I am not recommending anyone "look like a sales person". We all know that look, and its not the same as business "slightly less than formal". For guys, it means a nice shirt (sans tie most of the time), comfortable, but not crappy, slacks (you know what I mean), good-quality shoes instead of sneakers. and lose the baseball cap except on weekends. A good leather winter coat instead of a parka. A leather briefcase or bag instead of a synthetic carry-all.
"Here is another thing that may surprise you, most "geeks" have no interest in becoming managers, sales people, or executives."
Here's a news flash - once you reach a certain level of responsibility wrt code, you are a salesman. You have to sell the idea of cutting a feature that's totally useless, or a time and manpower sink. You have to sell the idea that taking the time to do it right, when everyone is dying to give in to the temptation "cut code" (because writing code is what we do - I've been doing it for a quarter-century, and today was no exception, and it IS a lot more "fun" than planning, documenting, and spec'ing, but I spent the last 2 weeks on spec'ing the database tables before cutting the first few lines of test code).
How many times have you or someone you know complained "how come there's never enough time to do it right, but there's always enough time to do it over?" I'm tired of that, and I'm sure you are too. But here's the thing - how we dress shouldn't affect how our analysis is received by the powers that be - but that's not how the world works. And when you have other people depending on your code, you want it to be right, and that means "playing the game" so you can get that most important resource of all - time - to do it right.
We are all ultimately selling something - our talents, and our people skills. Without those "people skills", you're not as effective a "go-to" person, because people won't "go to" you except as a last resort. I don't want them to wait that long - which is why I make the rounds several times a day saying I'm making a fresh pot of coffee - who wants one? Its also why I'm bringing a box of donuts to the office tomorrow to share - doing the little things, showing the small considerations to coworkers, also helps keep the lines of communications open.
At the same time, when I go to see the owner of the building our offices are in to resolve an issue (like earlier today), I sit down and chat with him, and its "business as usual" on a first-name basis. I don't have to wait for my boss to show up, and have him play "broken telephone". I do the same with people in adjoining offices, because people skills are important, and they require practice - and because I like people.
So hey, if dressing respectably ultimately makes my job go smoother, and I want to do a good job, why not make the "investment"?
Be happy you're only getting hit with 6%. Where I live, he combined sales tax is 13.95%, applied to all goods and services with the exception of basic groceries and rents.