Some things are. Holding people indefinitely without trial is wrong. Full stop. There's no grey area here. What the U.S. government is doing is unconscionable, and if the situation were reversed—if Afghanistan or Iraq or some other third-world country were holding our citizens prisoner without a trial—we'd be bombing the ever-living s*** out of them by now.
With that in mind, it should be self-evident that anyone in power with actual morals and ethics should be gladly willing to lose his or her job if necessary to ensure that such a heinous injustice is rectified by granting those prisoners a fair and speedy trial. And because a statement implies its contrapositive, anyone in power who is not willing to do that has no real morals and ethics, and is merely playing a Christian on TV.
The difference is that all of those upgrade decisions are under your control. If you don't want to upgrade those machines to the latest version of OS X or Windows, you don't have to do so.
To be fair, at some point, you'll be forced to do so by the inability to get systems that still run the old OS, so there almost always will eventually be a requirement to periodically update your software to be compatible with newer versions of the OS. However, you typically have years to plan for it. That's a far cry from "You have [n] days to migrate your files from our servers before this service goes away, and any data still on our servers after that day will be lost."
It's easy to do what's right when you don't have to worry about the consequences. The difference between a leader and a mere figurehead is that a true leader does what's right, even knowing that the s**t may hit the fan.
TFA says it will still cost the city ~$800k to make the move... the $280k is reported to be the savings from dropping what they are currently doing.
The only problem is that Google Docs are not guaranteed. You don't have a contract with Google that says, "We agree to provide this forever." WIth Office, assuming you don't choose to go with their rental model, you have a copy of a piece of software that you can just keep using.
So in five years, when Google realizes that even though Docs is popular, it isn't making them any money, they'll decide to yank it with six months notice. When Boston gets to spend way more than that $280k to move back to an actual purchased office suite on an emergency basis, we'll all say, "So much for big savings."
Software as a service is fine for things that aren't mission-critical. As soon as your workflow starts to depend on it, it's a fool's bargain.
In short, that's ridiculous. This is not an us-vs.-them war, and it hasn't been since the invention of modern warfare. The government can drop a nuke on your hometown. You can't drop a nuke on DC.
Actually, the government can't realistically drop a nuke on my town, at least right now. They could try, but soldiers have a sworn duty to refuse such an illegal order. For this reason, the extreme things that the government could theoretically do are not anything that the people need to worry about.
The subtle erosion of rights, however, is a far greater risk. For example, today, the government could convince us that it is acceptable to deploy the military (not the National Guard) on U.S. soil during peacetime to aid in a national crisis such as a tornado. Tomorrow, a terrorist blows up some school somewhere. The next day, they convince us that we should have military stationed at every school. A few months or years later, they convince us that it is acceptable to shoot someone who is trying to blow up a school, without trial. Then eventually they start shooting people for taking guns and knives to school. In a few decades, you have soldiers on the streets shooting kids for truancy.
When it comes to human behavior in the presence of authority, the slippery slope is quite real. You need look no further than the Milgram experiment back in the 1960s and the various experiments based on it (e.g. Sheridan and King). It is impossible to make giant leaps in terms of what you can convince someone to do under color of authority, but it is very easy to make small changes in behavior that, over time, add up to big changes. And many of the follow-on experiments demonstrated conclusively that the only thing standing between freedom and tyranny is the presence of a small percentage of people who are willing to say "no", not because that small minority will ever have enough power to matter, but because by saying "no," they cause other people to be willing to say "no", where otherwise they would be uncomfortable defying authority to do so.
Only partially correct. The opposition to moving GITMO detainees to the United States for trial was widespread and came from both parties. The Senate voted 90-6 to block all funding associated with moving any GITMO prisoners to the US. Blame the Democrats, sure, but also blame the Republicans. Almost nobody in the Senate was willing to see GITMO closed.
No. In this case, the GP was 100% correct. The soldiers holding the prisoners in GITMO are entirely under Obama's command. They can block funding for the move all they want to, but short of terminating military funding, they can't prevent the normal operations of the military under the commander in chief.
So, had the sitting President been willing to stand behind his convictions, he would have told Congress, "Look, we're closing GITMO, period. In 180 days, we're bringing our troops home and abandoning our base in Cuba. The last team will have orders to unlock all the cell block doors, so any prisoners remaining in GITMO at that time will be free to leave. Now you have a choice. Either we begin moving them into proper U.S. holding facilities and give them a trial, or they'll be on boats headed for the U.S. by the following week and suicide bombing your houses in D.C. the week after. Your call."
And then he would immediately begin the troop wind-down so that they would know he wasn't bluffing. It really is that simple.
Giant facial recognition databases are a powerful tool. That technological power can be used for good or evil, but the risk of evil is no reason to fear the technology itself.
I think what you're missing here is that our Constitution, and in particular, the Bill of Rights, was founded on the principle of denying the government too much power over the citizens precisely because the founding fathers had no faith in future elected officials using power exclusively for good. Every place where the government's actions are limited by the Bill of Rights, they are prevented from doing good while preventing them from doing harm.
History has proven that a government that holds too much power over its people will eventually devolve into tyranny. The general public has no possibility of building a database like this for their use against government tyranny, which means that the government must be disallowed from having such a database as well. We can only maintain freedom by carefully maintaining the balance between what your country can do to you and what you can do to your country.
If the regulatory agencies were not so completely captured by the industries that they regulate, we wouldn't need to pass laws to force them to do their jobs.
In my case, Megapath used to be Covad, but yes, they're just renting the AT&T lines. That said, at least back when they were Covad, they did manage to get AT&T to at least fix some of the problems with my line. YMMV.
The title says peppers but it says nicotine is actually the chemical at work.
It's not just nicotine. The same beneficial effects have been observed from several of the vanilloids and curcuminoids, including capsaicin (found in hot peppers) and curcumin. And it isn't just brain issues. They lower the risk of all sorts of damage caused by inflammation, including the risk of heart disease and stroke, and prevents metastasis and induces apoptosis in many types of cancer....
The average person would do well to consume more spicy foods.
Caffeine is known to reduce the risk of Alzheimer's. Capsaicin (from peppers) is also commonly believed to reduce Alzheimer's risk (and strokes and various other problems), as is cinnamon (which contains small amounts of capsaicin), and I would expect the effects of nicotine to be similar. The reason they work is that they all reduce inflammation.
This has all been fairly well understood in the naturopath community for many, many years, but it has only been in about the past decade that the scientific community has confirmed the naturopath community's often-less-than-rigorous survey study observations.
An RFID chip implanted on you someplace? It'd have to be reprogrammable, and being reprogrammable without it being removed means it's vulnerable to, shall we say, 'unauthorised reprogramming by non-State entities', as well as being capable of being read by said unauthorised non-State entities for purposes of their own.
The right answer is an RFID chip implanted in something you carry with you. And although it is reprogrammable by arbitrary parties, with proper use of PK crypto (signing), the ability to reprogram it would not allow the data to be changed except as an exact clone of an existing ID, which might be useful when replacing a damaged card, but would not be useful for forging your identity unless you had an identical twin or something.
I would kill for Google Fiber to cover the South Bay area. I live about ten miles from both Apple HQ and Google HQ (Sunnyvale), and I can't get cable Internet service, either. My only options are MegaPath DSL, AT&T DSL, and possibly some wireless services. (No, satellite Internet does not count.) And even though AT&T keeps sending me ads for U-Verse in the mail, when I actually go to check availability of business-class U-Verse service, they tell me that it isn't offered in Sunnyvale. My grandparents' house in rural Kentucky gets faster service than I can get halfway between the headquarters of the two largest tech firms in the world.
But because my choices range from horrible to worse, while I wait for Google to rescue me from South Bay Internet hell, I've set up a poor-man's Akamai service. My server serves the text content, and all the images come from a shared hosting provider with a fast connection. It also checks once an hour, and if the shared hosting provider ever goes down for longer than that, it transparently fails over to local copies of the images. All because I can't get a usable home network connection with upload speeds measured in megabits instead of kilobits. Blech.
Please, Google. Please start providing service in the South SF Bay area.
Even funnier is putting a bunch of those things in the same room, whistling, and laughing as they set each other off. Bonus points if you do this on the shelf at Wal-Mart.
A better solution would be to pick the microphone where the sound arrived first and reject that frequency on all other mics until about a second after the first microphone loses the signal. That way you're guaranteed to get the one that is closest in distance even if there are gain differences caused by variations in room acoustics.
Let's say each version of Photoshop saves you 5 minutes a day in increased productivity and efficiency and your billable hours is $100 an hour.
Let's say that fairies and unicorns exist. New versions of Photoshop cost productivity by adding additional features that you don't need. I seldom use anything that has been added since Photoshop 7, and that's six releases back. I've upgraded because Adobe's bugs prevent older versions of the software from running at all on newer versions of OS X, and I'd like to avoid running PS in a VM for as long as possible....
And each version of the software is bigger and slower than the previous one. If you upgrade your hardware and software at the same time, performance stays the same. If you upgrade only the software, everything gets slower. If you upgrade only the hardware, everything gets faster. Therefore, unless and until the current version forces you to start skipping OS and security updates to keep it from breaking, in terms of user productivity, you're always better off continuing to use an older version of the software.:-)
This equation changes when you have to work with outside parties, of course, for file compatibility reasons, but for in-house shops, unless a new feature represents a real workflow win (which doesn't happen very often with mature apps like Photoshop), the upgrade is usually a significant productivity loss even before you take into account the time spent doing the installation itself, learning where various controls moved, etc.
There's really nothing complicated about basic page layout, so for me, I see Acrobat and Indesign as tools for people who don't know how to program. My typesetting is done with a heavily modified LaTeX, and my content editing is done in XML. In the unlikely event that I ever need more complex text-heavy layouts (e.g. for a newspaper), I would use a blank document in Pages much as you would use PageMaker or whatever. It isn't perfect, but for most non-advertising tasks, it is good enough.
If I needed vector graphics, I'd probably also depend on Illustrator, but since I personally have no real need for them, I don't. Thus, for all of my complex graphical layout work, I use Photoshop. This is why Photoshop has no easy replacement for me. Unlike text placement on a page, getting pixel-perfect renderings of complex, layered art is hard.
Pixelmator has gotten a lot closer, though, particularly now that they do CMYK. And I'm gratified that the money I spent buying copies of Pixelmator over the past few years (even while using Photoshop as my normal day-to-day editing tool) has resulted in continued development and improvement so that now, when I'm starting to seriously look for a way off of Adobe's wagon, it is actually in a position to replace it (almost).
It's not FUD. Photoshop stops running after you stop paying your monthly fee. How do you plan to work with your Photoshop files if you can't run Photoshop? It's a proprietary format, and no other apps are fully compatible. So yes, you do effectively lose access to any of your files that require any features that aren't supported by Pixelmator or other alternative apps.
If this monthly fee gave us permanent licenses to any new versions released during that cycle, I would have no problem with it. It doesn't, so I do.
You're assuming that my backups are so poor that Adobe's DRM will block access should I lose my hard drive. That assumption is incorrect. Not only could I restore a functioning copy of Photoshop, but also I could restore it into a virtual machine if necessary, tweaking the VM to ensure that my ability to continue using the app is permanent even if Adobe dies tomorrow.
That said, the bigger difference between rental and perpetual licensing is whether I am legally authorized to continue using the software after the company goes belly up. If I am renting, and Adobe shuts down their licensing servers, then I have no legal right to continue using the software, because my license explicitly ends when that rental period is up.
If I own a perpetual license, then I have a legal right to crack their DRM, as using software that I have paid for is strictly not a violation of copyright. It could get a little ugly, but I'm confident that I could win that case if it ever went to court, and possibly even get court costs awarded.
From what I can tell, there is no upgrade to CS6 except from CS5.
That's a recent policy change that began around the start of this year, IIRC. I upgraded from CS3 to CS6 a few months ago at the usual upgrade price. They made that policy to force everyone to upgrade. Were it not for that, I was going to wait for CS7 because they still have not fixed critical bugs that make it a royal pain in the backside to install Photoshop on a machine with a case-sensitive HFS+ root volume. But since they forced my hand, I upgraded.
Perversely, I'm now glad that I did, as CS6 will likely be the last version of Photoshop that I run until somebody buys Adobe and fires everyone involved in this decision. Either way, given the previous policy change of them trying to force us to upgrade every version, there was a good chance that CS6 would have been my last version, but this guarantees it.
Bad analogy. Taxing consumption causes people to consume less because they have a relatively fixed amount of income, and taxes on consumption force them to prioritize that consumption. Punishing consumption hurts the economy because the people who have money are discouraged from using it in a way that will eventually go to pay workers who need money.
Taxing income does not cause people to work less. It causes people to work more and/or demand higher wages per hour so that they can afford to buy the things that they need. This, in turn does drive up the cost of goods, but only if that income is earned income arising out of the production of those goods.
For unearned income—income made by people who are not employed in the creation of those goods and services—there isn't a real mechanism for the tax to trickle down into the cost of goods and services. If it were feasible to raise the price of those goods, the businesses would have a fiduciary duty to do so, and thus would already have done so. It is therefore unlikely that taxation on stock market income would significantly drive up the cost of goods and services, simply because it is impossible to exceed what is supposed to already be infinite greed.
And to anyone who argues that higher capital gains taxes would cause people to stop investing, what's their alternative?
Slashdot Mirror
Some things are. Holding people indefinitely without trial is wrong. Full stop. There's no grey area here. What the U.S. government is doing is unconscionable, and if the situation were reversed—if Afghanistan or Iraq or some other third-world country were holding our citizens prisoner without a trial—we'd be bombing the ever-living s*** out of them by now.
With that in mind, it should be self-evident that anyone in power with actual morals and ethics should be gladly willing to lose his or her job if necessary to ensure that such a heinous injustice is rectified by granting those prisoners a fair and speedy trial. And because a statement implies its contrapositive, anyone in power who is not willing to do that has no real morals and ethics, and is merely playing a Christian on TV.
The difference is that all of those upgrade decisions are under your control. If you don't want to upgrade those machines to the latest version of OS X or Windows, you don't have to do so.
To be fair, at some point, you'll be forced to do so by the inability to get systems that still run the old OS, so there almost always will eventually be a requirement to periodically update your software to be compatible with newer versions of the OS. However, you typically have years to plan for it. That's a far cry from "You have [n] days to migrate your files from our servers before this service goes away, and any data still on our servers after that day will be lost."
It's easy to do what's right when you don't have to worry about the consequences. The difference between a leader and a mere figurehead is that a true leader does what's right, even knowing that the s**t may hit the fan.
The only problem is that Google Docs are not guaranteed. You don't have a contract with Google that says, "We agree to provide this forever." WIth Office, assuming you don't choose to go with their rental model, you have a copy of a piece of software that you can just keep using.
So in five years, when Google realizes that even though Docs is popular, it isn't making them any money, they'll decide to yank it with six months notice. When Boston gets to spend way more than that $280k to move back to an actual purchased office suite on an emergency basis, we'll all say, "So much for big savings."
Software as a service is fine for things that aren't mission-critical. As soon as your workflow starts to depend on it, it's a fool's bargain.
Actually, the government can't realistically drop a nuke on my town, at least right now. They could try, but soldiers have a sworn duty to refuse such an illegal order. For this reason, the extreme things that the government could theoretically do are not anything that the people need to worry about.
The subtle erosion of rights, however, is a far greater risk. For example, today, the government could convince us that it is acceptable to deploy the military (not the National Guard) on U.S. soil during peacetime to aid in a national crisis such as a tornado. Tomorrow, a terrorist blows up some school somewhere. The next day, they convince us that we should have military stationed at every school. A few months or years later, they convince us that it is acceptable to shoot someone who is trying to blow up a school, without trial. Then eventually they start shooting people for taking guns and knives to school. In a few decades, you have soldiers on the streets shooting kids for truancy.
When it comes to human behavior in the presence of authority, the slippery slope is quite real. You need look no further than the Milgram experiment back in the 1960s and the various experiments based on it (e.g. Sheridan and King). It is impossible to make giant leaps in terms of what you can convince someone to do under color of authority, but it is very easy to make small changes in behavior that, over time, add up to big changes. And many of the follow-on experiments demonstrated conclusively that the only thing standing between freedom and tyranny is the presence of a small percentage of people who are willing to say "no", not because that small minority will ever have enough power to matter, but because by saying "no," they cause other people to be willing to say "no", where otherwise they would be uncomfortable defying authority to do so.
No. In this case, the GP was 100% correct. The soldiers holding the prisoners in GITMO are entirely under Obama's command. They can block funding for the move all they want to, but short of terminating military funding, they can't prevent the normal operations of the military under the commander in chief.
So, had the sitting President been willing to stand behind his convictions, he would have told Congress, "Look, we're closing GITMO, period. In 180 days, we're bringing our troops home and abandoning our base in Cuba. The last team will have orders to unlock all the cell block doors, so any prisoners remaining in GITMO at that time will be free to leave. Now you have a choice. Either we begin moving them into proper U.S. holding facilities and give them a trial, or they'll be on boats headed for the U.S. by the following week and suicide bombing your houses in D.C. the week after. Your call."
And then he would immediately begin the troop wind-down so that they would know he wasn't bluffing. It really is that simple.
I think what you're missing here is that our Constitution, and in particular, the Bill of Rights, was founded on the principle of denying the government too much power over the citizens precisely because the founding fathers had no faith in future elected officials using power exclusively for good. Every place where the government's actions are limited by the Bill of Rights, they are prevented from doing good while preventing them from doing harm.
History has proven that a government that holds too much power over its people will eventually devolve into tyranny. The general public has no possibility of building a database like this for their use against government tyranny, which means that the government must be disallowed from having such a database as well. We can only maintain freedom by carefully maintaining the balance between what your country can do to you and what you can do to your country.
If the regulatory agencies were not so completely captured by the industries that they regulate, we wouldn't need to pass laws to force them to do their jobs.
In my case, Megapath used to be Covad, but yes, they're just renting the AT&T lines. That said, at least back when they were Covad, they did manage to get AT&T to at least fix some of the problems with my line. YMMV.
It's not just nicotine. The same beneficial effects have been observed from several of the vanilloids and curcuminoids, including capsaicin (found in hot peppers) and curcumin. And it isn't just brain issues. They lower the risk of all sorts of damage caused by inflammation, including the risk of heart disease and stroke, and prevents metastasis and induces apoptosis in many types of cancer....
The average person would do well to consume more spicy foods.
Caffeine is known to reduce the risk of Alzheimer's. Capsaicin (from peppers) is also commonly believed to reduce Alzheimer's risk (and strokes and various other problems), as is cinnamon (which contains small amounts of capsaicin), and I would expect the effects of nicotine to be similar. The reason they work is that they all reduce inflammation.
This has all been fairly well understood in the naturopath community for many, many years, but it has only been in about the past decade that the scientific community has confirmed the naturopath community's often-less-than-rigorous survey study observations.
The right answer is an RFID chip implanted in something you carry with you. And although it is reprogrammable by arbitrary parties, with proper use of PK crypto (signing), the ability to reprogram it would not allow the data to be changed except as an exact clone of an existing ID, which might be useful when replacing a damaged card, but would not be useful for forging your identity unless you had an identical twin or something.
There are numerous iPhone apps that provide OBDII support. They just use Wi-Fi instead of Bluetooth as the means of talking to the reader.
In the future, I'd expect these sorts of devices to use Bluetooth LE (and apps to use CoreBluetooth) because of the battery savings.
I would kill for Google Fiber to cover the South Bay area. I live about ten miles from both Apple HQ and Google HQ (Sunnyvale), and I can't get cable Internet service, either. My only options are MegaPath DSL, AT&T DSL, and possibly some wireless services. (No, satellite Internet does not count.) And even though AT&T keeps sending me ads for U-Verse in the mail, when I actually go to check availability of business-class U-Verse service, they tell me that it isn't offered in Sunnyvale. My grandparents' house in rural Kentucky gets faster service than I can get halfway between the headquarters of the two largest tech firms in the world.
But because my choices range from horrible to worse, while I wait for Google to rescue me from South Bay Internet hell, I've set up a poor-man's Akamai service. My server serves the text content, and all the images come from a shared hosting provider with a fast connection. It also checks once an hour, and if the shared hosting provider ever goes down for longer than that, it transparently fails over to local copies of the images. All because I can't get a usable home network connection with upload speeds measured in megabits instead of kilobits. Blech.
Please, Google. Please start providing service in the South SF Bay area.
Even funnier is putting a bunch of those things in the same room, whistling, and laughing as they set each other off. Bonus points if you do this on the shelf at Wal-Mart.
A better solution would be to pick the microphone where the sound arrived first and reject that frequency on all other mics until about a second after the first microphone loses the signal. That way you're guaranteed to get the one that is closest in distance even if there are gain differences caused by variations in room acoustics.
Let's say that fairies and unicorns exist. New versions of Photoshop cost productivity by adding additional features that you don't need. I seldom use anything that has been added since Photoshop 7, and that's six releases back. I've upgraded because Adobe's bugs prevent older versions of the software from running at all on newer versions of OS X, and I'd like to avoid running PS in a VM for as long as possible....
And each version of the software is bigger and slower than the previous one. If you upgrade your hardware and software at the same time, performance stays the same. If you upgrade only the software, everything gets slower. If you upgrade only the hardware, everything gets faster. Therefore, unless and until the current version forces you to start skipping OS and security updates to keep it from breaking, in terms of user productivity, you're always better off continuing to use an older version of the software. :-)
This equation changes when you have to work with outside parties, of course, for file compatibility reasons, but for in-house shops, unless a new feature represents a real workflow win (which doesn't happen very often with mature apps like Photoshop), the upgrade is usually a significant productivity loss even before you take into account the time spent doing the installation itself, learning where various controls moved, etc.
There's really nothing complicated about basic page layout, so for me, I see Acrobat and Indesign as tools for people who don't know how to program. My typesetting is done with a heavily modified LaTeX, and my content editing is done in XML. In the unlikely event that I ever need more complex text-heavy layouts (e.g. for a newspaper), I would use a blank document in Pages much as you would use PageMaker or whatever. It isn't perfect, but for most non-advertising tasks, it is good enough.
If I needed vector graphics, I'd probably also depend on Illustrator, but since I personally have no real need for them, I don't. Thus, for all of my complex graphical layout work, I use Photoshop. This is why Photoshop has no easy replacement for me. Unlike text placement on a page, getting pixel-perfect renderings of complex, layered art is hard.
Pixelmator has gotten a lot closer, though, particularly now that they do CMYK. And I'm gratified that the money I spent buying copies of Pixelmator over the past few years (even while using Photoshop as my normal day-to-day editing tool) has resulted in continued development and improvement so that now, when I'm starting to seriously look for a way off of Adobe's wagon, it is actually in a position to replace it (almost).
It's not FUD. Photoshop stops running after you stop paying your monthly fee. How do you plan to work with your Photoshop files if you can't run Photoshop? It's a proprietary format, and no other apps are fully compatible. So yes, you do effectively lose access to any of your files that require any features that aren't supported by Pixelmator or other alternative apps.
If this monthly fee gave us permanent licenses to any new versions released during that cycle, I would have no problem with it. It doesn't, so I do.
A single-app license is $20 a month ($10 a month for the first year), which is $240 a year, or about a quarter grand.
You're assuming that my backups are so poor that Adobe's DRM will block access should I lose my hard drive. That assumption is incorrect. Not only could I restore a functioning copy of Photoshop, but also I could restore it into a virtual machine if necessary, tweaking the VM to ensure that my ability to continue using the app is permanent even if Adobe dies tomorrow.
That said, the bigger difference between rental and perpetual licensing is whether I am legally authorized to continue using the software after the company goes belly up. If I am renting, and Adobe shuts down their licensing servers, then I have no legal right to continue using the software, because my license explicitly ends when that rental period is up.
If I own a perpetual license, then I have a legal right to crack their DRM, as using software that I have paid for is strictly not a violation of copyright. It could get a little ugly, but I'm confident that I could win that case if it ever went to court, and possibly even get court costs awarded.
Adobe has never had a monopoly on web design tools and likely never will, because anybody serious about web design codes by hand.... :-)
As for SVG, the number of people who care is small enough (and browser/device compatibility is poor enough) that it's probably moot.
That's a recent policy change that began around the start of this year, IIRC. I upgraded from CS3 to CS6 a few months ago at the usual upgrade price. They made that policy to force everyone to upgrade. Were it not for that, I was going to wait for CS7 because they still have not fixed critical bugs that make it a royal pain in the backside to install Photoshop on a machine with a case-sensitive HFS+ root volume. But since they forced my hand, I upgraded.
Perversely, I'm now glad that I did, as CS6 will likely be the last version of Photoshop that I run until somebody buys Adobe and fires everyone involved in this decision. Either way, given the previous policy change of them trying to force us to upgrade every version, there was a good chance that CS6 would have been my last version, but this guarantees it.
Bad analogy. Taxing consumption causes people to consume less because they have a relatively fixed amount of income, and taxes on consumption force them to prioritize that consumption. Punishing consumption hurts the economy because the people who have money are discouraged from using it in a way that will eventually go to pay workers who need money.
Taxing income does not cause people to work less. It causes people to work more and/or demand higher wages per hour so that they can afford to buy the things that they need. This, in turn does drive up the cost of goods, but only if that income is earned income arising out of the production of those goods.
For unearned income—income made by people who are not employed in the creation of those goods and services—there isn't a real mechanism for the tax to trickle down into the cost of goods and services. If it were feasible to raise the price of those goods, the businesses would have a fiduciary duty to do so, and thus would already have done so. It is therefore unlikely that taxation on stock market income would significantly drive up the cost of goods and services, simply because it is impossible to exceed what is supposed to already be infinite greed.
And to anyone who argues that higher capital gains taxes would cause people to stop investing, what's their alternative?
Maybe not, but a whole lot of casual users do buy it and at least occasionally upgrade it, myself included. Not anymore.