People misunderstand socialism. The heavy socialist countries don't let you lay around and do nothing. Even the original Marx implies that everyone is supposed to work.
Don't believe the hype. They don't actually work that hard. Any genuine workaholism is relegated to a very tiny part of the country. Everywhere else, you are lucky to see 6 hours of productivity out of American workers in an entire week.
> The whole system is rigged in favor of the employers
As it should be. They are the ones doing the real "heavy lifting" in capitalism. You want lazy slobs that won't job hunt past a few big brand names to reap all the rewards of starting and running a business? That's assinine.
They take no real risks and don't have to run anything. They just punch a clock and trade their labor. Nice and safe and easy.
The part you're glossing over is that ANYONE can be the employer. However this requires some balls. You have to be willing to take the risk of being a business owner.
You trade a certain degree of certainty and safety for your caged cubicle dwelling existence. That's why your boss gets (and deserves) a bigger piece of the action.
> It is not about brands, it is about the quality of tea that goes into teabags. Which is crap (generally tea dust, fannings if you are lucky). Hence it is just true today as it was 50 years ago.
That's really just an American problem. The US is an agricultural superpower but Americans will tolerate all kinds of cheap crap when it comes to food and drink.
What Americans think of as tea is stuff they slop pigs with in other countries.
It makes more sense if you understand or acknowledge that Israel and the Jews are one of the oldest continuously existing civilizations on the planet. They have been struggling to keep and maintain their national identity and native homeland since the beginning of human civilization.
This isn't about yesterday or 50 years or 100 years or even 500.
They've been at it since our ancestors lived in caves and ate each other.
The thesis of this article was refuted in it's own summary.
If EV cars only have a 10% advantage in the UK, then there is NO WAY that they are cheaper to operate in the US. EVs are barely making it when compared to countries where fuel costs are highly inflated by the government.
The analysis probably also ignores the fact that there is cliff pricing for electricity in many places. If you go above a certain threshold, costs get real ugly. You can do this just by running your air conditioner too much or too hard. Forget about "fueling your car".
Of course for many of us we would have to ditch perfectly functional vehicles first. The costs and externalities of that right there is no trivial matter.
Once you get beyond all that, you are still faced with the fact that not everyone applies the "cheap junk for less" mentality to these things.
Hybrids haven't even gotten past that threshold. Forget about EVs.
Of course you aren't going to get rid of ALL piracy. You will always have the persistent degenerates that will pirate no matter what. They aren't really worth bothering with. They aren't even worth punishing. The only reasonable thing you can do is just write them off and deal with the part of "the problem" that you can actually solve.
This "study" sounds like an excuse to discount what progress has already been achieved with "the problem".
You're just a shameless corporate shill trying to argue that corporations are the only people that should have rights.
Copyright is not some natural right. It exists merely to serve a particular public policy objective. That isn't a "rationalization". It's part of our highest law.
> Explain where it says that you have an entitlement to the content that you want simply by virtue of wanting it
The intellectual property clause of the US constitution.
Those artificial state granted monopolies are meant to be temporary. A good chunk of what's on Netflix, Amazon, & iTunes should rightfully be in the public domain.
> Or, maybe it's because people don't like seeing other people die if they can help it.
Once a patient has made their wishes true IT'S NO LONGER UP TO YOU. Your "feels" are entirely irrelevant. This is what we get from all of this statist nanny crap. A guy can't even have his own wishes in this matter honored and most of the peanut gallery is willing to make excuses to IGNORE the individual.
I don't care if you think it's morally wrong or not. It's up to you. Your body, your choice. I greatly appreciate those that have donated to me but that was their individual choice. I won't knock anyone for not being up to it or otherwise being against it.
The state doesn't exist to impose my will on other people.
If you're really worried about that kind of thing, you have life insurance or just give it to them upfront or just have something resembling estate planning.
> Consider moving to Europe, nobody will bill you for saving your life (assuming you want that to happen).
No. They will just write you off instead. It's the US that engages in great heroic effort (and expense) to people barely hanging onto life.
The bill collector can't take what you don't have. If you don't have any assets (like the vast majority of Europe), then the debt collector is an entirely moot point.
This is an entirely bullshit human criteria. Both animals are predators. As animals, the only thing that really matters is success in their particular niche.
Cats are very well adapted to their natural role.
They are less well suited to the role of "human child replacement".
Clearly some "pet consumer" needs to justify their consumer choices.
Since they can ban your account for trivial violations of their group think, the value of having only a single account linked to your true identity is very limited.
They also seem to be the anti-slashdot. The most trollish responses get the most attention. So off topic nonsense gets filtered to the top and useful stuff gets hidden.This is strangely contradictory to their complaint/moderation polices.
You can get banned by the Facebook censors over a mild disagreement on some non-controversial subject just because it contradicts whatever the Facebook group think is.
No need for trolling, flaming, insults, or anything remotely offensive.
Using untraceable and uncrackable methods of communications are not inherently illegal. They aren't by themselves obstruction of justice.
These kinds of things are standards that apply equally to everyone including you. It doesn't matter how much you hate them. You don't get to apply a double standard to them.
This is just more of the usual "professional trolling disguised as journalism" and you're lapping it up like an idiot with no self-awareness.
Slashdot Mirror
Sterilize those that aren't productive.
People misunderstand socialism. The heavy socialist countries don't let you lay around and do nothing. Even the original Marx implies that everyone is supposed to work.
Don't believe the hype. They don't actually work that hard. Any genuine workaholism is relegated to a very tiny part of the country. Everywhere else, you are lucky to see 6 hours of productivity out of American workers in an entire week.
> The whole system is rigged in favor of the employers
As it should be. They are the ones doing the real "heavy lifting" in capitalism. You want lazy slobs that won't job hunt past a few big brand names to reap all the rewards of starting and running a business? That's assinine.
They take no real risks and don't have to run anything. They just punch a clock and trade their labor. Nice and safe and easy.
The part you're glossing over is that ANYONE can be the employer. However this requires some balls. You have to be willing to take the risk of being a business owner.
You trade a certain degree of certainty and safety for your caged cubicle dwelling existence. That's why your boss gets (and deserves) a bigger piece of the action.
If you want better, hang out your own shingle.
> It is not about brands, it is about the quality of tea that goes into teabags. Which is crap (generally tea dust, fannings if you are lucky). Hence it is just true today as it was 50 years ago.
That's really just an American problem. The US is an agricultural superpower but Americans will tolerate all kinds of cheap crap when it comes to food and drink.
What Americans think of as tea is stuff they slop pigs with in other countries.
Just buy better tea (bagged or not).
It makes more sense if you understand or acknowledge that Israel and the Jews are one of the oldest continuously existing civilizations on the planet. They have been struggling to keep and maintain their national identity and native homeland since the beginning of human civilization.
This isn't about yesterday or 50 years or 100 years or even 500.
They've been at it since our ancestors lived in caves and ate each other.
The thesis of this article was refuted in it's own summary.
If EV cars only have a 10% advantage in the UK, then there is NO WAY that they are cheaper to operate in the US. EVs are barely making it when compared to countries where fuel costs are highly inflated by the government.
The analysis probably also ignores the fact that there is cliff pricing for electricity in many places. If you go above a certain threshold, costs get real ugly. You can do this just by running your air conditioner too much or too hard. Forget about "fueling your car".
Of course for many of us we would have to ditch perfectly functional vehicles first. The costs and externalities of that right there is no trivial matter.
Once you get beyond all that, you are still faced with the fact that not everyone applies the "cheap junk for less" mentality to these things.
Hybrids haven't even gotten past that threshold. Forget about EVs.
That's silly.
Make the welfare losers pick strawberries if Mexicans are "too good" for that job any more.
Hunting them is fun but not very productive.
Of course you aren't going to get rid of ALL piracy. You will always have the persistent degenerates that will pirate no matter what. They aren't really worth bothering with. They aren't even worth punishing. The only reasonable thing you can do is just write them off and deal with the part of "the problem" that you can actually solve.
This "study" sounds like an excuse to discount what progress has already been achieved with "the problem".
You're just a shameless corporate shill trying to argue that corporations are the only people that should have rights.
Copyright is not some natural right. It exists merely to serve a particular public policy objective. That isn't a "rationalization". It's part of our highest law.
Are trying to excuse or condemn the corruption of our laws to benefit corporations.
Speaking about the theft of the public domain is no "rationalization".
> Explain where it says that you have an entitlement to the content that you want simply by virtue of wanting it
The intellectual property clause of the US constitution.
Those artificial state granted monopolies are meant to be temporary. A good chunk of what's on Netflix, Amazon, & iTunes should rightfully be in the public domain.
It's still a Hollywood solution to anything but media consumption.
Neither is Trump. You're just butt hurt because the class clown outsmarted the "most qualified candidate ever".
> So in other words, Congress is completely ineffectual no matter who is in charge.
It was designed to be that way.
Distrust anyone that advocates we alter the way our government works in order to "get something done" or get past congressional deadlock.
> Or, maybe it's because people don't like seeing other people die if they can help it.
Once a patient has made their wishes true IT'S NO LONGER UP TO YOU. Your "feels" are entirely irrelevant. This is what we get from all of this statist nanny crap. A guy can't even have his own wishes in this matter honored and most of the peanut gallery is willing to make excuses to IGNORE the individual.
I don't care if you think it's morally wrong or not. It's up to you. Your body, your choice. I greatly appreciate those that have donated to me but that was their individual choice. I won't knock anyone for not being up to it or otherwise being against it.
The state doesn't exist to impose my will on other people.
If you're really worried about that kind of thing, you have life insurance or just give it to them upfront or just have something resembling estate planning.
> A tattoo is not a legal document.
You can write a check on a cow. Unless you really are a lawyer, don't pretend you're one.
> Consider moving to Europe, nobody will bill you for saving your life (assuming you want that to happen).
No. They will just write you off instead. It's the US that engages in great heroic effort (and expense) to people barely hanging onto life.
The bill collector can't take what you don't have. If you don't have any assets (like the vast majority of Europe), then the debt collector is an entirely moot point.
This is an entirely bullshit human criteria. Both animals are predators. As animals, the only thing that really matters is success in their particular niche.
Cats are very well adapted to their natural role.
They are less well suited to the role of "human child replacement".
Clearly some "pet consumer" needs to justify their consumer choices.
Since they can ban your account for trivial violations of their group think, the value of having only a single account linked to your true identity is very limited.
They also seem to be the anti-slashdot. The most trollish responses get the most attention. So off topic nonsense gets filtered to the top and useful stuff gets hidden.This is strangely contradictory to their complaint/moderation polices.
You can get banned by the Facebook censors over a mild disagreement on some non-controversial subject just because it contradicts whatever the Facebook group think is.
No need for trolling, flaming, insults, or anything remotely offensive.
The platform is ultimately self limiting.
The DNA from my blood is different than the DNA in my saliva.
You are of course entirely missing the point.
Using untraceable and uncrackable methods of communications are not inherently illegal. They aren't by themselves obstruction of justice.
These kinds of things are standards that apply equally to everyone including you. It doesn't matter how much you hate them. You don't get to apply a double standard to them.
This is just more of the usual "professional trolling disguised as journalism" and you're lapping it up like an idiot with no self-awareness.
This is pretty much the worst possible way they could have done this.