think as far as democracy is concerned, people should be able to vote on invidual laws and such
Well, the US, and most other "democracies" are representative democracies. Voting on individual laws is a terrible idea. Just look at Athens. Regardless of that though, citizens of the US (in some states) actually do get to vote on individual laws, through "Issues" polls, or on state consitutional amendments. That's how some states get ridiculous "anti-gay marriage" laws passed that a representative body would probably avoid.
The US is not, by law, a 2 party system; it has just developed that way. Democrats and Republicans do not always vote in one big block either. There are "blue dog" Democrats who will occasionally side with Republicans on some things, for example. Middle of the road representatives sometimes team up to challenge their parties. So, in the end, there actually is reasonable representaton.
The problem is that most Americans don't really understand how they are represented. Many don't vote, or only do so when their vote counts the least, the presidential election. The Senators represent smaller areas, and Representatives represent even smaller areas than those, and that's just the FEDERAL government. Most of the stuff that actually affects your life is decided by your State/County/Local/City representatives. Hardly anyone votes for them, or can keep track of them. Which makes those votes the most powerful you can cast.
So, to somehow be on topic, for this issue it doesn't matter at all if they are Republican or Democrat. Pretty much all the federal reps are "it's a series of tubes!" boneheads for technical issues.
Yes, but I believe there is something immoral here. As I stated, I live in the state, and use the state's resources. I feel I do have a moral obligation to pay taxes. I'm all for civil disobedience, but I don't think it applies here. In fact, you are just trying to rationalize not paying the tax becaue it is convenient. There is a law, and the law is not unjust. Therefore, it is both "wrong" and "illegal". Well, at least for me. You can come to your own conclusion.
It's also wrong and illegal to steal music, so I don't. However, a 70 year old copywrite is defintely not just. I like a lot of older music, so this seems rather convenient to me. I can't find a solution to this moral dilemma. Obviously, I can download a copy of a Robert Johnson recording, which is really old, and he's long dead. But where do I draw the line? If I draw it at 20 years I can happily download a lot of the music I like. In fact, it would be my duty to do so as an act of civil disobedience. Well, anyway....
There is a simple way the Feds can get involved. We just need an information reporting form (say 1099-INT) that any online retailer is required to issue to the Federal Government, and the state of the buyer. Just like when a contracter gets 1099'd. The burden of collecting sales tax for 50 states would be VERY high, but sending out a 1099 at the end of the year wouldn't be as bad. This would give the states a way to actually verify you are paying their use tax, if they have one. People don't pay the use tax because they know that the State government has no idea what they've bought online, or through catalogs. They will start paying the use tax if they know the state knows about the purchases.
This also avoids the problem of enforcing one state's laws on a business in another. Collection/payment of the tax is still the onus of the person in the state.
Er, well, I do; not that you know me, except as that idiot who pays use tax. And that included tax on about $1,000.00 in computer equipment this year. I work for the IRS though. If I don't correctly report, and pay, all my taxes (federal, state, local, etc.), I can be fired; thanks, Bill Clinton! I have no idea how anyone would ever figure out I didn't pay a use tax, though.
Anyway, I don't see anything so horrible about it. What's the difference if I buy my equipment (at a higher cost) from Best Buy, or get it cheaper on-line? I still live in KY, and should pay sales tax. I don't really use a lot of services, besides the library, but other members of my family do.
This is the same attitude that leads so many small businesses to not report all their income. It's not verifiable by the government, so why pay it? It's just stupid to report that income. But, it is also wrong. So, I'll keep paying my use tax, and start requesting that my local congressmen get the tax repealed, so I don't have to be the only idiot paying it.
Same how the Roman empire was invincible, really. And the British empire. And let's not even get started on the American empire, which is crumbling before our very eyes.
Really? Could you explain what the "American empire" even is, and what its fall would even mean? The Roman Empire fell to mismanagement, and increasingly effective "barbarians" taking back their lands. The British Empire "fell" because it became too expensive to keep all those colonies locked down. If by "American Empire" you mean our presence in Iraq, Afghanistan, Japan, and even Hawaii, then maybe I can see this "empire" crumbling. But I don't see the US being invaded and the government overthrown any time soon. Who would even want to do that? And I don't see the citizens of the country overthrowing our horrible dictator by any other means than election any time soon either. Is it that we will become a corporate-ocracy? As corporate actions become more intolerable people will eventually vote to stop them. Or, is it that the plight of the common man will become so horrible that he will vote for a demagogue like Hitler, and the US will actually become fascist?
All of these seem highly improbable. There is no "American Empire" to crumble. While American democracy may not be the perfect solution (or even the best solution in the world currently), it is a very stable one. I can only see its destabilization by some cataclysmic event. You made that statement as if it is an obvious fact, and that anybody like me is just naive. But stating things like that does not actually make them true, it is just really annoying. So, can you explain what you meant?
The only thing they're unlikely to help with are more creative subjects
You've clearly never played the Sims. Some slashdotters might balk at this, but the Sims is mainly about creativity. You design the person, their house, their stuff, and create the story of their life. The game encourages you to take pictures (and make videos), and then write the story to go with those pictures. You can then post that online, and read other people's stories.
If Spore meets expectations it'll be one of the most creative tools around. Now you can create creatures (with an easy to use interface), their world, the plants, the buildings, and pretty much everything else. The online sharing of content will be seamless.
Any good RPG is inherently creative, since you have to create a character. Creating an avatar seems like a great creative lesson. Create a representation of yourself, but not a replication of yourself physically. I'd prefer that to, say, making a poem of my name based on the first letters.
Even strategy games have a creative side. Even as a kid playing the NES version of Nobunaga's Ambition I was making up a complicated epic history as I was playing.
OTH, I'm not saying these games should be played in school, but video games can be great for creativity.
And it seems Art (especially modern art) is perfect for computer teaching. Here, look at this Picasso. Now we'll give you a tool to change how it looks. Try smearing this Monet around a little bit. Zoom in on this pointillist painting. That would allow children to interact with art, and maybe understand it a bit more, than just staring at a picture in a book.
The US is not a "two-party state" by law. The parties evolved over time. The two parties stay in control because of some aspects of the law, of course. And, since changing the law would require them to vote on the change, it is not going to happen. Some of the founding fathers were afraid of parties existing because of this.
Regardless of all this though, I seriously doubt it would make much difference if the US wasn't a "two-party state". There is a very wide range of views within the parties; a Kentucky Democrat is hardly the same as a California Democrat. And then you have all the state legislatures, which can really run the full gamut of politics.
Using the "Product Level" approach to above, does that fact that comparing the cost of MS products to the cost of *nix systems (free) mean that MS's entire worth is in its brand?
I don't think MS (in terms of Windows) has a "no-name" or "private label" to compare to though. You don't get Linux Windoze, you get Linux, which is a different operating system. If I go to the store I can choose between real Twinkies, and generic Kroger Twinkles (or whatever). I choose Twinkies because there's a picture of the confection dressed up as a cowboy with a lasso on the packaging.
Can someone explain what "brand power" is, and how you can possibly measure it? I know that "branding" is important, but ranking companies by "brand power" seems like useless information being created by "CoreBrand". I'm guessing CoreBrand didn't make it very high on the list themselves...
The dumbest title I've seen in awhile is Space Rangers 2: Rise of the Dominators. That's the kind of thing TV/Movie writers come up with when they try to think of a fake software title.
Anybody remember Silly String? Do they even still make that stuff?
The army does. I read several years ago that silly string was being used in Iraq. The lightweight strings, and the propulsion device, are ideal for detecting tripwires.
Wow, I can't wait until 2008 when "families can have steak-like meals twice a day without feeling a budget pinch." Do we get to have heart-attack-like deaths too?!? (Er, guess not, the steak is made of algae, bleh). Was this guy really looking forward to "steak-like meals"?? I guess he knew he would be really old and looked forward to gumming his "steak".
What's really funny is that food is insanely cheap today, even if it is not highly processed. I guess that some would argue that steak itself has become "steak-like" based on how cows are now raised, though.
This is incorrect. The correct way to withhold on "supplemental income", like bonuses, is described in Publication 15, page 13, which you can easily search for at irs.gov. If the bonuses for a year are over $1,000,000.00 you have to withhold at 35% or the highest rate for the year. Otherwise, you can withhold at 25%, or do various calculations to come up with a more reasonable number. The more reasonable method just involves averaging in the bonus, and withholding at your regular rate. Since this requires a little bit more calculating on the employer's part, they never do it. The IRS uses the 25% rate themselves, but no business is required to.
The rest of that was correct. Obviously, the rate at which income tax is withheld has nothing to do with what you pay in the end. Having a big bonus at the beginning of the year will essentially give the IRS a 1-year interest free loan though.
I probably screwed something up myself here, so look at the Publication if you want the real answer.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, the US, and most other "democracies" are representative democracies. Voting on individual laws is a terrible idea. Just look at Athens. Regardless of that though, citizens of the US (in some states) actually do get to vote on individual laws, through "Issues" polls, or on state consitutional amendments. That's how some states get ridiculous "anti-gay marriage" laws passed that a representative body would probably avoid.
The US is not, by law, a 2 party system; it has just developed that way. Democrats and Republicans do not always vote in one big block either. There are "blue dog" Democrats who will occasionally side with Republicans on some things, for example. Middle of the road representatives sometimes team up to challenge their parties. So, in the end, there actually is reasonable representaton.
The problem is that most Americans don't really understand how they are represented. Many don't vote, or only do so when their vote counts the least, the presidential election. The Senators represent smaller areas, and Representatives represent even smaller areas than those, and that's just the FEDERAL government. Most of the stuff that actually affects your life is decided by your State/County/Local/City representatives. Hardly anyone votes for them, or can keep track of them. Which makes those votes the most powerful you can cast.
So, to somehow be on topic, for this issue it doesn't matter at all if they are Republican or Democrat. Pretty much all the federal reps are "it's a series of tubes!" boneheads for technical issues.
Yes, but I believe there is something immoral here. As I stated, I live in the state, and use the state's resources. I feel I do have a moral obligation to pay taxes. I'm all for civil disobedience, but I don't think it applies here. In fact, you are just trying to rationalize not paying the tax becaue it is convenient. There is a law, and the law is not unjust. Therefore, it is both "wrong" and "illegal". Well, at least for me. You can come to your own conclusion.
It's also wrong and illegal to steal music, so I don't. However, a 70 year old copywrite is defintely not just. I like a lot of older music, so this seems rather convenient to me. I can't find a solution to this moral dilemma. Obviously, I can download a copy of a Robert Johnson recording, which is really old, and he's long dead. But where do I draw the line? If I draw it at 20 years I can happily download a lot of the music I like. In fact, it would be my duty to do so as an act of civil disobedience. Well, anyway....
There is a simple way the Feds can get involved. We just need an information reporting form (say 1099-INT) that any online retailer is required to issue to the Federal Government, and the state of the buyer. Just like when a contracter gets 1099'd. The burden of collecting sales tax for 50 states would be VERY high, but sending out a 1099 at the end of the year wouldn't be as bad. This would give the states a way to actually verify you are paying their use tax, if they have one. People don't pay the use tax because they know that the State government has no idea what they've bought online, or through catalogs. They will start paying the use tax if they know the state knows about the purchases.
This also avoids the problem of enforcing one state's laws on a business in another. Collection/payment of the tax is still the onus of the person in the state.
Er, well, I do; not that you know me, except as that idiot who pays use tax. And that included tax on about $1,000.00 in computer equipment this year. I work for the IRS though. If I don't correctly report, and pay, all my taxes (federal, state, local, etc.), I can be fired; thanks, Bill Clinton! I have no idea how anyone would ever figure out I didn't pay a use tax, though.
Anyway, I don't see anything so horrible about it. What's the difference if I buy my equipment (at a higher cost) from Best Buy, or get it cheaper on-line? I still live in KY, and should pay sales tax. I don't really use a lot of services, besides the library, but other members of my family do.
This is the same attitude that leads so many small businesses to not report all their income. It's not verifiable by the government, so why pay it? It's just stupid to report that income. But, it is also wrong. So, I'll keep paying my use tax, and start requesting that my local congressmen get the tax repealed, so I don't have to be the only idiot paying it.
All of these seem highly improbable. There is no "American Empire" to crumble. While American democracy may not be the perfect solution (or even the best solution in the world currently), it is a very stable one. I can only see its destabilization by some cataclysmic event. You made that statement as if it is an obvious fact, and that anybody like me is just naive. But stating things like that does not actually make them true, it is just really annoying. So, can you explain what you meant?
If Spore meets expectations it'll be one of the most creative tools around. Now you can create creatures (with an easy to use interface), their world, the plants, the buildings, and pretty much everything else. The online sharing of content will be seamless.
Any good RPG is inherently creative, since you have to create a character. Creating an avatar seems like a great creative lesson. Create a representation of yourself, but not a replication of yourself physically. I'd prefer that to, say, making a poem of my name based on the first letters.
Even strategy games have a creative side. Even as a kid playing the NES version of Nobunaga's Ambition I was making up a complicated epic history as I was playing.
OTH, I'm not saying these games should be played in school, but video games can be great for creativity.
And it seems Art (especially modern art) is perfect for computer teaching. Here, look at this Picasso. Now we'll give you a tool to change how it looks. Try smearing this Monet around a little bit. Zoom in on this pointillist painting. That would allow children to interact with art, and maybe understand it a bit more, than just staring at a picture in a book.
The US is not a "two-party state" by law. The parties evolved over time. The two parties stay in control because of some aspects of the law, of course. And, since changing the law would require them to vote on the change, it is not going to happen. Some of the founding fathers were afraid of parties existing because of this.
Regardless of all this though, I seriously doubt it would make much difference if the US wasn't a "two-party state". There is a very wide range of views within the parties; a Kentucky Democrat is hardly the same as a California Democrat. And then you have all the state legislatures, which can really run the full gamut of politics.
Can someone explain what "brand power" is, and how you can possibly measure it? I know that "branding" is important, but ranking companies by "brand power" seems like useless information being created by "CoreBrand". I'm guessing CoreBrand didn't make it very high on the list themselves...
The dumbest title I've seen in awhile is Space Rangers 2: Rise of the Dominators. That's the kind of thing TV/Movie writers come up with when they try to think of a fake software title.
The army does. I read several years ago that silly string was being used in Iraq. The lightweight strings, and the propulsion device, are ideal for detecting tripwires.
Wow, I can't wait until 2008 when "families can have steak-like meals twice a day without feeling a budget pinch." Do we get to have heart-attack-like deaths too?!? (Er, guess not, the steak is made of algae, bleh). Was this guy really looking forward to "steak-like meals"?? I guess he knew he would be really old and looked forward to gumming his "steak".
What's really funny is that food is insanely cheap today, even if it is not highly processed. I guess that some would argue that steak itself has become "steak-like" based on how cows are now raised, though.
The rest of that was correct. Obviously, the rate at which income tax is withheld has nothing to do with what you pay in the end. Having a big bonus at the beginning of the year will essentially give the IRS a 1-year interest free loan though.
I probably screwed something up myself here, so look at the Publication if you want the real answer.
Clovis42