But, just as any other free market situation, if they don't like the acceptable use terms of NetSol they can go with another host. They aren't FORCED to use NetSol as their host. That is like MySpace saying you can't post nude photos. So then post them on a site that does allow it. There is a host out there that won't take the site down, find it, use it, stop bitching about a company's right to create their own contracts. Hell, serve the site yourself if you don't like it.
If the voting machine used some sort of "stance on issues" to determine the party of the candidate I could see how they thought Guliani was a Dem, but since it should just be some field that is entered, maybe the data entry person got it mixed up:)
Does your power supply produce more than 120V? The other day I got shocked by an electrical outlet I was changing (damn low batteries in a volt meter makes them lie!) and didn't have the power off to it. Even at the normal amperage of an outlet I got a little buzz in my hand but by no means was I in any serious danger. Take almost all the amperage out of 120V and would have hardly felt a thing...soooo.... where's the danger?
Hide where? They already know who all the involved parties are. There is nothing that can be hidden. Everything is exposed. ^^^^should be modded down for uselessness.
I simply put anonymous in every text field that would hold it, and 00000 for the zip code...
I posted anonymously:) And I chided him for not validating his form fields:) tisk tisk.
So you think the answer would be to redistrict? I haven't looked into the issues of districting or redistricting, I was under the impression that these were done by population. We had some uproar over redistricting here in PA a couple of years ago. The problem with redistricting is that it never gets done objectively. It is always skewed to one side's agenda. If we could do some sort of independent population study then maybe it could work.
I really think that the government should start phasing out subsidies for the big farm corporations. And for all the other corporations for that matter. Instead of us having tariffs to protect our companies from cheap foreign products we use subsidies. We are really no holier in the free market than any other country.
"Does he grow marijuana or heroin organically? If not, he's getting subsidies. His equipment is subsidized. His seed grain is subsidized. His fertilizer is subsidized. His water is subsidized. His gasoline and heating oil are subsidized. I could go on. He gets some of this from just living in farm country."
By your logic all farmers are subsidized. That means that you are subsidized. His water is well water, no subsidy. No fertilizer, he's not a crop farmer. His grain he buys from my pap, who farms for fun since he is retired (he receives no subsidy), bail's his own hay. His equipment? hmmm...last I checked, all out of pocket. Nope, not subsidized. Not a single damn penny. So before you go making sweeping generalizations maybe you should know the facts.
Lets just face it. The government patted a few people on the back for some votes. That's why there are subsidies. Not everyone was in on it.
So back to my main point, get rid of the subsidies. For corn, for sugar, for oil, for medicine. Let the free market roll.
I agree with you about the farce that is Ethanol. Its a waste of time and a useless technology. Only 10% of our gas is ethanol, and only 10% of gas is responsible for our oil consumption. So the effect of ethanol is nothing. We are just as dependent on foreign oil as ever. Its all just a big PR machine.
It may not seem like it amid these posts, but I think you and I are on the same page when you boil this down to the real issues. What the animals are fed is not the issue, we got side tracked.
Look, as I said, I don't think subsidies should exist. My dad is a farmer, no subsidies. He makes a living, but its nothing great. I make more per year as a programmer than he makes farming. I'm 24, he's in his 40's and been doing it his whole life. He likes the small farm and doesn't want a big huge operation so he lives with that.
Cattle eat corn, pigs, chickens, and just about every other live stock. We ship a lot over seas as well. If it makes the animals fatter quicker and that is good for business then why not feed it to them? The meat won't be any more nutritious if we feed them sugar cane, or oats, or barley, or what have you. So the fact that it makes animals grow faster would suggest it has more nutritional value for the animal? Farmers represent less than 1% of the population. They themselves cannot keep candidates out of office that would end the subsidies.
The people and Puerto Rico and Hawaii can grow sugar if they want to. But we shouldn't subsidize them to do it. Just like we shouldn't subsidize the corn farmers and the dairy farmers and all the other farmers. People will argue that it would put them all out of business, which for some it might, but we would ultimately pay more for our food so that these companies would be able to make money. Instead, everyone gets super cheap food, and our tax dollars go to keep them in business. That is not the job of our tax dollars.
Everyone wants a free market until they become an underdog because of it.
Then you work in a very stifling place. Very little collaboration? I collaborate all the time with coworkers and other people in the industry. That's your fault for either not seeking it, or putting yourself in a bad company that would discourage it.
You really consider this cheating? Have you gone to college? Did you NEVER get involved with a study group? To say that a back and forth between two students over how to solve a problem is cheating is ridiculous and the person saying it obviously does not realize that this is the best way to learn. Bouncing information off the people that you can relate with in order to grasp what is going on is great. If I had to run to my professor with a question every time I wouldn't have gotten anything done, for more than one reason. 1) The professor can't always relate the material the way you need to be able to understand it. Hence the reason why you may have a question in the first place. 2)It may be late and the professor is not available. Hell, professors are usually hard to meet with even during normal hours.
I think the university that has hired this professor needs to evaluate why they hired this person. This professor is not about the students getting the most out of their education. If they were just copying answers or the sake of a grade then that is one thing. But to expel a student for organizing homework help THAT ONLY COUNTS FOR 10% OF THE GRADE is idiotic. If the students were just copying answers and not learning the material they would be failing the tests in the end and not passing anyway. The student running this only got a B. It wasn't like he was trying to cheat his way to a 4.0. The whole thing is stupid. Just a bunch of elite yuppie yups with their heads up each other's a--holes. They don't care about the students learning.
Well just so you don't think I'm some city slicker, I too grew up on a farm. My father still raises chickens, beef, and the occasional pig. I know first hand how much trouble the family farm is in. My dad is very lucky to still be in business. I think government subsidies that keep entire industries afloat are an economic magic show. They only hide and disguise what is really going on. They are used to get reelected. Don't blame the farmers for this. Its the politicians' fault. You say that we need to go back to sugar cane, is that going to give animals the quality food they need? I don't know much about sugar cane itself, before being processed. But the amount of land in this country that can grow sugar cane isn't even close to the amount of land that can grow corn, wheat, oats, barley, etc...
You are looking at this from a strictly southern agricultural view. I don't think mid-west farmers have any option. They have to grow crops that will grow in their geographical region. We've done much of the same thing in farming that we've done in other industries. We outsource the ones that are no longer profitable in the US. If we can import sugar cheaper than we can grow it, then why not put our fields to use growing something that is profitable to us. The problem with economics is also what makes it work. It removes emotion and feelings from the equation. Its about numbers, not about people. And while you can't base all your policy on numbers, they don't lie. And if you keep the human element then there are sacrifices. I'm not for subsidizing big business. The corn industry, the oil industry, and soon (if current trends continue) the automobile industry. If you can't figure out how to do it for a profit, find a new business. Those are the consequences of a free market. Deal with it.
YES! That's the answer. Put the last few farmers in the US out of business! Why didn't I think of that? I'll tell you why. Because its just plain stupid. That was one of the most ignorant things I've read in a while. The corn farmers killed sugar? How about cheap Caribbean sugar killed US sugar? Besides, you CAN'T kill the corn farmers. We rely so heavily on corn. And we are the world's largest producer. Not only is not possible, its a horrible idea to even attempt. Its not the corn farmer's fault that our Sugar industry is tied to Cuban policy.
Now, if, part of the agreement to open ourselves up with Cuba is to end the Gitmo contract then we would be free of it, and not obligated to subsidize their sugar. Just make it part of the agreement. They don't have to be separate. We shouldn't have that base in their country anyway.
When you try to compare apples to oranges you have to look at the biggest matching issues. Craigslist and Ebay serve some of the same purpose, but Ebay is far easier to navigate and search no matter how you look at it. So as far as finding what you want...Ebay would have to be better. For finding what you want locally? Maybe Craigslist...
Except you can't find $hit on Craigslist. It takes an hours to do the same search 50 times in 50 different regions...unless an item is listed close to you its a waste of time IMHO.
So you really affirm my point...our lack of an embargo has to do with money. The only reason we opened up to China wasn't a change in "strategy" to bring down an oppressive regime. It was because Nixon and his buddies saw dollar signs.
The embargo against Cuba is not having much effect on them economically is very true. But politically it gives them someone to blame in their brainwashing of their people. Open up trade with them and when American companies won't do business there because they get their profits taken then the people will know. It won't help either side much economically, but it gives them one less excuse.
How exactly will opening up to Cuba kill our domestic sugar industry any more than the other Caribbean nations? Is there sugar that much better? That much bigger volume? Are they going to flood our markets? Give me a break.
Yes indeed, but disproportionate sentences occur in all countries I'm sure. Each country has its own set of problems, thus different countries will have a lot of people in jail for specific things. There has been some talk in recent weeks about the governments unjustifiable difference in sentencing requirements when it comes to crack cocaine vs. powder cocaine. Crack has a mandatory 5 year sentence while powder does not. A lot of people attribute this to a belief that crack is a poor or even "black" (insert your favorite minority) drug while powder is more expensive and thus a rich man's or "white"(insert your favorite target) drug. Whether the sentencing differences are race, economic or otherwise motivated is irrelevant. Is wrong. For its own merits. The drugs have no fundamental difference...treat them the same. I think the sentencing for crack is far to severe by the way. I think we should work on drug rehabilitation for addicts instead of imprisoning for long periods of time (because they can get it on the inside).
Thus would open up another market opportunity. Just like those people don't want to "own" a property, but rent so that they don't have to do maintenance I'm sure there would be people that would set up and maintain these spots for a nominal fee...
I'm not a fan of the death penalty. But, how does that have to do with civil rights? The right to not be killed if you killed someone else? I didn't know that one existed. The right to stay on the streets if you commit a crime? hmm...missed that one too.
Now, maybe we need to refine how we prosecute and incarcerate our drug offenders. Some would even say to legalize all drugs(ignorant at best), and then we would reduce the prison population. Or maybe people could actually NOT break the law and take responsibility for their lives? I think we need to stop giving so much credit to the whining criminals. They broke the law, if they don't like the law they can either run for office or move to a country that is more of their liking. I think our civil rights are pretty good. I can't go to Cuba without permission but that isn't a civil rights issue, that's foreign policy. And you hired these guys in office to look after our foreign policy. So if it was that big of an issue to the people of this country we would actually elect people who would change that.
You are exactly correct about this. But there are actually 2 reasons why we treat China and Cuba differently. One: China is just too damn big for us to pick on. If we would cut them off they wouldn't care. It wouldn't hurt them enough. They have far too much dirt on us. Two: Our corporations and economy has a very vested interest in China. This comes in two forms. The first is cheap labor and cheap materials. The second is China's foreign investment. If we pick on China, and they stop investing in our government bonds, then how are we going to borrow all the money to keep our war machine going. How are we going to borrow all the money we need to cover our deficit? If you follow the money from our benefit, you'll follow our public policy. If it means $ it means business, America's Business.
Slashdot Mirror
But, just as any other free market situation, if they don't like the acceptable use terms of NetSol they can go with another host. They aren't FORCED to use NetSol as their host. That is like MySpace saying you can't post nude photos. So then post them on a site that does allow it. There is a host out there that won't take the site down, find it, use it, stop bitching about a company's right to create their own contracts. Hell, serve the site yourself if you don't like it.
If the voting machine used some sort of "stance on issues" to determine the party of the candidate I could see how they thought Guliani was a Dem, but since it should just be some field that is entered, maybe the data entry person got it mixed up :)
Does your power supply produce more than 120V? The other day I got shocked by an electrical outlet I was changing (damn low batteries in a volt meter makes them lie!) and didn't have the power off to it. Even at the normal amperage of an outlet I got a little buzz in my hand but by no means was I in any serious danger. Take almost all the amperage out of 120V and would have hardly felt a thing...soooo.... where's the danger?
Last time I checked we don't run anti-virus on our IBM midrange servers...hmmmm... but IBM is so old that its not even cool to try to hack it right?
Name a single internet company that begins with numbers such as 121Media that is not a scam.... go ahead...next to 1&1 hosting I can't think of one...
Hide where? They already know who all the involved parties are. There is nothing that can be hidden. Everything is exposed. ^^^^should be modded down for uselessness.
"Next, they will attempt to ban attempts to disguise your identity in public by wearing masks" Great, there goes Halloween.
In which case, we are worse off then I originally posted. I need to get better at my doomsday scenarios...
I simply put anonymous in every text field that would hold it, and 00000 for the zip code... I posted anonymously :) And I chided him for not validating his form fields :) tisk tisk.
Unless they track you by IP address. Then you are only new if you restart your modem.
So you think the answer would be to redistrict? I haven't looked into the issues of districting or redistricting, I was under the impression that these were done by population. We had some uproar over redistricting here in PA a couple of years ago. The problem with redistricting is that it never gets done objectively. It is always skewed to one side's agenda. If we could do some sort of independent population study then maybe it could work. I really think that the government should start phasing out subsidies for the big farm corporations. And for all the other corporations for that matter. Instead of us having tariffs to protect our companies from cheap foreign products we use subsidies. We are really no holier in the free market than any other country.
"Does he grow marijuana or heroin organically? If not, he's getting subsidies. His equipment is subsidized. His seed grain is subsidized. His fertilizer is subsidized. His water is subsidized. His gasoline and heating oil are subsidized. I could go on. He gets some of this from just living in farm country." By your logic all farmers are subsidized. That means that you are subsidized. His water is well water, no subsidy. No fertilizer, he's not a crop farmer. His grain he buys from my pap, who farms for fun since he is retired (he receives no subsidy), bail's his own hay. His equipment? hmmm...last I checked, all out of pocket. Nope, not subsidized. Not a single damn penny. So before you go making sweeping generalizations maybe you should know the facts. Lets just face it. The government patted a few people on the back for some votes. That's why there are subsidies. Not everyone was in on it. So back to my main point, get rid of the subsidies. For corn, for sugar, for oil, for medicine. Let the free market roll. I agree with you about the farce that is Ethanol. Its a waste of time and a useless technology. Only 10% of our gas is ethanol, and only 10% of gas is responsible for our oil consumption. So the effect of ethanol is nothing. We are just as dependent on foreign oil as ever. Its all just a big PR machine. It may not seem like it amid these posts, but I think you and I are on the same page when you boil this down to the real issues. What the animals are fed is not the issue, we got side tracked.
"What are they going to do with that...?" Sell it to telemarketers...
Look, as I said, I don't think subsidies should exist. My dad is a farmer, no subsidies. He makes a living, but its nothing great. I make more per year as a programmer than he makes farming. I'm 24, he's in his 40's and been doing it his whole life. He likes the small farm and doesn't want a big huge operation so he lives with that. Cattle eat corn, pigs, chickens, and just about every other live stock. We ship a lot over seas as well. If it makes the animals fatter quicker and that is good for business then why not feed it to them? The meat won't be any more nutritious if we feed them sugar cane, or oats, or barley, or what have you. So the fact that it makes animals grow faster would suggest it has more nutritional value for the animal? Farmers represent less than 1% of the population. They themselves cannot keep candidates out of office that would end the subsidies. The people and Puerto Rico and Hawaii can grow sugar if they want to. But we shouldn't subsidize them to do it. Just like we shouldn't subsidize the corn farmers and the dairy farmers and all the other farmers. People will argue that it would put them all out of business, which for some it might, but we would ultimately pay more for our food so that these companies would be able to make money. Instead, everyone gets super cheap food, and our tax dollars go to keep them in business. That is not the job of our tax dollars. Everyone wants a free market until they become an underdog because of it.
Then you work in a very stifling place. Very little collaboration? I collaborate all the time with coworkers and other people in the industry. That's your fault for either not seeking it, or putting yourself in a bad company that would discourage it.
You really consider this cheating? Have you gone to college? Did you NEVER get involved with a study group? To say that a back and forth between two students over how to solve a problem is cheating is ridiculous and the person saying it obviously does not realize that this is the best way to learn. Bouncing information off the people that you can relate with in order to grasp what is going on is great. If I had to run to my professor with a question every time I wouldn't have gotten anything done, for more than one reason. 1) The professor can't always relate the material the way you need to be able to understand it. Hence the reason why you may have a question in the first place. 2)It may be late and the professor is not available. Hell, professors are usually hard to meet with even during normal hours. I think the university that has hired this professor needs to evaluate why they hired this person. This professor is not about the students getting the most out of their education. If they were just copying answers or the sake of a grade then that is one thing. But to expel a student for organizing homework help THAT ONLY COUNTS FOR 10% OF THE GRADE is idiotic. If the students were just copying answers and not learning the material they would be failing the tests in the end and not passing anyway. The student running this only got a B. It wasn't like he was trying to cheat his way to a 4.0. The whole thing is stupid. Just a bunch of elite yuppie yups with their heads up each other's a--holes. They don't care about the students learning.
Well just so you don't think I'm some city slicker, I too grew up on a farm. My father still raises chickens, beef, and the occasional pig. I know first hand how much trouble the family farm is in. My dad is very lucky to still be in business. I think government subsidies that keep entire industries afloat are an economic magic show. They only hide and disguise what is really going on. They are used to get reelected. Don't blame the farmers for this. Its the politicians' fault. You say that we need to go back to sugar cane, is that going to give animals the quality food they need? I don't know much about sugar cane itself, before being processed. But the amount of land in this country that can grow sugar cane isn't even close to the amount of land that can grow corn, wheat, oats, barley, etc...
You are looking at this from a strictly southern agricultural view. I don't think mid-west farmers have any option. They have to grow crops that will grow in their geographical region. We've done much of the same thing in farming that we've done in other industries. We outsource the ones that are no longer profitable in the US. If we can import sugar cheaper than we can grow it, then why not put our fields to use growing something that is profitable to us. The problem with economics is also what makes it work. It removes emotion and feelings from the equation. Its about numbers, not about people. And while you can't base all your policy on numbers, they don't lie. And if you keep the human element then there are sacrifices. I'm not for subsidizing big business. The corn industry, the oil industry, and soon (if current trends continue) the automobile industry. If you can't figure out how to do it for a profit, find a new business. Those are the consequences of a free market. Deal with it.
YES! That's the answer. Put the last few farmers in the US out of business! Why didn't I think of that? I'll tell you why. Because its just plain stupid. That was one of the most ignorant things I've read in a while. The corn farmers killed sugar? How about cheap Caribbean sugar killed US sugar? Besides, you CAN'T kill the corn farmers. We rely so heavily on corn. And we are the world's largest producer. Not only is not possible, its a horrible idea to even attempt. Its not the corn farmer's fault that our Sugar industry is tied to Cuban policy.
Now, if, part of the agreement to open ourselves up with Cuba is to end the Gitmo contract then we would be free of it, and not obligated to subsidize their sugar. Just make it part of the agreement. They don't have to be separate. We shouldn't have that base in their country anyway.
When you try to compare apples to oranges you have to look at the biggest matching issues. Craigslist and Ebay serve some of the same purpose, but Ebay is far easier to navigate and search no matter how you look at it. So as far as finding what you want...Ebay would have to be better. For finding what you want locally? Maybe Craigslist...
Except you can't find $hit on Craigslist. It takes an hours to do the same search 50 times in 50 different regions...unless an item is listed close to you its a waste of time IMHO.
So you really affirm my point...our lack of an embargo has to do with money. The only reason we opened up to China wasn't a change in "strategy" to bring down an oppressive regime. It was because Nixon and his buddies saw dollar signs. The embargo against Cuba is not having much effect on them economically is very true. But politically it gives them someone to blame in their brainwashing of their people. Open up trade with them and when American companies won't do business there because they get their profits taken then the people will know. It won't help either side much economically, but it gives them one less excuse. How exactly will opening up to Cuba kill our domestic sugar industry any more than the other Caribbean nations? Is there sugar that much better? That much bigger volume? Are they going to flood our markets? Give me a break.
Yes indeed, but disproportionate sentences occur in all countries I'm sure. Each country has its own set of problems, thus different countries will have a lot of people in jail for specific things. There has been some talk in recent weeks about the governments unjustifiable difference in sentencing requirements when it comes to crack cocaine vs. powder cocaine. Crack has a mandatory 5 year sentence while powder does not. A lot of people attribute this to a belief that crack is a poor or even "black" (insert your favorite minority) drug while powder is more expensive and thus a rich man's or "white"(insert your favorite target) drug. Whether the sentencing differences are race, economic or otherwise motivated is irrelevant. Is wrong. For its own merits. The drugs have no fundamental difference...treat them the same. I think the sentencing for crack is far to severe by the way. I think we should work on drug rehabilitation for addicts instead of imprisoning for long periods of time (because they can get it on the inside).
Thus would open up another market opportunity. Just like those people don't want to "own" a property, but rent so that they don't have to do maintenance I'm sure there would be people that would set up and maintain these spots for a nominal fee...
I'm not a fan of the death penalty. But, how does that have to do with civil rights? The right to not be killed if you killed someone else? I didn't know that one existed. The right to stay on the streets if you commit a crime? hmm...missed that one too. Now, maybe we need to refine how we prosecute and incarcerate our drug offenders. Some would even say to legalize all drugs(ignorant at best), and then we would reduce the prison population. Or maybe people could actually NOT break the law and take responsibility for their lives? I think we need to stop giving so much credit to the whining criminals. They broke the law, if they don't like the law they can either run for office or move to a country that is more of their liking. I think our civil rights are pretty good. I can't go to Cuba without permission but that isn't a civil rights issue, that's foreign policy. And you hired these guys in office to look after our foreign policy. So if it was that big of an issue to the people of this country we would actually elect people who would change that.
You are exactly correct about this. But there are actually 2 reasons why we treat China and Cuba differently. One: China is just too damn big for us to pick on. If we would cut them off they wouldn't care. It wouldn't hurt them enough. They have far too much dirt on us. Two: Our corporations and economy has a very vested interest in China. This comes in two forms. The first is cheap labor and cheap materials. The second is China's foreign investment. If we pick on China, and they stop investing in our government bonds, then how are we going to borrow all the money to keep our war machine going. How are we going to borrow all the money we need to cover our deficit? If you follow the money from our benefit, you'll follow our public policy. If it means $ it means business, America's Business.