For me that's a perfectly normal day on/., I get downbombmoded periodically, somebody comes in with 30-50 moderation points and mods down every single comment (multiple times, so multiple accounts).
That's how you know you are on the right side of things - when instead of arguing with you, they are simply trying to shut you up so you can't post more than 1-2 times a day.
The very reason for these insane prices is government involvement in health insurance and care. Prices for child birth are very affordable outside of USA, in Germany or Switzerland prices are 5000-7000, not 10 times that as in the US. People need to pay for these things out of pocket, these are not catastrophic events, these are expected events, if you can't afford to pay for childbirth out of pocket, you shouldn't be having children.
Insurance is there to cover any complications, problems that may cost much more than what you EXPECTED to pay.
. I think that it's a GOOD cross-subsidy (from a public policy perspective), but let's not pretend that it's a comment on USPS's efficiency or lack thereof.
- why should people, who send letters a few miles from each other be subsidising somebody who sends letters across the continent? I do not think it is a good thing, I think it is an awful abuse of gov't power. Are the people living in Alaska subsidising Manhattan cost of living?
Being declared a monopoly and being subsidised by government and providing 46 cent letter services does NOT make USPS efficient, it only makes it a monopoly that is using various government subsidies (some are hidden as parts of other government programs) to provide that type of delivery. Of-course USPS was selling 'forever stamps' for more than a year now, those could in principle work as a hedge against inflation unless USPS at some point simply declares that it will not honour those sales or that it just stops letter delivery altogether.
Yes, if it is government then it must be inefficient, that's because the principles of government prevent it from being efficient. The more money and office spends, the more power it has, government reducing its spending is equivalent to government reducing its power and people don't go to government to reduce their or government power, they go there to grow it.
As labour becomes more and more expensive due to all of the resource mis-allocation, inflation, taxes, regulations the capital comes to the rescue and saves the day once again. Competition is pushing USPS to reduce costs and in our times the result is obvious - automation. This may be good news actually, of-course it's a government program, so there has to be a level of inefficiency somewhere there, the procurement process, somewhere is getting a nice piece of the pie, but as long as it works out at the end, it should in principle save money and this is due to the competitive pressure from the free market.
Similarly, health insurance includes paying for care due to decisions made by the companies involved that paying for routine care actually reduces their expenses.
- sure sure, except it's nonsense. If it is a benefit to a company in some way, then it's up to the free market to provide these benefits. Instead you are pointing at a gov't regulation, which is enforced upon people by threat of gov't violence and talk about some ephemeral benefit that companies are apparently too stupid to realise themselves, and so they must be forced by gov't to provide something that they wouldn't do on their own.
This entire argument is completely skewed, it shouldn't be blocked due to religious considerations, it should be blocked based on the fact that government is dictating to the employers and employees as to how employers pay their employees! Where is the freedom? Where is the freedom to associate, freedom of contract? Where is freedom to run private property as one sees fit? Why are you all accepting as a fact that government can dictate to employers and employees must be paid in contraceptives rather than in cash?
The second valid argument is of-course the fact that government is dictating that insurance cannot BE insurance but instead must be some form of prepaid health management system.
What do contraceptives have to do with catastrophic events that insurance is supposed to cover? Why are contraceptives any more special than food or clothing or machine oil or fuel or housing for that matter?
Insurance is a bet that some event will take place and actuary science is used to calculate the probability of events based on individual participant's and then the bets are placed. What does it have to do with events that are of near 100% probability (that women will have sex?) Insurance is not there to provide you with every day items, in fact insurance shouldn't even cover child birth - it's an EXPECTED event, not an unexpected one, it's an event that people must prepare for and they even know with almost complete certainty when exactly this will happen and they must plan for it.
Medical complications during child birth might be covered by insurance but child birth itself is simply an expected procedure that should be paid OUT OF POCKET just like most doctor visits and most other things, like birth control.
The real issue is that it is a question of individual freedom, not a question of religious prejudice.
Once govt gets the power to prevent people from building private infrastructure, you get all these 'unintended' consequences. It is up to private property owners ( or supposed to be ) whether to let oil pipeline through their property, not up to govt. There should be no 'public property' (an oxymoron).
"The future is on its way, and it is going to be on your face. We need to think about it and be ready for it in a way we werenâ(TM)t with smartphones."
- what can you tell a man with 2 black eyes? Nothing, he has already been told twice.
directives given to them by Congress and utilizing powers granted to them by the PATRIOT Act
- Patriot Act, probably the most traitorous piece of legislation that ever came out of Congress and signed into law by POTUS.
There is not a single thing unlawful or unconstitutional about what they've done.
- except for violating every Constitutional principle of-course, even specific amendments, not that amendments matter when the principle of the Constitution, the process, the rule of law is violated.
You're making the common mistake of transposing your own moral beliefs as though they are somehow the basis of law.
- Constitutional principles, not moral believes.
While what htey've done may be immoral
- I didn't argue anything about morality.
they were ordered to do by our elected officials via Constitutional processes
- precisely, the system is subverted, the rule of law is annihilated, the government process is destroyed, that's how orders like these are made and carried out. This type of defence didn't help the other group of people during the Nuremberg Trials.
Traitor also requires one to take from one's country and provide the benefits of what you take to an enemy.
- which they did, the enemy in this case is domestic.
Snowden has done this; by definition he is a traitor.
- wrong, unless your definition of 'enemy' is USA public.
The NSA has never provided information to an enemy of the USA.
- of-course it has, it provided the information about USA citizens to the fascist/socialist/Mafia government officials, who are the actual enemy of the USA.
They are effectively soldiers: they are given a mission and they carry it out.
- so where the SS.
The target for your ire should be those who make the decisions - our elected officials in both parties - and the tools they use to grant them powers, namely the PATRIOT Act
- wrong, the powers were usurped, the name of the illegal act is irrelevant, though ironic, the target of my ire is the mob, thus as I said: mobocracy keeps the power establishment going (which is why any form of collectivism is the death of good governance, of rule of law, of process, the name is irrelevant, socialism, fascism, mobocracy, Marxism, communism any of these or any others that annihilate the Constitutional principles and the rule of law in order to establish the rule of men).
I recognize you're just confused. You use a lot of terms that are contradictory and don't mean much.
- I realise your life circumstance somehow depends on the current power establishment and the status-quo.
Authoritarian mobocracy? There's no such thing
- wrong, it is what keeps the establishment in power, the mob that desires for its own short term benefit by discarding principles of good government, of the rule of law, of process.
Perhaps you're referring to an Ochlocracy
- wrong, the mob does not scare the power establishment, the power establishment feeds off of the ignorance of the mob. It's a cycle, the power establishment uses propaganda to promote ignorance, class envy, jealousy, the mob filled with ignorance, class hate, jealousy keeps the establishment in power with the express purpose of using tyranny of the Mafia government against the currently hated minority (today that would be 'the rich', anybody richer than the average mob member).
Socialism is an economic system mixing to varying degrees private enterprise and direct public investment
- irrelevant, socialism is a subset of collectivism, which justifies its authority by promising a skewed version
I don't believe a word of the NSA traitors (that's what they are - traitors to the Constitution, thus traitors to the Republic).
I think they are as strong as ever and their powers are growing, that's because while before Snowden they just pretended that they were an actual legal institution, now the courts will proclaim them to be legal! The system is corrupt completely and irreversibly, it will have to be replaced to be made workable again.
The problem is not NSA, the problem is the government that no longer follows the rule of law (the Constitution, the process) the government doesn't have a process anymore, it's based on mobocracy keeping it in power, it's based on propaganda, it's based on cult of personalities, it's based on class warfare talk and thus propaganda and it's based on ability to extort money from the RULED. The problem is that the government is absolutely illegitimate, it is now a system or rulers, the mob and the rest of those who are ruled.
Was it worth fighting against a Constitutional monarchy to end up with an authoritarian mobocracy/socialism/fascism/cronyism/Mafia?
(An exception is astronomy, where amateurs continue to play important roles. Of course, astronomy doesn't involve chemicals or other (currently) 'scary stuff.') Can amateur science make a come-back? Or are the legal obsicles too entrenched?"
- a real 'obsicle' maybe scarier than the 'scary stuff' mentioned in the fucking summary. How about we start with amateur literacy and go from there?
But this has nothing to do with culture, these people are subsidised not for any reasons of 'culture', they are subsidised because that's just one way to steal money from some for your own benefit. If you are a politician, stealing money from a hated minority (the productive class of people, often known as "the rich") is a very cheap political manoeuvre. Why not do it, there is no pain for the politician - only gain. He passes a law to steal money from some minority to subsidise some type of real or perceived majority. It's political expedience, there are no cultural reasons behind it.
The correct response to "everybody subsidising their nonsensical culture" is not to play that game, the game of theft and shooting your own economy in the feet. That's not what politicians do, because they are not shooting their own feet in this process, they are shooting the feet of the rest of the society by creating more laws, stealing, redistributing, misallocating resources.
The difference of-course is that people are not forced to shop at Meyer's, there is no government program that will penalise you if you don't shop there, there is no gov't program that prevents actual competition in on-line retail (well, there are a bunch, but at least it's not illegal to offer most products at whatever prices).
The other difference is that people actually are shopping online voluntarily, nobody forces them, they see it as a benefit and they are not asking for subsidies, they are paying the online prices that are set by private entities.
The last difference is that Australian Prime Minister didn't come out and didn't tell everybody: if you like your other online stores, you can keep shopping there. If you like the products you choose to buy in other online retailers, you are free shopping there. Otherwise here is the best thing since they invented sliced bread: the Meyer's online store.
No, none of that happened. Do, compare the 2 once more.
Do you know how many times USA judges passed anti-Constitutional rulings? It's impossible to count, it's overwhelming. The system is completely corrupt, judges are not representing the Republic, they are not protecting the Constitution, which is their job. They are representing and protecting the power that is in place, that's all it is and it is part of the real problem - destruction of good self governance, destruction of the rule of law, installation of the rule of men.
Rule of law is not just a phrase, it has a meaning, it's supposed to provide an expected set out outcomes to the questions regardless of who poses the questions, regardless of who stands to benefit, regardless of who is in power. Rule of law is what makes a growing economy possible by providing a framework that is understood and hopefully is very stable and it is supposed to prevent any group of people to get control over any other group of people. It's supposed to protect the individual from the collective, from the mob, from the government. Instead what passes for the rule of law today is whatever is politically expedient and convenient for the establishment and those in power.
You better explain to me who is paying their bills? They have employees, right? They are renting space somewhere, correct? They have servers running, so they bought those, isn't it so? How about energy and support and maintenance of those servers?
So you better try and find an explanation how can a business live without making money and if the bills so far were paid by investors, then why are you surprised that investors want to see a return?
Re:Numerical Calculations dont use Java
on
Asm.js Gets Faster
·
· Score: -1
One of these days I will be next to somebody who will not be an AC and who will confuse Javascript with Java and that person will be very sure of himself that what comes out of his mouth makes any kind of sense. It will be a fine day to murder that person right on the spot. I will truly and thoroughly enjoy it.
What USA needs is more understanding of economics, understanding that you have to produce to consum, understanding that free people are able to produce because they are free. Free from the thugbooted collectivists, free from being slaves of the mob. Taxes are important to pay for a functioning govt but what makes a functioning govt? A functioning govt is one that protects individual freedoms of people, doesn't try to rule them, to own them. Income taxes are ownership of people, they must be outlawed as a form of slavery. Govt has no role in business in money in welfare in empire building.
The ignorance permeating through commebts on this forum is clear and overwhelming, there is no way to fix it, for many here their ignorance is their entire way of life, their ideology is based on massive amount of economic ignorance, nothing will fix it. Their ignorance is painful to see, to read its comments on these pages.
The poverty that is coming is poverty based on ecojomic ignorance, based on collectivism, politics of envy and stupidity. Nothing will fix it. I think now that ignorance deserves poverty, pain and suffering because it is willful in our age of abundance of information.
What does 'deserve' have to do with it? The prices for housing are going up, the Fed is on the mission to push them there. The tech workers are better paid and their companies can afford to hire private buses? The rest of the economy is decimated by the Fed and by regulations and taxes. It has nothing to do with deserving, it has to do with being able to afford someyhing, but I think that those protesters do not deserve a working economy, that is California, they are collectivists, they vote for socialists and when the economy suffers because of collectivism and destruction of individual freedoms, they should reap what they have sown.
Mariko Drew and Anabelle Bolanos had turned out with Our Mission No Eviction. Drew, who described herself as a longtime resident, said the bus was âoea symbol of the privatization and increasing separation between the poor and the rich.â Bolanos chimed in, âoeItâ(TM)s a constant reminder of how ⦠our mayor and our local government has sold us out. [Mayor] Ed Lee is letting money make decisions.â
- typical collectivist scum.
Privatization = capitalism (private ownership and operation of property.) It is done when there are efficiencies to be gained and the market rewards it with more profits. Collectivist scum disagrees, it wants to steal and redistribute. It votes to steal and if voting is not enough it protests and vsndalises private property (breaking bus windows). I dont see anything even remotely deserving a good economy, i see scum deserving every consequence of its scummy ideology.
Slashdot Mirror
For me that's a perfectly normal day on /., I get downbombmoded periodically, somebody comes in with 30-50 moderation points and mods down every single comment (multiple times, so multiple accounts).
That's how you know you are on the right side of things - when instead of arguing with you, they are simply trying to shut you up so you can't post more than 1-2 times a day.
Yo Dawg, I herd you like to break ice, so I put an ice breaker in your ice breaker so you can break ice while you break ice.
"Jump the shark" comes to mind, and I mean everything jumped the shark, /., West, coins....
The very reason for these insane prices is government involvement in health insurance and care. Prices for child birth are very affordable outside of USA, in Germany or Switzerland prices are 5000-7000, not 10 times that as in the US. People need to pay for these things out of pocket, these are not catastrophic events, these are expected events, if you can't afford to pay for childbirth out of pocket, you shouldn't be having children.
Insurance is there to cover any complications, problems that may cost much more than what you EXPECTED to pay.
. I think that it's a GOOD cross-subsidy (from a public policy perspective), but let's not pretend that it's a comment on USPS's efficiency or lack thereof.
- why should people, who send letters a few miles from each other be subsidising somebody who sends letters across the continent? I do not think it is a good thing, I think it is an awful abuse of gov't power. Are the people living in Alaska subsidising Manhattan cost of living?
Being declared a monopoly and being subsidised by government and providing 46 cent letter services does NOT make USPS efficient, it only makes it a monopoly that is using various government subsidies (some are hidden as parts of other government programs) to provide that type of delivery. Of-course USPS was selling 'forever stamps' for more than a year now, those could in principle work as a hedge against inflation unless USPS at some point simply declares that it will not honour those sales or that it just stops letter delivery altogether.
Yes, if it is government then it must be inefficient, that's because the principles of government prevent it from being efficient. The more money and office spends, the more power it has, government reducing its spending is equivalent to government reducing its power and people don't go to government to reduce their or government power, they go there to grow it.
As labour becomes more and more expensive due to all of the resource mis-allocation, inflation, taxes, regulations the capital comes to the rescue and saves the day once again. Competition is pushing USPS to reduce costs and in our times the result is obvious - automation. This may be good news actually, of-course it's a government program, so there has to be a level of inefficiency somewhere there, the procurement process, somewhere is getting a nice piece of the pie, but as long as it works out at the end, it should in principle save money and this is due to the competitive pressure from the free market.
Similarly, health insurance includes paying for care due to decisions made by the companies involved that paying for routine care actually reduces their expenses.
- sure sure, except it's nonsense. If it is a benefit to a company in some way, then it's up to the free market to provide these benefits. Instead you are pointing at a gov't regulation, which is enforced upon people by threat of gov't violence and talk about some ephemeral benefit that companies are apparently too stupid to realise themselves, and so they must be forced by gov't to provide something that they wouldn't do on their own.
You are pathetic at this, don't try even.
This entire argument is completely skewed, it shouldn't be blocked due to religious considerations, it should be blocked based on the fact that government is dictating to the employers and employees as to how employers pay their employees! Where is the freedom? Where is the freedom to associate, freedom of contract? Where is freedom to run private property as one sees fit? Why are you all accepting as a fact that government can dictate to employers and employees must be paid in contraceptives rather than in cash?
The second valid argument is of-course the fact that government is dictating that insurance cannot BE insurance but instead must be some form of prepaid health management system.
What do contraceptives have to do with catastrophic events that insurance is supposed to cover? Why are contraceptives any more special than food or clothing or machine oil or fuel or housing for that matter?
Insurance is a bet that some event will take place and actuary science is used to calculate the probability of events based on individual participant's and then the bets are placed. What does it have to do with events that are of near 100% probability (that women will have sex?) Insurance is not there to provide you with every day items, in fact insurance shouldn't even cover child birth - it's an EXPECTED event, not an unexpected one, it's an event that people must prepare for and they even know with almost complete certainty when exactly this will happen and they must plan for it.
Medical complications during child birth might be covered by insurance but child birth itself is simply an expected procedure that should be paid OUT OF POCKET just like most doctor visits and most other things, like birth control.
The real issue is that it is a question of individual freedom, not a question of religious prejudice.
Worthless without pics...
Once govt gets the power to prevent people from building private infrastructure, you get all these 'unintended' consequences. It is up to private property owners ( or supposed to be ) whether to let oil pipeline through their property, not up to govt. There should be no 'public property' (an oxymoron).
Unless the eyes are on his ass and his ass is hanging out, I can't imagine how you got the colour of that body part from my comment!
"The future is on its way, and it is going to be on your face. We need to think about it and be ready for it in a way we werenâ(TM)t with smartphones."
- what can you tell a man with 2 black eyes? Nothing, he has already been told twice.
directives given to them by Congress and utilizing powers granted to them by the PATRIOT Act
- Patriot Act, probably the most traitorous piece of legislation that ever came out of Congress and signed into law by POTUS.
There is not a single thing unlawful or unconstitutional about what they've done.
- except for violating every Constitutional principle of-course, even specific amendments, not that amendments matter when the principle of the Constitution, the process, the rule of law is violated.
You're making the common mistake of transposing your own moral beliefs as though they are somehow the basis of law.
- Constitutional principles, not moral believes.
While what htey've done may be immoral
- I didn't argue anything about morality.
they were ordered to do by our elected officials via Constitutional processes
- precisely, the system is subverted, the rule of law is annihilated, the government process is destroyed, that's how orders like these are made and carried out. This type of defence didn't help the other group of people during the Nuremberg Trials.
Traitor also requires one to take from one's country and provide the benefits of what you take to an enemy.
- which they did, the enemy in this case is domestic.
Snowden has done this; by definition he is a traitor.
- wrong, unless your definition of 'enemy' is USA public.
The NSA has never provided information to an enemy of the USA.
- of-course it has, it provided the information about USA citizens to the fascist/socialist/Mafia government officials, who are the actual enemy of the USA.
They are effectively soldiers: they are given a mission and they carry it out.
- so where the SS.
The target for your ire should be those who make the decisions - our elected officials in both parties - and the tools they use to grant them powers, namely the PATRIOT Act
- wrong, the powers were usurped, the name of the illegal act is irrelevant, though ironic, the target of my ire is the mob, thus as I said: mobocracy keeps the power establishment going (which is why any form of collectivism is the death of good governance, of rule of law, of process, the name is irrelevant, socialism, fascism, mobocracy, Marxism, communism any of these or any others that annihilate the Constitutional principles and the rule of law in order to establish the rule of men).
I recognize you're just confused. You use a lot of terms that are contradictory and don't mean much.
- I realise your life circumstance somehow depends on the current power establishment and the status-quo.
Authoritarian mobocracy? There's no such thing
- wrong, it is what keeps the establishment in power, the mob that desires for its own short term benefit by discarding principles of good government, of the rule of law, of process.
Perhaps you're referring to an Ochlocracy
- wrong, the mob does not scare the power establishment, the power establishment feeds off of the ignorance of the mob. It's a cycle, the power establishment uses propaganda to promote ignorance, class envy, jealousy, the mob filled with ignorance, class hate, jealousy keeps the establishment in power with the express purpose of using tyranny of the Mafia government against the currently hated minority (today that would be 'the rich', anybody richer than the average mob member).
Socialism is an economic system mixing to varying degrees private enterprise and direct public investment
- irrelevant, socialism is a subset of collectivism, which justifies its authority by promising a skewed version
Department of Homeland Security, otherwise known as Schutzstaffel or SS for short.
I don't believe a word of the NSA traitors (that's what they are - traitors to the Constitution, thus traitors to the Republic).
I think they are as strong as ever and their powers are growing, that's because while before Snowden they just pretended that they were an actual legal institution, now the courts will proclaim them to be legal! The system is corrupt completely and irreversibly, it will have to be replaced to be made workable again.
The problem is not NSA, the problem is the government that no longer follows the rule of law (the Constitution, the process) the government doesn't have a process anymore, it's based on mobocracy keeping it in power, it's based on propaganda, it's based on cult of personalities, it's based on class warfare talk and thus propaganda and it's based on ability to extort money from the RULED. The problem is that the government is absolutely illegitimate, it is now a system or rulers, the mob and the rest of those who are ruled.
Was it worth fighting against a Constitutional monarchy to end up with an authoritarian mobocracy/socialism/fascism/cronyism/Mafia?
(An exception is astronomy, where amateurs continue to play important roles. Of course, astronomy doesn't involve chemicals or other (currently) 'scary stuff.') Can amateur science make a come-back? Or are the legal obsicles too entrenched?"
- a real 'obsicle' maybe scarier than the 'scary stuff' mentioned in the fucking summary. How about we start with amateur literacy and go from there?
But this has nothing to do with culture, these people are subsidised not for any reasons of 'culture', they are subsidised because that's just one way to steal money from some for your own benefit. If you are a politician, stealing money from a hated minority (the productive class of people, often known as "the rich") is a very cheap political manoeuvre. Why not do it, there is no pain for the politician - only gain. He passes a law to steal money from some minority to subsidise some type of real or perceived majority. It's political expedience, there are no cultural reasons behind it.
The correct response to "everybody subsidising their nonsensical culture" is not to play that game, the game of theft and shooting your own economy in the feet. That's not what politicians do, because they are not shooting their own feet in this process, they are shooting the feet of the rest of the society by creating more laws, stealing, redistributing, misallocating resources.
The difference of-course is that people are not forced to shop at Meyer's, there is no government program that will penalise you if you don't shop there, there is no gov't program that prevents actual competition in on-line retail (well, there are a bunch, but at least it's not illegal to offer most products at whatever prices).
The other difference is that people actually are shopping online voluntarily, nobody forces them, they see it as a benefit and they are not asking for subsidies, they are paying the online prices that are set by private entities.
The last difference is that Australian Prime Minister didn't come out and didn't tell everybody: if you like your other online stores, you can keep shopping there. If you like the products you choose to buy in other online retailers, you are free shopping there. Otherwise here is the best thing since they invented sliced bread: the Meyer's online store.
No, none of that happened. Do, compare the 2 once more.
Do you know how many times USA judges passed anti-Constitutional rulings? It's impossible to count, it's overwhelming. The system is completely corrupt, judges are not representing the Republic, they are not protecting the Constitution, which is their job. They are representing and protecting the power that is in place, that's all it is and it is part of the real problem - destruction of good self governance, destruction of the rule of law, installation of the rule of men.
Rule of law is not just a phrase, it has a meaning, it's supposed to provide an expected set out outcomes to the questions regardless of who poses the questions, regardless of who stands to benefit, regardless of who is in power. Rule of law is what makes a growing economy possible by providing a framework that is understood and hopefully is very stable and it is supposed to prevent any group of people to get control over any other group of people. It's supposed to protect the individual from the collective, from the mob, from the government. Instead what passes for the rule of law today is whatever is politically expedient and convenient for the establishment and those in power.
Let this Neural Net watch Matrix a few times, then turn on the sound and hear it say: "I know Kung Fu".
You better explain to me who is paying their bills? They have employees, right? They are renting space somewhere, correct? They have servers running, so they bought those, isn't it so? How about energy and support and maintenance of those servers?
So you better try and find an explanation how can a business live without making money and if the bills so far were paid by investors, then why are you surprised that investors want to see a return?
One of these days I will be next to somebody who will not be an AC and who will confuse Javascript with Java and that person will be very sure of himself that what comes out of his mouth makes any kind of sense. It will be a fine day to murder that person right on the spot. I will truly and thoroughly enjoy it.
What USA needs is more understanding of economics, understanding that you have to produce to consum, understanding that free people are able to produce because they are free. Free from the thugbooted collectivists, free from being slaves of the mob. Taxes are important to pay for a functioning govt but what makes a functioning govt? A functioning govt is one that protects individual freedoms of people, doesn't try to rule them, to own them. Income taxes are ownership of people, they must be outlawed as a form of slavery. Govt has no role in business in money in welfare in empire building.
The ignorance permeating through commebts on this forum is clear and overwhelming, there is no way to fix it, for many here their ignorance is their entire way of life, their ideology is based on massive amount of economic ignorance, nothing will fix it. Their ignorance is painful to see, to read its comments on these pages.
The poverty that is coming is poverty based on ecojomic ignorance, based on collectivism, politics of envy and stupidity. Nothing will fix it. I think now that ignorance deserves poverty, pain and suffering because it is willful in our age of abundance of information.
What does 'deserve' have to do with it? The prices for housing are going up, the Fed is on the mission to push them there. The tech workers are better paid and their companies can afford to hire private buses? The rest of the economy is decimated by the Fed and by regulations and taxes. It has nothing to do with deserving, it has to do with being able to afford someyhing, but I think that those protesters do not deserve a working economy, that is California, they are collectivists, they vote for socialists and when the economy suffers because of collectivism and destruction of individual freedoms, they should reap what they have sown.
Mariko Drew and Anabelle Bolanos had turned out with Our Mission No Eviction. Drew, who described herself as a longtime resident, said the bus was âoea symbol of the privatization and increasing separation between the poor and the rich.â Bolanos chimed in, âoeItâ(TM)s a constant reminder of how ⦠our mayor and our local government has sold us out. [Mayor] Ed Lee is letting money make decisions.â
- typical collectivist scum.
Privatization = capitalism (private ownership and operation of property.) It is done when there are efficiencies to be gained and the market rewards it with more profits. Collectivist scum disagrees, it wants to steal and redistribute. It votes to steal and if voting is not enough it protests and vsndalises private property (breaking bus windows). I dont see anything even remotely deserving a good economy, i see scum deserving every consequence of its scummy ideology.