Be selective, identify the key areas, where the most business logic is happening and centre around it. Set up a wiki, have a main page describing the application's purpose, then branch from that and describe the areas (files, components, resources) that take care of major functionality, not 'how' it's done but mainly 'why' it is done.
Don't forget to fill the new information into your wiki and eventually you should be able to create a map from a structured wiki document to your 'Spaghetti' application.
It doesn't really matter actually if the code itself is convoluted if you can map a maintained, structured document to your code, where the key pieces of functionality are described.
If you do this, eventually it wouldn't matter that the code itself is awful, because if the code does the job, then it can be awful but still an important resource, a piece of capital. If it works and gives proper results, does what it is supposed to do, then it's good code (even if it is ugly and badly structured). Document it with wiki and have pointers and explanations in your documentation.
Yeah, political and economic facts are being manipulated constantly for the benefit of the ruling class. Take the current unemployment statistics in USA, they are obviously manipulated. The number of people who are discouraged from looking for work, number of people who are underemployed, number of people who switched from EI to disability (shouldn't you be disabled to get that benefit, obviously people on it are not disabled, thei EI expired and after 2 years on it they just want to continue and are accommodated by the system.)
The GDP is a joke, it's near 70% of consumption spending, how is that production at all? Those goods are made elsewhere, but the sales count toward 'product' (gross domestic product, not gross domestic consumption, or is it?)
The inflation is clearly manipulated too, the latest numbers are what, 7/10th of 1% for the quarter? That's ridiculous, the real inflation rate is over 11% and maybe close to 15%. But who is counting what the real inflation rate is, the government is constantly changing how the inflation rate is calculated, hedonics and adjustments and reverse engineering, to accommodate the Fed and the Treasury and the equity and housing markets.
Who in their right mind would lend money to the government at 2% for 30 years? You really have to believe that the government is so much stronger than the free market and will stay stronger for another 3 decades and will force interest rates down.
The taxes are another huge lie, never mind the inflation tax.
The current income and corporate taxes in USA are highest they have ever been, but people can point at marginal rates 50 years ago and say: see those 94% tax rates, those were high and economy was good, so clearly it's the tax rate that makes the economy great!
Wow, one has to be really desperate to come up with such nonsense. People are avoiding taxes at much lower rates, yet somebody wants people to believe that ANYBODY was paying 94% rate? People were paying much lower taxes when the rates were much higher, entire industries were created to avoid taxes.
Of-course the real economic growth took place before any income taxes existed, any corporate taxes, any payroll taxes, before 1913 none of those existed and the government was insignificant, the economy was growing, USA was major exporter and largest creditor nation.
Manufacturing - this is what makes the economy. Consumption is a trivial consequence of production, yet the government would have you believe that you can just print or borrow or tax money (and tax money from those who actually produce) and redistribute money to people who didn't work for it and they would buy products and that's what grows the economy! Nonsense on top of nonsense.
The economy only has as much goods as is manufactured, created, produced. More goods cannot be bought and any amount of money that is printed only pushes prices up for the existing goods.
The taxes that are taken from the productivity of people, so income, payroll, corporate, death taxes, these are taxes that reduce economic activity, because that's money extracted from successful business activity.
There are some people on top who will not pay taxes regardless of the rates.
There are people on the bottom who get tax returns and they don't pay taxes.
But there are people somewhere in between these two extremes, that actually end up paying all these rates, many of them paying most of their taxes in marginal rates. Taxing somebody 35% federal, 5-8% State, 2.9% Medicare is destructive, it reduces the economic activity it prevents money from being reinvested in business, prevents growth, prevents better products at cheaper prices, prevents jobs from being created.
Of-course then the 35% federal death tax and up to 12% State death tax, what does that do? Puts the tax burden over 90%, given that the business has to be liquidated at firesale prices (to Warren Buffet, who loves to buy these undervalued businesses during the death tax auctions), this maybe puts the taxe
So this is about managing a network of computers, but how is that about a language? It is about a toolset, controlling networked nodes, not about a compiling some instruction set from a higher level language, I mean what would it run on?
It's about network topology, it's about load balancers, switches, cables, UPSs, NAS, tape drives:)
They are going to end up defining a tool that will read some XML file that will have the network topology in it (which is about as good as the next broken switch or even a network cable that is moved from one interface to another on the same appliance).
so will it be something like a huge XML file with visual arrows and boxes GUI, more of a document than anything else, that will be out of date.
Now, if there is a robot that can be programmed to maintain everything, and it runs around and does things for you, then you can program the robot to configure and reconfigure the network according to the diagram.
Isn't that a weird question? Why does it have to be a 'revolution'? If OpenGL is so much better than DirectX/Direct3D, then wouldn't this provide enough incentives for the developers of games and other software to go the OpenGL route, because their DirectX/Direct3D counterparts will be slower (and I assume people like software to work faster, hopefully that's a valid assumption).
It's going to be evolution, not a revolution, because if OpenGL is faster by 20% and this matters to the users, then it will win.
Do you believe that businessmen hire people out of feeling generous?
Do you think that businessmen build products out of feeling generous?
--
So you think that 'spreading the wealth' under the free market scenario is done out of generosity? Who told you that?
Why do you think people run their businesses, to be generous? Do you think that by building the best product and service that businessmen can given all the competition the business is not providing the society with the wealth?
If the customers are paying for the product and service enough to make some profits for a businessmen, you don't think they are getting enough value of the purchase to be willing to participate in that exchange?
You can't be reasoned with, I am not telling you to apologise for a 'wrong guess', so if you can't understand right now where you are wrong in that statement, then you cannot be reasoned with and my statement about the state of the public 'education' system you are obviously a product of is correct.
I scanned your comment, I don't see an apology for that last statement, which I proved to be 100% wrong. I'll read your comment and reply to it once I see another comment that shows me that you can be reasoned with, otherwise never mind.
Knowledge, knowledge is the most valuable commodity in the universe, far moreso than profit - especially monetary profit.
- contradiction in the very first sentence.
Value can be measured in the real world, it's not that hard, either people want it and are willing to SPEND on it, and thus you can have profit and you can measure efficiency or people don't want it and then there is NO VALUE except for what is in your head.
Now, there are cases where the value is not immediately obvious, so something can be known for a while without the economy gaining anything, and all of a sudden there is some new information that comes out and makes this knowledge valuable, because the economy decides that whatever this knowledge provides can be used.
If you are not seeing this, then all you are talking about is mental masturbation, sure sure, you can have your mental masturbation, you can have your mental orgasm even because you believe that you have some knowledge that wasn't there previously, but if this knowledge never translates into anything that the economy actually is willing to pay for with profits, then its purely irrelevant, it was no more relevant than any other form of entertainment.
So you are looking for entertainment at the expense of the economy, or are you? Let's say there are 5 individuals in the world who are capable of fully appreciating some piece of information, something very obscure, absolutely impossible to use in any practical manner for another 10 trillion years (so useless for all practical purposes). Lets say it took 150 million USD to figure this out.
You know what that is? Theft for the purposes of entertainment. It's legal, it's backed by the threat of violence of government against individuals and it wastes valuable scarce resources, because it spent 150 million USD on something that nobody will ever able to use and it provides NOTHING to anybody who trades with those 5 individuals (and whoever else that was employed with that money).
So those 5 (and more) individuals are on welfare. Every fish they eat, every loaf of bread, every drink of clean water or booze, whatever they do, they never created anything of any value to anybody that would provide an equitable exchange between them and the people who paid for their entertainment, and it's not even entertainment that can be enjoyed by the masses, like a book or a movie or a play or a poem. ----
Now, there are other situations - some knowledge can be eventually used, let's say 50 years from the moment of understanding. So government steals productivity, thus savings, from people so that 50 years from then some other people can enjoy something derived from that knowledge. Well, at least it's not a fully worthless enterprise.
But how necessary is it to have government stealing money from the private sector to fund research into such things, what is the efficiency of this model?
My argument is that the basic science is done in the private sector as long as there is no government stealing money from the private sector, and it's done as a side effect of people searching for profit.
Before 1913 there were no income taxes, there were no corporate taxes, there were no payroll taxes, there were no capital gains taxes, no taxes on dividends, no taxes on rent, no taxes on PRODUCTIVITY. Yet it was at the time that the industry truly moved forward and not only allowed, but created the incentives for the private education to take off and thus created the environment for institutions that would be concerning themselves with education in the first place.
It is the institutions that are concerned with education that allow the environment to develop that is necessary to do scientific research, including basic sciences.
You are completely wrong, putting the cart ahead of a horse, thinking that the education and science came before the free market capitalist looking for profit.
Before industrialisation over 90% of population were basically subsistence
that doesn't mean that science has to be done with a profit motive
- no? So tell me then, what is the motivation if it is not for profit? So how do you measure scientific output, how do you figure what scientific paths to pursue?
Do you understand why science developed mostly starting with the industrial revolution, which was the consequence of free market capitalism? Science doesn't exist in the vacuum, it never did. Without a strong economic base science remains the pursuit of lone individuals, the public is much less inclined to pay for pursuits of lone individuals than you think, I know I wouldn't in a non-industrial economy want any of my money to go towards anybody's idea of what 'science' is or what it may be.
Why do you think science that exists today follows a certain path, how about all that funding, should it be thrown at all possible scenarios that search for scientific answers can take?
Let's simplify, imagine this: there is no government spending on ANYTHING except science and everybody who works in the private sector is forced to pay taxes to support this structure and all scientific pursuits are nearly equally seen as justified, all pursuits are funded, well, maybe the funding depends on popularity of a field and maybe it depends on a number of 'scientific' papers that are published.
If you don't immediately see a problem with this even most simplified scenario, if you don't understand that in this case science is simply one way to redistribute wealth from those who create, to those who do not want to create things people need, but instead they want to pursue their own gratification, this becomes a system of welfare with one department.
Eventually everybody who is on welfare today, anybody receiving food stamps, anybody receiving EI, anybody receiving disability, military and other gov't contracts under the current system, they are all known as 'scientists' in that imaginary situation.
Everybody is churning out papers, there is a huge market for writing scientifically sounding papers, the people who are paying for this with their productivity are being called 'the rich', who need to do more of their 'fair share'.
Everything that government steals money for and distributes to is a convenient and safe place for people who do not want to work, who are too lazy or afraid to go steal themselves and they prefer a situation where threat of government violence would do it for them.
---
Science does not live in vacuum, it didn't exist as a real process before industrial revolution for a reason - it wasn't providing almost anything of any value to 99% of people on this planet. The reason science is funded is because its output CAN be used to make profit, and profit is the measure stick by which the scarce resources are allocated, PROFIT IS MEASURE OF EFFICIENCY.
If there is no profit motive, there is no way to measure efficiency and in government there is no reason to hunt for efficiency in the first place.
You are going to say: efficiency is not important, well then you are going to crash the economy, that's what destroys it. Inefficient allocation of scarce resources because of government meddling - regulations, taxes, inflation. Inefficient allocation of credit because of government meddling - fake money that destroys credit, fake interest rates (price on money).
Money is not pieces of paper, if you think it is, then ask yourself a question: what would you do with a ton of money on an island without any food?
Money is the difference between production and consumption, it's created by the businessmen, by productivity of business. It's the difference between overproduction and under-consumption. Catch 10 fish, eat 1 and now you have 9 fish that you saved, that's your money, you can trade with it for other things that other people provide. Paper or other forms of currency is just a more convenient way to store the capital, to exchange and to do accounting. That's why gold is real money and fia
The larger and wealthier they get, the more secure and generous giant international corporations will feel
- can you provide your most honest answer to this: do you truly think that whatever you understand under the formula 'trickle down economics' must include corporations 'feeling generous'?
What I mean is this: do you think that 'spreading the wealth' is a consequence of somebody feeling generous?
Just that question, can you give an answer to it, I am unable to get a straight answer on this question from anybody who promotes your type of views.
Makes him pretty hypocritical, doesn't it? The fact is that all science is done with money that is created in the 'for-profit' market, in the private sector. So his point is - take their money, but don't try and do something that can generate a return on that money.
How about then do not take their money?
--
All science is done as a spin off from successful, wealthy, for profit economies.
So that shows another reason why you are not very smart. SCOTUS is in on the deal, that's why they still pass laws as supposedly Constitutional based on very narrow and specific interpretation, while they are supposed to be looking at the spirit of what the law is intended to do and then based on the past performances of the government abuse of SCOTUS narrow decisions that are generalised to grab power that the government isn't supposed to have, and SCOTUS should deny the government all new laws. They are supposed to protect the Constitution, it's their mandate. Not to protect the power, not the government, not Senate, not Congress, not POTUS and not even the people, SCOTUS is there to protect one thing: the Constitution, and it is failing miserably and not because they are not smart enough for the job, they are doing it to be popular with the government, media and the crowd.
Taking this to SCOTUS is a worthless idea from every perspective.
Oh, you are so full of nonsense. As to patents - yeah, patents and copyrights must be abolished, governments shouldn't be creating artificial barriers to entry based on any such privileges, protecting people's business models.
Low low prices is what people need, as to quality, again, it is up to the people in the free market to share this information about doctors and treatments, and nothing is easier in the age of the Internet, that's what people do - they look at ratings on sites they trust. It works for movies, boos, phones, computers, cars, houses, boats, airplanes, hotels, restaurants and even hospitals, teachers and doctors today, so it is no longer a problem - sharing of information. The problem is you, you are completely braindead.
Lasik eye surgery has much FEWER regulations, dumb ass, the prices are not going up, the veterinarian care is quick, cheap and superb, and it's due to the mostly free market in health care and insurance when it comes to pets.
I suggest you test out that theory. Call up the IRS and tell them all about your plan to not pay. See how it works out.
- clearly your brain is at 0%, your understanding is limited by lack of brain capacity.
Calling IRS and telling them you won't pay, etc., same thing as calling Mafia that is racketeering you and saying you wont pay.
I am not arguing that you will have problems with IRS, that's the entire point, I am arguing that what IRS is doing is against the Constitution, it is against what the SCOTUS ruled was legal based on the 16th amendment.
So because one case slips through we throw out the whole system?
- yeah, you have already threw the hole system based on a small percentage of people who had problems, you created this monstrosity of a system that is falling apart under its own weight and is taking the economy with it, you have done it as a response to a small number of cases where people had problems given a much freer market. Of-course they had other forms of solutions then, there was actual charity, doctors were working pro bono, this was the norm.
As opposed to your system, were we let everyone do this and chalk up all the deaths to the hand of the free market.
- yeah, bullshit. Under the free market the prices were falling, choices were growing, so was quality. Choices were growing and quality was growing in the health care the way the choices and quality are increasing in mobile phones today.
The relatively free market for lasik eye surgery, and definitely much freer market for veterinary care for pets shows that the free market is much more efficient, the prices are falling or at least not going up at all, which given the insane inflation caused by gov't money printing is equivalent to falling prices if the money was stable.
The market in action? That is your fucking response to people being maimed? You think it is ok that some people get killed so you can save a couple bucks on cosmetic surgery?
- obviously.
I see that your government did a fine job preventing this from happening. Oh wait, it did not. What was your retarded argument again, that government does a better job protecting people from this than the free market? How would you know, chump, you never tried free market in health care, you only had it more or less in mobile phones and computer hardware.
Again, you can argue against your own straw figurines or you can follow the link, read about the income taxes in it.
The SCOTUS decided on more than one occasion that the 16th amendment means the following: it's not the people, who are allowed to be taxed, it's income that can be taxed ONLY if it can be separated from its source, so it cannot be tied to a person directly, because all direct taxes must be apportioned, (the 16th amendment doesn't change the fact that all direct taxes must be apportioned).
The SCOTUS explained that the way to separate the source from income is through a corporate balance sheet! There so called 'income' tax is only legal when it applies to a balance sheet, what is allowed to be taxed is the difference between revenues and expenses, commonly known as PROFIT.
The income tax, by the SCOTUS, is only legal if it is actually narrowly applied as a tax on profits. (Incidentally individuals do not have profits, they have incomes, corporations have profits).
The government is collecting the personal income taxes illegally, it widened the narrow ruling of the SCOTUS unilaterally.
Going to a motel to get cement and glue injected in your body is not the smartest of moves, and the society shouldn't face economic destruction and individuals shouldn't have their freedoms stolen just because somebody doesn't care to check where they are going, who they are allowing to 'operate' on them.
Besides, if the FDA and other types of medical licensing wasn't required, if all these artificial barriers to entry weren't set up, there would have been more choice in the market for all these procedures as well, so prices would fall.
Sure, sure, some people would suffer. Then the names and the details would become known and anybody with half a brain cell doing a research for their own procedure would not choose to go to a motel to do cement injections.
Also this is clearly a case of fraud and bodily harm, which means it's a criminal matter.
yeah, except the 'very specific' cases in the hands of the government become general powers, and who and what army is going to stop the government from taking a decision of a court that is based on a very limited and specific set of circumstances and using it to cover all general cases?
That's the reason the personal income taxes are collected by the IRS. Personal income taxes are illegal and are collected illegally, the court cases regarding income taxes ruled that the 16th amendment only allows the government to collect taxes from corporate profits, not from anything remotely similar to 'personal income', you can see the journal entry that I am linking to in my sig to get more information on it.
This is expansion of government, every new area and endeavour that governments ends up regulating stops progress, innovation is stifled, monopolies are created, choices are diminished and prices are raised. It is never the opposite, innovation is never encouraged by more regulations, prices never fall by more regulations, and if they are forced down by regulations in one place, then the society ends up paying through other means (like the fake insurances that governments issues, all types of loan guarantees and all types of other moral hazards, like limitation of liability, and eventual and inevitable bail outs).
People are not microbiologists, but they should be the ones deciding based on research of the market whether to buy a product, to use a service, etc., especially today, when the information is so much easier to access.
Government does not have to rate anything, by giving this power to the government you end up with terrible consequences of destruction of the market, monopolisation, huge price spikes, reduction of choices.
This is not about anarchy either, anarchy is the false choice. Bigger government is not the answer to the problem of business regulations, the free market is the answer. Government is the answer to the other question - how do politicians get more power over you, so they can sell this power to the highest and the most connected bidder?
Happy to be on the opposite side of your 'everyone'.
It's disturbing that the government has so much power and is entrenched in the minds of the people that they are happy to witness yet another powergrab and cheer for it.
Well, if they are using software similar to what retailers use to 'predict purchasing trends', then all they are looking at is statistics of past crimes, looking at graphs that plot locations, seasons, times, types of crime against a database of past criminals, their ages, past crimes committed, other personal info, but how are they going to account for all other metrics? What about advertising? Whatever is advertised in the media at the time will have more sales. Also what about people without criminal records, are they looking at everybody?
Obviously they are not looking at every possible home invasion, every possible burglary, every possible theft and every possible murder. They probably have some prioritised locations and people they are interested in, banks, shipping lanes, famous people, who are they looking to protect?
Are they excluding entire classes of people from their software, like are all of the politicians excluded? All the people connected to the ruling class? Because if they want to prevent REAL crimes, mass murders, theft on huge scale, global scale even, they wouldn't have to go too far, they just have to look at the people in power, running the place.
Slashdot Mirror
Be selective, identify the key areas, where the most business logic is happening and centre around it. Set up a wiki, have a main page describing the application's purpose, then branch from that and describe the areas (files, components, resources) that take care of major functionality, not 'how' it's done but mainly 'why' it is done.
Don't forget to fill the new information into your wiki and eventually you should be able to create a map from a structured wiki document to your 'Spaghetti' application.
It doesn't really matter actually if the code itself is convoluted if you can map a maintained, structured document to your code, where the key pieces of functionality are described.
If you do this, eventually it wouldn't matter that the code itself is awful, because if the code does the job, then it can be awful but still an important resource, a piece of capital. If it works and gives proper results, does what it is supposed to do, then it's good code (even if it is ugly and badly structured). Document it with wiki and have pointers and explanations in your documentation.
Yeah, political and economic facts are being manipulated constantly for the benefit of the ruling class. Take the current unemployment statistics in USA, they are obviously manipulated. The number of people who are discouraged from looking for work, number of people who are underemployed, number of people who switched from EI to disability (shouldn't you be disabled to get that benefit, obviously people on it are not disabled, thei EI expired and after 2 years on it they just want to continue and are accommodated by the system.)
The GDP is a joke, it's near 70% of consumption spending, how is that production at all? Those goods are made elsewhere, but the sales count toward 'product' (gross domestic product, not gross domestic consumption, or is it?)
The inflation is clearly manipulated too, the latest numbers are what, 7/10th of 1% for the quarter? That's ridiculous, the real inflation rate is over 11% and maybe close to 15%. But who is counting what the real inflation rate is, the government is constantly changing how the inflation rate is calculated, hedonics and adjustments and reverse engineering, to accommodate the Fed and the Treasury and the equity and housing markets.
Who in their right mind would lend money to the government at 2% for 30 years? You really have to believe that the government is so much stronger than the free market and will stay stronger for another 3 decades and will force interest rates down.
The taxes are another huge lie, never mind the inflation tax.
The current income and corporate taxes in USA are highest they have ever been, but people can point at marginal rates 50 years ago and say: see those 94% tax rates, those were high and economy was good, so clearly it's the tax rate that makes the economy great!
Wow, one has to be really desperate to come up with such nonsense. People are avoiding taxes at much lower rates, yet somebody wants people to believe that ANYBODY was paying 94% rate? People were paying much lower taxes when the rates were much higher, entire industries were created to avoid taxes.
Of-course the real economic growth took place before any income taxes existed, any corporate taxes, any payroll taxes, before 1913 none of those existed and the government was insignificant, the economy was growing, USA was major exporter and largest creditor nation.
Manufacturing - this is what makes the economy. Consumption is a trivial consequence of production, yet the government would have you believe that you can just print or borrow or tax money (and tax money from those who actually produce) and redistribute money to people who didn't work for it and they would buy products and that's what grows the economy! Nonsense on top of nonsense.
The economy only has as much goods as is manufactured, created, produced. More goods cannot be bought and any amount of money that is printed only pushes prices up for the existing goods.
The taxes that are taken from the productivity of people, so income, payroll, corporate, death taxes, these are taxes that reduce economic activity, because that's money extracted from successful business activity.
There are some people on top who will not pay taxes regardless of the rates.
There are people on the bottom who get tax returns and they don't pay taxes.
But there are people somewhere in between these two extremes, that actually end up paying all these rates, many of them paying most of their taxes in marginal rates. Taxing somebody 35% federal, 5-8% State, 2.9% Medicare is destructive, it reduces the economic activity it prevents money from being reinvested in business, prevents growth, prevents better products at cheaper prices, prevents jobs from being created.
Of-course then the 35% federal death tax and up to 12% State death tax, what does that do? Puts the tax burden over 90%, given that the business has to be liquidated at firesale prices (to Warren Buffet, who loves to buy these undervalued businesses during the death tax auctions), this maybe puts the taxe
So this is about managing a network of computers, but how is that about a language? It is about a toolset, controlling networked nodes, not about a compiling some instruction set from a higher level language, I mean what would it run on?
It's about network topology, it's about load balancers, switches, cables, UPSs, NAS, tape drives :)
They are going to end up defining a tool that will read some XML file that will have the network topology in it (which is about as good as the next broken switch or even a network cable that is moved from one interface to another on the same appliance).
so will it be something like a huge XML file with visual arrows and boxes GUI, more of a document than anything else, that will be out of date.
Now, if there is a robot that can be programmed to maintain everything, and it runs around and does things for you, then you can program the robot to configure and reconfigure the network according to the diagram.
Isn't that a weird question? Why does it have to be a 'revolution'? If OpenGL is so much better than DirectX/Direct3D, then wouldn't this provide enough incentives for the developers of games and other software to go the OpenGL route, because their DirectX/Direct3D counterparts will be slower (and I assume people like software to work faster, hopefully that's a valid assumption).
It's going to be evolution, not a revolution, because if OpenGL is faster by 20% and this matters to the users, then it will win.
Do you believe that businessmen hire people out of feeling generous?
Do you think that businessmen build products out of feeling generous?
--
So you think that 'spreading the wealth' under the free market scenario is done out of generosity? Who told you that?
Why do you think people run their businesses, to be generous? Do you think that by building the best product and service that businessmen can given all the competition the business is not providing the society with the wealth?
If the customers are paying for the product and service enough to make some profits for a businessmen, you don't think they are getting enough value of the purchase to be willing to participate in that exchange?
--
Your ideas, who gave them to you?
You can't be reasoned with, I am not telling you to apologise for a 'wrong guess', so if you can't understand right now where you are wrong in that statement, then you cannot be reasoned with and my statement about the state of the public 'education' system you are obviously a product of is correct.
I scanned your comment, I don't see an apology for that last statement, which I proved to be 100% wrong. I'll read your comment and reply to it once I see another comment that shows me that you can be reasoned with, otherwise never mind.
Knowledge, knowledge is the most valuable commodity in the universe, far moreso than profit - especially monetary profit.
- contradiction in the very first sentence.
Value can be measured in the real world, it's not that hard, either people want it and are willing to SPEND on it, and thus you can have profit and you can measure efficiency or people don't want it and then there is NO VALUE except for what is in your head.
Now, there are cases where the value is not immediately obvious, so something can be known for a while without the economy gaining anything, and all of a sudden there is some new information that comes out and makes this knowledge valuable, because the economy decides that whatever this knowledge provides can be used.
If you are not seeing this, then all you are talking about is mental masturbation, sure sure, you can have your mental masturbation, you can have your mental orgasm even because you believe that you have some knowledge that wasn't there previously, but if this knowledge never translates into anything that the economy actually is willing to pay for with profits, then its purely irrelevant, it was no more relevant than any other form of entertainment.
So you are looking for entertainment at the expense of the economy, or are you? Let's say there are 5 individuals in the world who are capable of fully appreciating some piece of information, something very obscure, absolutely impossible to use in any practical manner for another 10 trillion years (so useless for all practical purposes). Lets say it took 150 million USD to figure this out.
You know what that is? Theft for the purposes of entertainment. It's legal, it's backed by the threat of violence of government against individuals and it wastes valuable scarce resources, because it spent 150 million USD on something that nobody will ever able to use and it provides NOTHING to anybody who trades with those 5 individuals (and whoever else that was employed with that money).
So those 5 (and more) individuals are on welfare. Every fish they eat, every loaf of bread, every drink of clean water or booze, whatever they do, they never created anything of any value to anybody that would provide an equitable exchange between them and the people who paid for their entertainment, and it's not even entertainment that can be enjoyed by the masses, like a book or a movie or a play or a poem.
----
Now, there are other situations - some knowledge can be eventually used, let's say 50 years from the moment of understanding. So government steals productivity, thus savings, from people so that 50 years from then some other people can enjoy something derived from that knowledge. Well, at least it's not a fully worthless enterprise.
But how necessary is it to have government stealing money from the private sector to fund research into such things, what is the efficiency of this model?
My argument is that the basic science is done in the private sector as long as there is no government stealing money from the private sector, and it's done as a side effect of people searching for profit.
Before 1913 there were no income taxes, there were no corporate taxes, there were no payroll taxes, there were no capital gains taxes, no taxes on dividends, no taxes on rent, no taxes on PRODUCTIVITY. Yet it was at the time that the industry truly moved forward and not only allowed, but created the incentives for the private education to take off and thus created the environment for institutions that would be concerning themselves with education in the first place.
It is the institutions that are concerned with education that allow the environment to develop that is necessary to do scientific research, including basic sciences.
You are completely wrong, putting the cart ahead of a horse, thinking that the education and science came before the free market capitalist looking for profit.
Before industrialisation over 90% of population were basically subsistence
that doesn't mean that science has to be done with a profit motive
- no? So tell me then, what is the motivation if it is not for profit? So how do you measure scientific output, how do you figure what scientific paths to pursue?
Do you understand why science developed mostly starting with the industrial revolution, which was the consequence of free market capitalism? Science doesn't exist in the vacuum, it never did. Without a strong economic base science remains the pursuit of lone individuals, the public is much less inclined to pay for pursuits of lone individuals than you think, I know I wouldn't in a non-industrial economy want any of my money to go towards anybody's idea of what 'science' is or what it may be.
Why do you think science that exists today follows a certain path, how about all that funding, should it be thrown at all possible scenarios that search for scientific answers can take?
Let's simplify, imagine this: there is no government spending on ANYTHING except science and everybody who works in the private sector is forced to pay taxes to support this structure and all scientific pursuits are nearly equally seen as justified, all pursuits are funded, well, maybe the funding depends on popularity of a field and maybe it depends on a number of 'scientific' papers that are published.
If you don't immediately see a problem with this even most simplified scenario, if you don't understand that in this case science is simply one way to redistribute wealth from those who create, to those who do not want to create things people need, but instead they want to pursue their own gratification, this becomes a system of welfare with one department.
Eventually everybody who is on welfare today, anybody receiving food stamps, anybody receiving EI, anybody receiving disability, military and other gov't contracts under the current system, they are all known as 'scientists' in that imaginary situation.
Everybody is churning out papers, there is a huge market for writing scientifically sounding papers, the people who are paying for this with their productivity are being called 'the rich', who need to do more of their 'fair share'.
Everything that government steals money for and distributes to is a convenient and safe place for people who do not want to work, who are too lazy or afraid to go steal themselves and they prefer a situation where threat of government violence would do it for them.
---
Science does not live in vacuum, it didn't exist as a real process before industrial revolution for a reason - it wasn't providing almost anything of any value to 99% of people on this planet. The reason science is funded is because its output CAN be used to make profit, and profit is the measure stick by which the scarce resources are allocated, PROFIT IS MEASURE OF EFFICIENCY.
If there is no profit motive, there is no way to measure efficiency and in government there is no reason to hunt for efficiency in the first place.
You are going to say: efficiency is not important, well then you are going to crash the economy, that's what destroys it. Inefficient allocation of scarce resources because of government meddling - regulations, taxes, inflation. Inefficient allocation of credit because of government meddling - fake money that destroys credit, fake interest rates (price on money).
Money is not pieces of paper, if you think it is, then ask yourself a question: what would you do with a ton of money on an island without any food?
Money is the difference between production and consumption, it's created by the businessmen, by productivity of business. It's the difference between overproduction and under-consumption. Catch 10 fish, eat 1 and now you have 9 fish that you saved, that's your money, you can trade with it for other things that other people provide. Paper or other forms of currency is just a more convenient way to store the capital, to exchange and to do accounting. That's why gold is real money and fia
The larger and wealthier they get, the more secure and generous giant international corporations will feel
- can you provide your most honest answer to this: do you truly think that whatever you understand under the formula 'trickle down economics' must include corporations 'feeling generous'?
What I mean is this: do you think that 'spreading the wealth' is a consequence of somebody feeling generous?
Just that question, can you give an answer to it, I am unable to get a straight answer on this question from anybody who promotes your type of views.
Makes him pretty hypocritical, doesn't it? The fact is that all science is done with money that is created in the 'for-profit' market, in the private sector. So his point is - take their money, but don't try and do something that can generate a return on that money.
How about then do not take their money?
--
All science is done as a spin off from successful, wealthy, for profit economies.
Romney probably will choose somebody like Condoleezza Rice, she is black and she is a woman, that's probably the best way to go for him at this point.
Not that I give a shit and not that it will matter.
People who care about the future should either write in Ron Paul or just vote for Gary Johnson (he is the Libertarian candidate on the ticket).
So that shows another reason why you are not very smart. SCOTUS is in on the deal, that's why they still pass laws as supposedly Constitutional based on very narrow and specific interpretation, while they are supposed to be looking at the spirit of what the law is intended to do and then based on the past performances of the government abuse of SCOTUS narrow decisions that are generalised to grab power that the government isn't supposed to have, and SCOTUS should deny the government all new laws. They are supposed to protect the Constitution, it's their mandate. Not to protect the power, not the government, not Senate, not Congress, not POTUS and not even the people, SCOTUS is there to protect one thing: the Constitution, and it is failing miserably and not because they are not smart enough for the job, they are doing it to be popular with the government, media and the crowd.
Taking this to SCOTUS is a worthless idea from every perspective.
Oh, you are so full of nonsense. As to patents - yeah, patents and copyrights must be abolished, governments shouldn't be creating artificial barriers to entry based on any such privileges, protecting people's business models.
Low low prices is what people need, as to quality, again, it is up to the people in the free market to share this information about doctors and treatments, and nothing is easier in the age of the Internet, that's what people do - they look at ratings on sites they trust. It works for movies, boos, phones, computers, cars, houses, boats, airplanes, hotels, restaurants and even hospitals, teachers and doctors today, so it is no longer a problem - sharing of information. The problem is you, you are completely braindead.
Lasik eye surgery has much FEWER regulations, dumb ass, the prices are not going up, the veterinarian care is quick, cheap and superb, and it's due to the mostly free market in health care and insurance when it comes to pets.
I suggest you test out that theory. Call up the IRS and tell them all about your plan to not pay. See how it works out.
- clearly your brain is at 0%, your understanding is limited by lack of brain capacity.
Calling IRS and telling them you won't pay, etc., same thing as calling Mafia that is racketeering you and saying you wont pay.
I am not arguing that you will have problems with IRS, that's the entire point, I am arguing that what IRS is doing is against the Constitution, it is against what the SCOTUS ruled was legal based on the 16th amendment.
So because one case slips through we throw out the whole system?
- yeah, you have already threw the hole system based on a small percentage of people who had problems, you created this monstrosity of a system that is falling apart under its own weight and is taking the economy with it, you have done it as a response to a small number of cases where people had problems given a much freer market. Of-course they had other forms of solutions then, there was actual charity, doctors were working pro bono, this was the norm.
As opposed to your system, were we let everyone do this and chalk up all the deaths to the hand of the free market.
- yeah, bullshit. Under the free market the prices were falling, choices were growing, so was quality. Choices were growing and quality was growing in the health care the way the choices and quality are increasing in mobile phones today.
The relatively free market for lasik eye surgery, and definitely much freer market for veterinary care for pets shows that the free market is much more efficient, the prices are falling or at least not going up at all, which given the insane inflation caused by gov't money printing is equivalent to falling prices if the money was stable.
You aren't going to be that lucky, instead of a missile, the drone will launch a lawyer.
The market in action? That is your fucking response to people being maimed? You think it is ok that some people get killed so you can save a couple bucks on cosmetic surgery?
- obviously.
I see that your government did a fine job preventing this from happening. Oh wait, it did not. What was your retarded argument again, that government does a better job protecting people from this than the free market? How would you know, chump, you never tried free market in health care, you only had it more or less in mobile phones and computer hardware.
Again, you can argue against your own straw figurines or you can follow the link, read about the income taxes in it.
The SCOTUS decided on more than one occasion that the 16th amendment means the following: it's not the people, who are allowed to be taxed, it's income that can be taxed ONLY if it can be separated from its source, so it cannot be tied to a person directly, because all direct taxes must be apportioned, (the 16th amendment doesn't change the fact that all direct taxes must be apportioned).
The SCOTUS explained that the way to separate the source from income is through a corporate balance sheet! There so called 'income' tax is only legal when it applies to a balance sheet, what is allowed to be taxed is the difference between revenues and expenses, commonly known as PROFIT.
The income tax, by the SCOTUS, is only legal if it is actually narrowly applied as a tax on profits. (Incidentally individuals do not have profits, they have incomes, corporations have profits).
The government is collecting the personal income taxes illegally, it widened the narrow ruling of the SCOTUS unilaterally.
that's market in action, weeding out idiots.
Going to a motel to get cement and glue injected in your body is not the smartest of moves, and the society shouldn't face economic destruction and individuals shouldn't have their freedoms stolen just because somebody doesn't care to check where they are going, who they are allowing to 'operate' on them.
Besides, if the FDA and other types of medical licensing wasn't required, if all these artificial barriers to entry weren't set up, there would have been more choice in the market for all these procedures as well, so prices would fall.
Sure, sure, some people would suffer. Then the names and the details would become known and anybody with half a brain cell doing a research for their own procedure would not choose to go to a motel to do cement injections.
Also this is clearly a case of fraud and bodily harm, which means it's a criminal matter.
yeah, except the 'very specific' cases in the hands of the government become general powers, and who and what army is going to stop the government from taking a decision of a court that is based on a very limited and specific set of circumstances and using it to cover all general cases?
That's the reason the personal income taxes are collected by the IRS. Personal income taxes are illegal and are collected illegally, the court cases regarding income taxes ruled that the 16th amendment only allows the government to collect taxes from corporate profits, not from anything remotely similar to 'personal income', you can see the journal entry that I am linking to in my sig to get more information on it.
The person who was trying to make that argument to the courts in USA has served 3 sentences and is now serving his 4th, it's a 13 year sentence handed out to a 78 y.o. guy, who is now 84, and the judge never allowed his arguments to be heard by the jury, it's not hard to guess why the jury wasn't allowed to listen to the arguments in the case.
This is expansion of government, every new area and endeavour that governments ends up regulating stops progress, innovation is stifled, monopolies are created, choices are diminished and prices are raised. It is never the opposite, innovation is never encouraged by more regulations, prices never fall by more regulations, and if they are forced down by regulations in one place, then the society ends up paying through other means (like the fake insurances that governments issues, all types of loan guarantees and all types of other moral hazards, like limitation of liability, and eventual and inevitable bail outs).
People are not microbiologists, but they should be the ones deciding based on research of the market whether to buy a product, to use a service, etc., especially today, when the information is so much easier to access.
Government does not have to rate anything, by giving this power to the government you end up with terrible consequences of destruction of the market, monopolisation, huge price spikes, reduction of choices.
This is not about anarchy either, anarchy is the false choice. Bigger government is not the answer to the problem of business regulations, the free market is the answer. Government is the answer to the other question - how do politicians get more power over you, so they can sell this power to the highest and the most connected bidder?
Happy to be on the opposite side of your 'everyone'.
It's disturbing that the government has so much power and is entrenched in the minds of the people that they are happy to witness yet another powergrab and cheer for it.
Well, if they are using software similar to what retailers use to 'predict purchasing trends', then all they are looking at is statistics of past crimes, looking at graphs that plot locations, seasons, times, types of crime against a database of past criminals, their ages, past crimes committed, other personal info, but how are they going to account for all other metrics? What about advertising? Whatever is advertised in the media at the time will have more sales. Also what about people without criminal records, are they looking at everybody?
Obviously they are not looking at every possible home invasion, every possible burglary, every possible theft and every possible murder. They probably have some prioritised locations and people they are interested in, banks, shipping lanes, famous people, who are they looking to protect?
Are they excluding entire classes of people from their software, like are all of the politicians excluded? All the people connected to the ruling class? Because if they want to prevent REAL crimes, mass murders, theft on huge scale, global scale even, they wouldn't have to go too far, they just have to look at the people in power, running the place.
Those who can, do.
Those who can't, teach.
Those who can neither do nor teach, rule.