US past civil war and before 1913 was extremely libertarian and it became the country that was able to fund all of this nonsense, including wars and so called social obligations (human freedom modification programs) etc. You are squandering the wealth that was acquired by the country that was libertarian.
I agree with you 100%, you shouldn't pay for anything that is not for you. It works, it only doesn't work in a broken society that doesn't care about freedoms anymore that US became.
Oh, and by the way, you schmuck, USA was that country that you "wish the lot of you would go found" etc.etc. The problem became that morons like you multiply and destroy it by voting for ever more government, which is only happy to become ever more powerful.
I wish there was never any money spent by any government on any programs, ever. Of-course this is loose change, when talking about insignificant amounts spent on anything beyond military and social modification programs, but I still don't want any government doing anything beyond barest minimum of most bare minimums that is so bare, it barely exists. You can write that down.
It's not semantics to say that if phenomena can be observed within our space, then there is no reason to say that this phenomena falls outside of purview of normal astro-physics, but then this grant doesn't make sense.
This can't be right, how can we, "inside" our own universe observe anything else "outside"our universe? Wouldn't anything we observe withing our universe be our universe? "Uni" - one. If there is some sort of a collision between "our" and "foreign" verses, wouldn't they be one verse? This is truly a bunch of bullshit.
If somehow there were multiple "universes" (whatever that would mean), why would they be colliding and what does it mean - colliding, in the sense that, our laws of physics with the gravity and space and time only make sense within our universe, so the word "colliding" wouldn't even mean anything on the outside, because on the so called outside there wouldn't be anything resembling what we have inside.
If there are multiple 'bubbles' of some sort, each one created from its own big bang, no way we can detect something that is on the outside, because anything we 'collide' with would mean that it can collide with us - it has similar enough physics to do it and whatever the bubbles are withing provides the opportunity for such collisions.
AFAIC this is all nonsense, there cannot be a division between physics that is used to observe our universe and physics that can be used to observe some form of external phenomena, so if somebody is getting a grant for it, they are just full of it and the government is again, paying for shit just because it can, it has money to burn and it has that type of a policy, not because it makes sense.
I don't believe the code is 'interpreted' in VMs, Java or.NET
There is a use case for a VM that is outside of being cross-platform, which is code management. So things like garbage collection, security implementations can be taken care of by the platform. Now, whether this requires a VM - I don't believe it does if the code is only supposed to run on Windows anyway. Instead of using a VM, all of these features can be taken care of by the language design and compiler, which then can use necessary libraries to take care of such things.
Any attempt at controlling technology, people, businesses via artificial mean backfire, so this is no different.
IF.NET is just a managed environment that makes it easier to develop for Windows platforms, then it's not a wrong thing to do, but if it marketed as a VM for the sake of being a VM while being boxed into Windows only, then it loses purpose.
What's the purpose of this VM that can only be used in Windows? Is it just to provide a managed environment for the developers? Because if that's all it is, it can have a niche use, but it cannot compete with VMs that can run the same code on multiple platforms. In any case, I always saw it as a trap and not the kind I'd walk into, because my applications run on real operating systems and not on desktop toys.
Agree with your comment, but the USSR didn't just fall apart because people 'finally figured out' something. It fell apart because it was bankrupt and couldn't provide anything, any products to its people, even though it had 100% employment.
That's where USA is heading if it is going to continue with this ideology that government must do all the thinking, central planning, hiring and money printing and all this spending. I was born in USSR and that's actually exactly how I remember it.
The USA WAS Free because the federal government was forced to abide by a Constitution created by a bunch of idealists, who had to ensure that separate States would ratify that Constitution and agree to be part of the federation. Your surprise to the fact that over time the federal government and Supreme court found ways to get around the law that was binding them is strange.
This is equivalent to many companies that are started by people who are really interested in what they are doing, that become great companies while the original founders are still at the helm, and then once the original founders are gone, the companies go down the hill. HP immediately comes to mind, Ford as well, there are many.
Anybody ever in one of those organizations ever suggested the US to let go?
They need to roll some joints and let go.
The need to let go of trying to have an empire, USA can't have an empire, it doesn't have the wealth - production capacity, to have an empire. Empires are the last stage of a dying super-power, because that's the time that the government grew so much, it became the dominant industry, while all other industries are collapsing due to underproduction and resource mis-allocation towards the government and its preferred monopolies.
How about letting go of trying to be an empire and reducing the government instead, firing 99% of the government employees and contractors, wouldn't it be another great experiment that USA could be first in and show the world how it's done, how an economy can be rebuilt not by force of government intervention but by the Free people that US citizens supposedly used to be. Being Free, isn't that why people came to US?
The real reason for this of-course has nothing to do with people being pricks on the web. The real reason for this is the bottom line of FB, which would improve greatly if they could have everybody on file, with their real names, addresses, S/Ns, birth dates, certificates (long form, right?), etc.
They want you to be a better product for their customers - advertisers. What better way of doing this if not by making sure everybody is known exactly for who they are, where they live, where they work, what they do, where they shop, how much they make, what their family situation is, medical data, what their future plans are, etc.etc.etc.
Of-course if you provide FB with this sort of information, FB gains enormous power over your lives, they become more powerful than you could ever imagine, product #241125
Computer market is a much freer market from government regulations, than most other markets, so the prices there are falling, while quality is increasing, but imagine where the prices and quality would be if there was no government destroying the value of money and regulating away.
Houses are not a commodity in any way, they are expense, they should not be seeing as investment, unless they generate income (rental properties and such). Houses are assets of-course, but they are also liability, if there is a mortgage there. All aside, the government's policy of 1-0% interest and money printing and FHA/Freddie/Fannie policy of insuring bad debt caused massive asset inflation, the bubble burst in 2008, of-course this was predicted way before 2008 (see my sig.) and housing prices must come down more in real terms, though in nominal terms they may stay where they are or even go up a little, but in relation to their nominal term values, everything else is rising in price, so in real terms house prices must come down, and that's again, a good thing for the market, a necessary thing.
Labor costs are much overpriced in USA, this is connected to the labor regulations, taxes, subsidies, so no surprise US and most of the rest of Western world is losing jobs, because all of the regulations and inflation and taxes are causing capital flight.
Food prices are going up in dollars, that's what created the instability in the world, all the revolutions in the Middle East, the huge inflation in China, that will eventually force them to rethink subsidies they are providing to the West.
Solar panels are government subsidized, this has nothing to do with the market.
Cars, medications, telecommunications, all of this is pushed up in price and costs by government money and regulations. FDA, FCC, Medicare, Medicaid and all the other government departments and initiatives, they are causing massive price hikes everywhere, where in fact prices would have been falling steadily for the last 50 years. This includes education prices. The government causes massive monetary transfer via the consumers (debtors) from the government to all these companies, that get these funds. The students, sick people, consumers of telecommunications, they are all pawns in this massive wealth transfer game. The monopolies are subsidized and protected by the government. Obviously GM and Chrysler are directly bailed out an put on the shoulders of the public.
Chinese consumption is not causing price hikes, Chinese consumption causes price to decrease, as any new consumption in China is immediately offset by new production. You see, in productive societies the signals that the market sends in response to any new consumption immediately causes new production to take place and satisfy the demand, that's because in productive societies real money can be made satisfying the demand.
I am not pessimistic on all economies, I am just pessimistic on the short term future of socialized economies of US and Europe.
Why do so many people in finance continue to insist on growth?
- I hope you are joking, right?
The reason should be obvious from the get go: inflation that is created by the government destroys the value of your savings and investment unless you can outrun that inflation.
Moody's, Standard & Poor's, and Fitch Ratings all maintained at least A ratings on AIG and Lehman Brothers up until mid-September of last year. Lehman Brothers declared bankruptcy Sept. 15; the federal government provided AIG with its first of four multibillion-dollar bailouts the next day.
US has defaulted on the promise to pay gold for US federal reserve notes in 1971, ever since that moment the economic and financial collapse of the economy of USA was just a matter of time, not an 'if', but a 'when'.
GDP is as meaningless as it is weak, since it was revised down this way:
GDP estimates for the first quarter of 2011 were revised downward to 0.4 percent growth, a sharp drop from the previous estimate of 1.9 percent. GDP for 2007 through 2010, previously thought to have grown by an average of less than 0.1 percent each year during that period, was also revised downward, to show an average decrease of 0.3 percent per year.
Besides, GDP in US is fake, the way it's measured is fake, it's based on a fake economy and one more thing about it: they didn't use the appropriate deflator, because they believe that the inflation is about 2%, but in reality inflation is at about 10% level, and closer to 13% the way I calculate it:
sugar Dec 2003: 20.40 cents/pound, Apr 2011: 36.97 cents/pound, price up by over 81% Beef Dec 2003: 105.40 cents/pound, Apr 2011: 193.00 cents/pound, price up by over 83% Barley Dec 2003: 100.77 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 208.70 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 107% Rice Dec 2003: 197.00 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 500.57 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 154% Cocoa Beans Dec 2003: 1,646.58 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 3,113.52 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 89% Tea Dec 2003: 205.22 cents/KG, Apr 2011: 325.33 cents/KG, price up by over 58% Rubber Dec 2003: 57.31cents/pound, Apr 2011: 265.49cents/pound, price up by over 363% Corn Dec 2003: 111.98 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 318.45 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 184% Bananas Dec 2003: 371.43 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 1,013.47 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 172% Propane Dec 2003: 0.63 USD/Gallon, Apr 2011: 1.45 USD/Gallon, price up by over 130% Wheat Dec 2003: 165.57 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 336.30 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 103% Oranges Dec 2003: 583.00 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 881.00 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 51% Salmon Dec 2003: 3.12 USD/Kg, Apr 2011: 7.86 USD/Kg, price up by over 151% Chicken Dec 2003: 68.98 cents/pound, Apr 2011: 86.42 cents/pound, price up by over 25%
See, I don't believe in natural monopolies, you'd understand better why, if you read this. Natural monopolies are a myth propagated by government that prefers to give out franchise deals and maintain actual monopolies that it creates by regulations/subsidies/tax code.
In any situation that has space for profit there will be competition as long as there is no government enforcing a monopoly.
In my last comment I am not sure how, but the link in the last sentence got eaten by the angry gods of the intrawebs.
Let's try again:
Of-course moving value out of fiat and into this was always a good idea over the past decade and it's even a better idea today. That's how you keep the value and have savings. Then you can use it to invest.
Actually that's questionable. I would say that whatever people buy that is not fiat cash may actually not only hold value, but increase in value over time.
I know that every piece of clothing that I bought over the last year has increased in value, though I am using the clothing, it still is more expensive now than it was a year ago to buy it. A cotton shirt is worth more than the money I spent on it a year ago. Since I normally buy a bunch, I might have worn any one of the shirts maybe 10 times over that year, so it's not too bad in terms of wear.
Of-course moving value out of fiat and into this was always a good idea over the past decade and it's even a better idea today. That's how you keep the value and have savings. Then you can use it to invest.
Slashdot Mirror
US past civil war and before 1913 was extremely libertarian and it became the country that was able to fund all of this nonsense, including wars and so called social obligations (human freedom modification programs) etc. You are squandering the wealth that was acquired by the country that was libertarian.
I agree with you 100%, you shouldn't pay for anything that is not for you. It works, it only doesn't work in a broken society that doesn't care about freedoms anymore that US became.
Oh, and by the way, you schmuck, USA was that country that you "wish the lot of you would go found" etc.etc. The problem became that morons like you multiply and destroy it by voting for ever more government, which is only happy to become ever more powerful.
I wish there was never any money spent by any government on any programs, ever. Of-course this is loose change, when talking about insignificant amounts spent on anything beyond military and social modification programs, but I still don't want any government doing anything beyond barest minimum of most bare minimums that is so bare, it barely exists. You can write that down.
I am fine with people searching for whatever outside of this universe, as long as I am not paying for any of it. Ever.
"inside surface"? Inside surface?
I have a bridge on some inside surface and it can be acquired for an insignificant amount of only a couple of million.
and I wish to see who is paying for this mumbo jumbo.
It's not semantics to say that if phenomena can be observed within our space, then there is no reason to say that this phenomena falls outside of purview of normal astro-physics, but then this grant doesn't make sense.
This can't be right, how can we, "inside" our own universe observe anything else "outside"our universe? Wouldn't anything we observe withing our universe be our universe? "Uni" - one. If there is some sort of a collision between "our" and "foreign" verses, wouldn't they be one verse? This is truly a bunch of bullshit.
If somehow there were multiple "universes" (whatever that would mean), why would they be colliding and what does it mean - colliding, in the sense that, our laws of physics with the gravity and space and time only make sense within our universe, so the word "colliding" wouldn't even mean anything on the outside, because on the so called outside there wouldn't be anything resembling what we have inside.
If there are multiple 'bubbles' of some sort, each one created from its own big bang, no way we can detect something that is on the outside, because anything we 'collide' with would mean that it can collide with us - it has similar enough physics to do it and whatever the bubbles are withing provides the opportunity for such collisions.
AFAIC this is all nonsense, there cannot be a division between physics that is used to observe our universe and physics that can be used to observe some form of external phenomena, so if somebody is getting a grant for it, they are just full of it and the government is again, paying for shit just because it can, it has money to burn and it has that type of a policy, not because it makes sense.
I don't believe the code is 'interpreted' in VMs, Java or .NET
There is a use case for a VM that is outside of being cross-platform, which is code management. So things like garbage collection, security implementations can be taken care of by the platform. Now, whether this requires a VM - I don't believe it does if the code is only supposed to run on Windows anyway. Instead of using a VM, all of these features can be taken care of by the language design and compiler, which then can use necessary libraries to take care of such things.
Any attempt at controlling technology, people, businesses via artificial mean backfire, so this is no different.
IF .NET is just a managed environment that makes it easier to develop for Windows platforms, then it's not a wrong thing to do, but if it marketed as a VM for the sake of being a VM while being boxed into Windows only, then it loses purpose.
What's the purpose of this VM that can only be used in Windows? Is it just to provide a managed environment for the developers? Because if that's all it is, it can have a niche use, but it cannot compete with VMs that can run the same code on multiple platforms. In any case, I always saw it as a trap and not the kind I'd walk into, because my applications run on real operating systems and not on desktop toys.
Agree with your comment, but the USSR didn't just fall apart because people 'finally figured out' something. It fell apart because it was bankrupt and couldn't provide anything, any products to its people, even though it had 100% employment.
That's where USA is heading if it is going to continue with this ideology that government must do all the thinking, central planning, hiring and money printing and all this spending. I was born in USSR and that's actually exactly how I remember it.
The USA WAS Free because the federal government was forced to abide by a Constitution created by a bunch of idealists, who had to ensure that separate States would ratify that Constitution and agree to be part of the federation. Your surprise to the fact that over time the federal government and Supreme court found ways to get around the law that was binding them is strange.
This is equivalent to many companies that are started by people who are really interested in what they are doing, that become great companies while the original founders are still at the helm, and then once the original founders are gone, the companies go down the hill. HP immediately comes to mind, Ford as well, there are many.
Anybody ever in one of those organizations ever suggested the US to let go?
They need to roll some joints and let go.
The need to let go of trying to have an empire, USA can't have an empire, it doesn't have the wealth - production capacity, to have an empire. Empires are the last stage of a dying super-power, because that's the time that the government grew so much, it became the dominant industry, while all other industries are collapsing due to underproduction and resource mis-allocation towards the government and its preferred monopolies.
How about letting go of trying to be an empire and reducing the government instead, firing 99% of the government employees and contractors, wouldn't it be another great experiment that USA could be first in and show the world how it's done, how an economy can be rebuilt not by force of government intervention but by the Free people that US citizens supposedly used to be. Being Free, isn't that why people came to US?
The real reason for this of-course has nothing to do with people being pricks on the web. The real reason for this is the bottom line of FB, which would improve greatly if they could have everybody on file, with their real names, addresses, S/Ns, birth dates, certificates (long form, right?), etc.
They want you to be a better product for their customers - advertisers. What better way of doing this if not by making sure everybody is known exactly for who they are, where they live, where they work, what they do, where they shop, how much they make, what their family situation is, medical data, what their future plans are, etc.etc.etc.
Of-course if you provide FB with this sort of information, FB gains enormous power over your lives, they become more powerful than you could ever imagine, product #241125
am I happy that I was right not to have an FB account .....
Computer market is a much freer market from government regulations, than most other markets, so the prices there are falling, while quality is increasing, but imagine where the prices and quality would be if there was no government destroying the value of money and regulating away.
Houses are not a commodity in any way, they are expense, they should not be seeing as investment, unless they generate income (rental properties and such). Houses are assets of-course, but they are also liability, if there is a mortgage there. All aside, the government's policy of 1-0% interest and money printing and FHA/Freddie/Fannie policy of insuring bad debt caused massive asset inflation, the bubble burst in 2008, of-course this was predicted way before 2008 (see my sig.) and housing prices must come down more in real terms, though in nominal terms they may stay where they are or even go up a little, but in relation to their nominal term values, everything else is rising in price, so in real terms house prices must come down, and that's again, a good thing for the market, a necessary thing.
Labor costs are much overpriced in USA, this is connected to the labor regulations, taxes, subsidies, so no surprise US and most of the rest of Western world is losing jobs, because all of the regulations and inflation and taxes are causing capital flight.
Food prices are going up in dollars, that's what created the instability in the world, all the revolutions in the Middle East, the huge inflation in China, that will eventually force them to rethink subsidies they are providing to the West.
Solar panels are government subsidized, this has nothing to do with the market.
Cars, medications, telecommunications, all of this is pushed up in price and costs by government money and regulations. FDA, FCC, Medicare, Medicaid and all the other government departments and initiatives, they are causing massive price hikes everywhere, where in fact prices would have been falling steadily for the last 50 years. This includes education prices. The government causes massive monetary transfer via the consumers (debtors) from the government to all these companies, that get these funds. The students, sick people, consumers of telecommunications, they are all pawns in this massive wealth transfer game. The monopolies are subsidized and protected by the government. Obviously GM and Chrysler are directly bailed out an put on the shoulders of the public.
Chinese consumption is not causing price hikes, Chinese consumption causes price to decrease, as any new consumption in China is immediately offset by new production. You see, in productive societies the signals that the market sends in response to any new consumption immediately causes new production to take place and satisfy the demand, that's because in productive societies real money can be made satisfying the demand.
I am not pessimistic on all economies, I am just pessimistic on the short term future of socialized economies of US and Europe.
Why do so many people in finance continue to insist on growth?
- I hope you are joking, right?
The reason should be obvious from the get go: inflation that is created by the government destroys the value of your savings and investment unless you can outrun that inflation.
I am not saying gold is an investment, I hope I am being clear about it, it's a store of value.
As to inflation, I calculate it to be between 10 and 13 percent.
nah, I think they used a combination of to write that.
Moody's, Standard & Poor's, and Fitch Ratings all maintained at least A ratings on AIG and Lehman Brothers up until mid-September of last year. Lehman Brothers declared bankruptcy Sept. 15; the federal government provided AIG with its first of four multibillion-dollar bailouts the next day.
US has defaulted on the promise to pay gold for US federal reserve notes in 1971, ever since that moment the economic and financial collapse of the economy of USA was just a matter of time, not an 'if', but a 'when'.
GDP is as meaningless as it is weak, since it was revised down this way:
GDP estimates for the first quarter of 2011 were revised downward to 0.4 percent growth, a sharp drop from the previous estimate of 1.9 percent. GDP for 2007 through 2010, previously thought to have grown by an average of less than 0.1 percent each year during that period, was also revised downward, to show an average decrease of 0.3 percent per year.
Besides, GDP in US is fake, the way it's measured is fake, it's based on a fake economy and one more thing about it: they didn't use the appropriate deflator, because they believe that the inflation is about 2%, but in reality inflation is at about 10% level, and closer to 13% the way I calculate it:
sugar Dec 2003: 20.40 cents/pound, Apr 2011: 36.97 cents/pound, price up by over 81%
Beef Dec 2003: 105.40 cents/pound, Apr 2011: 193.00 cents/pound, price up by over 83%
Barley Dec 2003: 100.77 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 208.70 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 107%
Rice Dec 2003: 197.00 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 500.57 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 154%
Cocoa Beans Dec 2003: 1,646.58 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 3,113.52 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 89%
Tea Dec 2003: 205.22 cents/KG, Apr 2011: 325.33 cents/KG, price up by over 58%
Rubber Dec 2003: 57.31cents/pound, Apr 2011: 265.49cents/pound, price up by over 363%
Corn Dec 2003: 111.98 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 318.45 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 184%
Bananas Dec 2003: 371.43 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 1,013.47 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 172%
Propane Dec 2003: 0.63 USD/Gallon, Apr 2011: 1.45 USD/Gallon, price up by over 130%
Wheat Dec 2003: 165.57 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 336.30 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 103%
Oranges Dec 2003: 583.00 USD/Metric Ton, Apr 2011: 881.00 USD/Metric Ton, price up by over 51%
Salmon Dec 2003: 3.12 USD/Kg, Apr 2011: 7.86 USD/Kg, price up by over 151%
Chicken Dec 2003: 68.98 cents/pound, Apr 2011: 86.42 cents/pound, price up by over 25%
correction was made.
See, I don't believe in natural monopolies, you'd understand better why, if you read this. Natural monopolies are a myth propagated by government that prefers to give out franchise deals and maintain actual monopolies that it creates by regulations/subsidies/tax code.
In any situation that has space for profit there will be competition as long as there is no government enforcing a monopoly.
In my last comment I am not sure how, but the link in the last sentence got eaten by the angry gods of the intrawebs.
Let's try again:
Of-course moving value out of fiat and into this was always a good idea over the past decade and it's even a better idea today. That's how you keep the value and have savings. Then you can use it to invest.
Actually that's questionable. I would say that whatever people buy that is not fiat cash may actually not only hold value, but increase in value over time.
I know that every piece of clothing that I bought over the last year has increased in value, though I am using the clothing, it still is more expensive now than it was a year ago to buy it. A cotton shirt is worth more than the money I spent on it a year ago. Since I normally buy a bunch, I might have worn any one of the shirts maybe 10 times over that year, so it's not too bad in terms of wear.
Of-course moving value out of fiat and into this was always a good idea over the past decade and it's even a better idea today. That's how you keep the value and have savings. Then you can use it to invest.