You dont understand ho astroturfing works. The goal is transparency and deception. Astroturfing appears as opinion, but is actually scumbag capitalism.
You are talking about individuals, despite income mostly being counted relevant across HOUSEHOLDS this is because households are where money is summed, or collected, and then managed. Again, there are far more dependents than you might be considering....
So, looking for 100 million PEOPLE to each afford $1500, year. This is for you based on the way you decided to determine how 100k people might contribute. From some wiki facts:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_income_in_the_United_States#Personal_Income_and_Disposable_Personal_Income
The following chart shows the income distribution among all 211,492,000 individuals aged 15 or higher who received income in 2010 as recorded by the United States Census Bureau.[10]...... $75k-$100k 5.29% = 11.16 Million People.
$100,000 or more 6.61% = 13.97 Million People.
Total = 25.13 Million People ------------- Now I wouldn't consider adding in people below 75k, but lets see if we include them too from 50-75k.
$50k-$75k 12.86% = 27.13 Million People
Now that would be 52.26 Million people if everyone that made 50k or more in a year contributed 1500 dollars each and every year. According to those stats, if we included people making 25-50k in there (I think thats very unlikely to even the loosest assumptions) we would just hit over your 100 million people... But I just don't see how you could get 100 million individuals/people to contribute, on average, 1500 dollars. The thing is, whether its a CEO, or joe schmoe, you can't get someone to throw money at a good idea if its not obvious and already sitting right in front of them, whatever that idea should produce... Basic research and the work that has gone into developing what we understand today, is the key, but it is very poorly understood by the public. They wouldn't fund it. They would get the HDTV.
Sorry,.. I didn't have time to go into detail via. phone.
So this ambiguous, but probably not too inordinate, 150 Billion would be surmised by 100 million americans, at 1500/year.
First, consider that most americans do not generate income, and that burden of taxation/payment is better plotted against households. This is because of children, housewives(or stay at home dads), and elderly dependents, making up a pretty large chunk of the population.
Then imagine, when faced with the idea of buying a new HDTV, or sending 1500 dollars off for research they are too naive to understand they are already benefiting from (lest I refrain from the glaring/obvious fact that americans largely do not have sufficient scientific knowledge to grasp the reality of what made a TV, or wifi, or cancer treatments)----- and then consider this choice is made every single year, except they still have the HDTV from last year, so now maybe a trip to Disneyland.....
Yeah... like I said.. my point exactly. Its not going to happen in libertaria, nor would the large corps do it well either --- as is already evident, large corps siphon what public knowledge is present and then build product-specific private databases of scientific research knowledge...
Microbiologists ma disagree about the antibiotic resistance cold war component of your point. They often assert that when resistance is evolved against one mode of action, it is devolved from a previous mode.... this is true in bacteria, whereby removing antibiotics from media can generate a dominant species that is absent of resistance in 30 generations (1 to 2 days). This is because without the pressure, the small functional advantage of lacking a useless resistance gene lets the nonresistant mutant outpace its resistant ancestor in 30 doublings.
I am a firm believer in working *with* nature than against it. The future looks dreary...
Smart people would make changes in farming and population control over the sae timeframe. Sadly, lots of ignorant people will die because they were born from ignorance and largely dont improve from the cycle.... and so 4+ BN will die, not that any sane human wouldnt be apalled by natures big push back.
Oil resources finite? Check phosphorous peak estimates for a real scary reality check.
The symbiotic organism evolved against the pressure, and since it is symbiotic with the insects, fitness is acquired. Classic darwin in the true complexity of life.
According to libertarians, the tech companies of the world should spontaneousely fund it. Lol. I think we know how impossible that little fantasy plays out in modern society..... wait for the comical reply about how some free market would spur billion dollar physics projects.... yea right.
Its a theory because the wants of the citizens of the democracy are not heeded, though businesses can influence government without voting.
The metals lobby that keeps the penny in circulation despite massive public disapproval, is the tantamount example of the power of lobbies to distort democracy.... that is taught in polsci 101. Yes, its a theory. SOPA 2.0 or 3.0 will not have the popular oversight that 1.0 had, and when our reps know we disagree but arent looking, they will pass it for the lobbies.
This is my concern.... GEOHOT was criminalized and attacked using government resources based on his so-called violations of EULAs.... And now government directed entities do similar things but are not comparably criminalized....
No. Getting sick of the corporations.gov concept here... the abuse of citizens is so blatant and the preference fr corporations is absurd.
imho, a business would not, in good faith, offer 'free' services under the legalese shroud to actually modify and distort what a client would faithfully consider to be happening....
in other words, this is dishonest business practice, even if its in a ToS or EULA.
Please explain to me, in the context of calling addictions hobbies that can be quit readily to save $10, how you intended to exhibit sympathy for addictions. In context, you suggested the addictions were of personal choice, and that they can be avoided or quit readily if necessary.
Poor is poor. $10 a month might as well be $100000 in the eyes of the poor. Raise the standard of living, first, then start expecting things of people. The problem we face is wealth disparity. There is no link between work and wealth. The poor are notorious for taking the hardest jobs and wrking the most hours.... well, aside from science postdocs, lol.
Slashdot Mirror
Wtf? reactionary hyperbole?
You dont understand ho astroturfing works. The goal is transparency and deception. Astroturfing appears as opinion, but is actually scumbag capitalism.
This is advertising. It is also a lie. That's fraud, plain and simple.
Kill it before it multiplies. Hang and eviscerate on site.
The way you are calculating or assuming is wrong.
You are talking about individuals, despite income mostly being counted relevant across HOUSEHOLDS this is because households are where money is summed, or collected, and then managed. Again, there are far more dependents than you might be considering....
So, looking for 100 million PEOPLE to each afford $1500, year. This is for you based on the way you decided to determine how 100k people might contribute. From some wiki facts:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_income_in_the_United_States#Personal_Income_and_Disposable_Personal_Income
The following chart shows the income distribution among all 211,492,000 individuals aged 15 or higher who received income in 2010 as recorded by the United States Census Bureau.[10] ... ...
$75k-$100k
5.29% = 11.16 Million People.
$100,000 or more
6.61% = 13.97 Million People.
Total = 25.13 Million People
-------------
Now I wouldn't consider adding in people below 75k, but lets see if we include them too from 50-75k.
$50k-$75k
12.86% = 27.13 Million People
Now that would be 52.26 Million people if everyone that made 50k or more in a year contributed 1500 dollars each and every year. According to those stats, if we included people making 25-50k in there (I think thats very unlikely to even the loosest assumptions) we would just hit over your 100 million people... But I just don't see how you could get 100 million individuals/people to contribute, on average, 1500 dollars. The thing is, whether its a CEO, or joe schmoe, you can't get someone to throw money at a good idea if its not obvious and already sitting right in front of them, whatever that idea should produce... Basic research and the work that has gone into developing what we understand today, is the key, but it is very poorly understood by the public. They wouldn't fund it. They would get the HDTV.
As long as they're doing it legally, there's nothing wrong with playing the game by the game's rules.
So exploits are ok? From what I garner, exploits are wrong unless its Apple and the opinion comes from a fanboi. No 'reason', just feelings.
Legal !=right. And you already know that, but doubletalked anyway...
Sorry,.. I didn't have time to go into detail via. phone.
So this ambiguous, but probably not too inordinate, 150 Billion would be surmised by 100 million americans, at 1500/year.
First, consider that most americans do not generate income, and that burden of taxation/payment is better plotted against households. This is because of children, housewives(or stay at home dads), and elderly dependents, making up a pretty large chunk of the population.
Then imagine, when faced with the idea of buying a new HDTV, or sending 1500 dollars off for research they are too naive to understand they are already benefiting from (lest I refrain from the glaring/obvious fact that americans largely do not have sufficient scientific knowledge to grasp the reality of what made a TV, or wifi, or cancer treatments)----- and then consider this choice is made every single year, except they still have the HDTV from last year, so now maybe a trip to Disneyland.....
Yeah... like I said.. my point exactly. Its not going to happen in libertaria, nor would the large corps do it well either --- as is already evident, large corps siphon what public knowledge is present and then build product-specific private databases of scientific research knowledge...
Microbiologists ma disagree about the antibiotic resistance cold war component of your point. They often assert that when resistance is evolved against one mode of action, it is devolved from a previous mode.... this is true in bacteria, whereby removing antibiotics from media can generate a dominant species that is absent of resistance in 30 generations (1 to 2 days). This is because without the pressure, the small functional advantage of lacking a useless resistance gene lets the nonresistant mutant outpace its resistant ancestor in 30 doublings.
I am a firm believer in working *with* nature than against it. The future looks dreary...
Smart people would make changes in farming and population control over the sae timeframe. Sadly, lots of ignorant people will die because they were born from ignorance and largely dont improve from the cycle.... and so 4+ BN will die, not that any sane human wouldnt be apalled by natures big push back.
Oil resources finite? Check phosphorous peak estimates for a real scary reality check.
The symbiotic organism evolved against the pressure, and since it is symbiotic with the insects, fitness is acquired. Classic darwin in the true complexity of life.
My point exactly.
What am I looking at here? a joke?
According to libertarians, the tech companies of the world should spontaneousely fund it. Lol. I think we know how impossible that little fantasy plays out in modern society..... wait for the comical reply about how some free market would spur billion dollar physics projects.... yea right.
How about we leave the internet alone, as is, and then hold parents responsible for their kids! Yay for responsibility!
Its a theory because the wants of the citizens of the democracy are not heeded, though businesses can influence government without voting.
The metals lobby that keeps the penny in circulation despite massive public disapproval, is the tantamount example of the power of lobbies to distort democracy.... that is taught in polsci 101. Yes, its a theory. SOPA 2.0 or 3.0 will not have the popular oversight that 1.0 had, and when our reps know we disagree but arent looking, they will pass it for the lobbies.
Fanboys mount up!
Had you commented on a site whete we havent seen enough evidence to agree with him, you might have made sense.
F U for downplaying the seriousness that makes Brim right, even if they are competitors.
This was fr your own good. Learn to appreciate the blunt, unchecked, self-justified actions from the more guns less butter government.
Cut MILITARY SPENDING TO REASONABLE LEVELS. SAVE A COUNTRY, CUT RIDIC MILITARY BUDGETS.
This is my concern.... GEOHOT was criminalized and attacked using government resources based on his so-called violations of EULAs.... And now government directed entities do similar things but are not comparably criminalized....
No. Getting sick of the corporations.gov concept here... the abuse of citizens is so blatant and the preference fr corporations is absurd.
Good point.
As the saying goes "protect yourself with awareness, but let your neighbors burn in the fire of ignorance".
'the market' isnt the answer to everything.
Here here!
imho, a business would not, in good faith, offer 'free' services under the legalese shroud to actually modify and distort what a client would faithfully consider to be happening....
in other words, this is dishonest business practice, even if its in a ToS or EULA.
Should take the time to write something meaningful. Right now you just sound insensitive and hurtful.
Please explain to me, in the context of calling addictions hobbies that can be quit readily to save $10, how you intended to exhibit sympathy for addictions. In context, you suggested the addictions were of personal choice, and that they can be avoided or quit readily if necessary.
Liar.
You call addictions "hobbies". Wow. You are deluded beyond sympathy.
Poor is poor. $10 a month might as well be $100000 in the eyes of the poor. Raise the standard of living, first, then start expecting things of people. The problem we face is wealth disparity. There is no link between work and wealth. The poor are notorious for taking the hardest jobs and wrking the most hours.... well, aside from science postdocs, lol.
I had a feeling this would happen. Thanks.