So here's the fix, and it is actually very simple. Change the monetary system to the one advocated by C. H. Douglas almost 100 years ago: fiat money put into circulation by yearly identically sized dividend checks written by the treasury to each citizen. The size of the checks rigidly determined by a formula based upon the nation's productivity the previous year. Ban fractional reserve lending in all it's forms. The banks' power melts like snow in the spring!
>> Windows XP/Office 2003, which is being retired on April 8, 2014
WTF do you mean by "retired"??? My computer is going to shut down on that date? Oh, you mean no more "security" updates? Who fucking cares? I install XP with SP2, (not 3!), and Of2003 with SP3, both SPs btw are already downloaded so no Windows Update nonsense, and that is all I ever need. Works just fine, and has never been hacked except with the user clicks on the bait.
Quite cogent, but even more to the point, please consider *personal* income taxes. By greatly increasing the tax rates on the top tiers of income, you will absolutely create jobs. (N.B. Corporate income tax is a waste of time and money - we should reduce it to a very low rate, and only keep it to prevent people using corporate spending as a way to dodge personal income tax.) The problem with low personal tax rates such as we have now is that they encourage the short term pillaging of job having enterprises. We should go back to what we had in the late 50s and early 60s: a 90% top tier rate.
Of course this tier should start at the $1M level, not at the low level our top tier starts now, and there should be additional highly taxed tiers for those making making over 6 figures. Once execs know that short term bonus gathering activity is only going to enrich Uncle Sam, then the only game left at that level worth playing is growing the size and employment grip of their enterprises - the long term game becomes the only one worth playing. The whole Reagan trickle down theory turned out to work exactly the opposite of what was (and is still by morons) claimed.
Duck, you do a good job here, but you don't go far enough. My sig points to the work of the greatest economist who has yet practiced the science. He points out that we all benefit from our inherited cultural framework, and that we all deserve, just by way of being human, a share in this.
Or, even better, give the money to Bill Andrews. With adequate funding, his company, Sierra Sciences, is 3 years away from having a small molecule telomerase activator ready for clinical trials. With all due respect to Aubrey, he has nothing in the hopper likely to produce results in our lifetimes, whereas it is entirely possible that a telomerase activator would reverse nearly all symptoms of aging.
I have completely cut out all sugar, and the only carbs I eat is a tiny amount of rice and corn. Meat, Clarified Butter, and Green Vegetables are all you need.
I lived healthily on food stamps, but only because Lucky Stores used to let you dig in their dumpters for stuff they threw away. Now I don't think you can do that anymore. The US seems to be a nation mostly of selfish assholes. Except the funny thing is that no one I know actually wants people to starve. Hmm.
The public has been bamboozled about fat. Fat is a very essential nutrient and *it doesn't make you fat!* What makes you fat is sugar and carbs. Neither of which humans should eat.
That's the problem with those who criticize libertarianism: their criticisms are almost always irrational. The problem with libertarianism is that libertarians are dishonest about the implications of their politics. If a children's parents cannot find a job the children and their parents should not be prevented from starving to death is a valid representation of libertarian politics that most libertarians would attempt to deny. That principle (and attendant dishonesty) is a good example of why I have largely abandoned libertarianism, except for the part about not not legislating morality via prohibition.
The free market will always solve a problem - that much of the religion is true. However the solution may not be optimum. The best example of this is what is going to happen to human civilization due to our use of the free market to guide our energy production. Barring technical miracle (You better pray for one!) fossil fuels will be used until all that is left is so deeply buried that the net energy production from digging them up is less than 50%. At that point we will try to turn to alternatives, but will not be able to quickly enough since the energy needed to build an alternative infrastructure will be too expensive. What I mean by "quickly enough" is quickly enough to prevent a massive die-off of humanity. The optimum solution would be to abrogate the free market by governmental fiat, building enough nuclear fission power plants so that electricity becomes so inexpensive that the free market in transportation builds an all-electric transportation system infrastructure.
I dream of a job at Microsoft. Of course the only two job I'd accept is CEO. Then I'd show those bitches how an Operating System is supposed to work! Though there'd be a hell of a depression in Washington due to all the fired motherfuckers. I bet you this: 5 years after I started, people would LOVE Microsoft.
No, there are more than two approaches. There are a multitude of approaches. Just as one example of how fantastic your rhetoric is: in the late 50s and early 60s the top tier individual income tax rate in the US was 90%. I don't recall any large corporations shutting their doors because the CEO decided it was no longer worth it to work. In fact that was the period of the greatest expansion of the middle class in the entire history of the world. Hello?
>> Oil and natural gas are being produced from less-and-less readily available reservoirs. The low-hanging fruit has been picked, as it were, so we have to work harder and harder to produce from less-and-less easy reservoirs. Frac-ing is one of the technologies which makes this possible.
Holy shit! You said a mouthful there. Now think about what your statement means for the future of energy production via fossil fuels. That's correct: the real cost per energy unit is going to rise inexorably. Now think about what that means to civilization. That's correct: if we don't find a way to stabilize the real cost of energy production, we are facing Armageddon. Now thin:k about how we might stabilize the real cost of energy production. That's correct: the only way to do so is to build an energy production infrastructure that does not rely on ever more difficult to recover resources: the two that come to my mind are solar energy and breeder reactors. Now think about what it will take to build that infrastructure. That's correct: a lot of energy - energy that will eventually be so costly that every bit of it will be used just to feed humanity. NOW THINK!
It's not about what others have the Excel doesn't. No, it's about what Excel has that none of the others do: VBA! VBA is the coolest ide ever. Not because it is anything or has anything that "programmers" like to one up with, but because it is the Swiss Army Knife of ides, that very often gets the job done and very quickly too.
Slashdot Mirror
So here's the fix, and it is actually very simple. Change the monetary system to the one advocated by C. H. Douglas almost 100 years ago: fiat money put into circulation by yearly identically sized dividend checks written by the treasury to each citizen. The size of the checks rigidly determined by a formula based upon the nation's productivity the previous year. Ban fractional reserve lending in all it's forms. The banks' power melts like snow in the spring!
Soon mobile apps will alert one and all. No flashing lights needed.
>> Windows XP/Office 2003, which is being retired on April 8, 2014
WTF do you mean by "retired"??? My computer is going to shut down on that date? Oh, you mean no more "security" updates? Who fucking cares? I install XP with SP2, (not 3!), and Of2003 with SP3, both SPs btw are already downloaded so no Windows Update nonsense, and that is all I ever need. Works just fine, and has never been hacked except with the user clicks on the bait.
Quite cogent, but even more to the point, please consider *personal* income taxes. By greatly increasing the tax rates on the top tiers of income, you will absolutely create jobs. (N.B. Corporate income tax is a waste of time and money - we should reduce it to a very low rate, and only keep it to prevent people using corporate spending as a way to dodge personal income tax.) The problem with low personal tax rates such as we have now is that they encourage the short term pillaging of job having enterprises. We should go back to what we had in the late 50s and early 60s: a 90% top tier rate.
Of course this tier should start at the $1M level, not at the low level our top tier starts now, and there should be additional highly taxed tiers for those making making over 6 figures. Once execs know that short term bonus gathering activity is only going to enrich Uncle Sam, then the only game left at that level worth playing is growing the size and employment grip of their enterprises - the long term game becomes the only one worth playing. The whole Reagan trickle down theory turned out to work exactly the opposite of what was (and is still by morons) claimed.
>> The ramifications are really stupendous.
Especially when the cars are able to enter the vacuum tubes and travel at hypersonic velocities.
Duck, you do a good job here, but you don't go far enough. My sig points to the work of the greatest economist who has yet practiced the science. He points out that we all benefit from our inherited cultural framework, and that we all deserve, just by way of being human, a share in this.
This is the best list here, but you left out Vance.
He is a true monster, but, sorry, Vance is the King!
Where are mod points when I need them. Vance is *somehow* God! Read his memoir. He's a schlumpf. Read his fiction: he is God! Go figure...
The solution is simple: blanket the nation with breeder reactors. Duh!
Or, even better, give the money to Bill Andrews. With adequate funding, his company, Sierra Sciences, is 3 years away from having a small molecule telomerase activator ready for clinical trials. With all due respect to Aubrey, he has nothing in the hopper likely to produce results in our lifetimes, whereas it is entirely possible that a telomerase activator would reverse nearly all symptoms of aging.
Disclaimer: I am a Sierra Sciences employee.
Amen!
I have completely cut out all sugar, and the only carbs I eat is a tiny amount of rice and corn. Meat, Clarified Butter, and Green Vegetables are all you need.
I lived healthily on food stamps, but only because Lucky Stores used to let you dig in their dumpters for stuff they threw away. Now I don't think you can do that anymore. The US seems to be a nation mostly of selfish assholes. Except the funny thing is that no one I know actually wants people to starve. Hmm.
A vegetarian diet is a one-way ticket to the cancer ward. All the starches you eat are like living on sugar. Deadly.
Soy is poison! Force me to eat soy, and I'm going out shooting.
The public has been bamboozled about fat. Fat is a very essential nutrient and *it doesn't make you fat!* What makes you fat is sugar and carbs. Neither of which humans should eat.
That's the problem with those who criticize libertarianism: their criticisms are almost always irrational. The problem with libertarianism is that libertarians are dishonest about the implications of their politics. If a children's parents cannot find a job the children and their parents should not be prevented from starving to death is a valid representation of libertarian politics that most libertarians would attempt to deny. That principle (and attendant dishonesty) is a good example of why I have largely abandoned libertarianism, except for the part about not not legislating morality via prohibition.
The free market will always solve a problem - that much of the religion is true. However the solution may not be optimum. The best example of this is what is going to happen to human civilization due to our use of the free market to guide our energy production. Barring technical miracle (You better pray for one!) fossil fuels will be used until all that is left is so deeply buried that the net energy production from digging them up is less than 50%. At that point we will try to turn to alternatives, but will not be able to quickly enough since the energy needed to build an alternative infrastructure will be too expensive. What I mean by "quickly enough" is quickly enough to prevent a massive die-off of humanity. The optimum solution would be to abrogate the free market by governmental fiat, building enough nuclear fission power plants so that electricity becomes so inexpensive that the free market in transportation builds an all-electric transportation system infrastructure.
Ready for the next level? Have a look at my sig...
Dude, Slash and Axl haven't spoken in years, much less played any music.
As if we still live under the rule of law. How quaint.
I dream of a job at Microsoft. Of course the only two job I'd accept is CEO. Then I'd show those bitches how an Operating System is supposed to work! Though there'd be a hell of a depression in Washington due to all the fired motherfuckers. I bet you this: 5 years after I started, people would LOVE Microsoft.
No, there are more than two approaches. There are a multitude of approaches. Just as one example of how fantastic your rhetoric is: in the late 50s and early 60s the top tier individual income tax rate in the US was 90%. I don't recall any large corporations shutting their doors because the CEO decided it was no longer worth it to work. In fact that was the period of the greatest expansion of the middle class in the entire history of the world. Hello?
>> Oil and natural gas are being produced from less-and-less readily available reservoirs. The low-hanging fruit has been picked, as it were, so we have to work harder and harder to produce from less-and-less easy reservoirs. Frac-ing is one of the technologies which makes this possible.
Holy shit! You said a mouthful there. Now think about what your statement means for the future of energy production via fossil fuels. That's correct: the real cost per energy unit is going to rise inexorably. Now think about what that means to civilization. That's correct: if we don't find a way to stabilize the real cost of energy production, we are facing Armageddon. Now thin:k about how we might stabilize the real cost of energy production. That's correct: the only way to do so is to build an energy production infrastructure that does not rely on ever more difficult to recover resources: the two that come to my mind are solar energy and breeder reactors. Now think about what it will take to build that infrastructure. That's correct: a lot of energy - energy that will eventually be so costly that every bit of it will be used just to feed humanity. NOW THINK!
It's not about what others have the Excel doesn't. No, it's about what Excel has that none of the others do: VBA! VBA is the coolest ide ever. Not because it is anything or has anything that "programmers" like to one up with, but because it is the Swiss Army Knife of ides, that very often gets the job done and very quickly too.