You seem to not be concerned that the government would need records of every transaction you make, odd, and one of the reasons the income tax is so invasive already.
Mines opening and closing is usually not controlled by governments. Gold stored in central banks would be part of the money supply, and since the governments never just destroy their gold, it doesn't influence the supply at all. They influence supply through regulations and permits for gold mining.
Even with fractional reserve banking removed, any timed deposit can still be loaned out, or invested, although I'm not opposed to fractional reserve banking, as long as the capital requirement is backed by gold, not paper dollars.
Inflation tends to increase spending and borrowing.
That's the entire problem, we want to encourage saving and investment, not spending and borrowing. Inflation also increases riskier investments, since not investing gives a negative return. The tax code further encourages spending and borrowing, they are tax deductible, but savings and investments are taxed again.
It's the fact that paying a lot more now for shitty electric cars make no sense. Why would government directed research suddenly lead to new discoveries? Will the government direct the research into the right areas? It's not like companies haven't noticed, and as prices for new tech go down, and prices for oil go up, there will be a point where we switch over.
You want to force that switch on us earlier. Do you really wanna be paying 2-4x for a slower less practical vehicle? Will collapsing the economy be worth switching to electric cars a decade sooner?
Even if we aren't yet, by then it won't 'probably', it will be far too expensive. The bleek future of quiet electric cars is ever looming in the future. Why ban them for the few of us left with classic cars in 2050?
Synthesis of gold? I mean besides neutron absorption (billions of times more expensive than mining), that technology seems extremely far off. By the time that occurs, I assume everything will basically be free, and I won't be working. Creating gold from other elements may likely come far after molecular and atomic 3d printers are available. If that's the case, I could already print anything I desire.
Deflation is the entire point of a growing economy, my wages and savings gain value, and everything is cheaper, life gets better. Why do you think technology is so great, because electronics prices deflation outpaces the US dollar inflation, so cells phones and computers are getting cheaper. Wouldn't it be nice if everything else also got cheaper, it's just that 10% inflation in money supply outpaces the lower deflation rates other products have, like cars, food, and energy.
You missed the point, the Capital Gains Tax on gold makes every transaction, every time you sell gold for dollars to make a purchase, every time you transact in gold, if the price of gold went up, you need to report those capital gains to the government and pay 15% taxes on those gains. Therefore, every transaction is required to be recorded and sent with appropriate forms to the government, every single legal transaction every time the price of gold goes up from the date you originally purchased it. It makes using gold as money infinitely more complex and less free.
Gold only grows by about 1%/yr, it's still an exponential increase in money supply, but it's very stable, and for the most part uncontrolled by governments. Swings in gold supply aren't drastic and aren't short term, it takes years for a new mine to open, let alone enough to effect the money supply in a meaningful way. Hording is a problem, but most people will just leave it in banks, hording is more a problem now since people don't trust paper dollars to keep their value.
More like McAfee infected. One time I got McAfee on my computer, no idea how it happened, but it interfered terribly and was probably one of the hardest things to get rid of.
I think solar will become practical and cheap within 5-10 yrs, and by cheap, I mean cheaper than coal.
Nuclear is expensive and dangerous.It's not really getting much cheaper and needs to be subsidized just to exist. Just leave the market alone and let Coal work for now, and solar will come online soon enough.
I just meant the trail isn't kept by the government. Private companies keeping their OWN paper trails to conduct business is fine with me. By freedom, I mean't my bank account can't be undermined by inflation, and lose 50% or more of it's value over my lifetime.
Using a monopolistic tactic like price setting will only result in the same effects as a monopoly using price setting, higher prices for everyone, that was my point.
They aren't gaming any system except ours. They pay all their overseas taxes. Unless you intentionally wrote in loopholes you can't avoid taxes. Comparably structured is a completely socialist idea. Some countries have no taxes, they rely on charities and a small government. That does not give the US a right to demand money from businesses operating there. It also doesn't give the US a right to demand the government start taxing businesses that operate in that country.
We currently give tax breaks if they are already paying higher taxes in the foreign country where they incur profits. The US is a unique case in this scenario, as almost every other country doesn't tax profits earned overseas. If we did tax those earnings again, the US companies would most likely split into a foreign owned part, as many US companies are forced to everyday if they can't receive similar tax breaks, or the paperwork is too excessive.
Giving them tax breaks on income earned in the US is odd. If it was all 'green tech' subsidies, then yell at the democrats. If it was another loophole they used, then we should fix it. But considering the fact that Google, MS, and Facebook all skirt tax laws via a 'loophole' shows the extent of the problem. The 'system' has been gamed by politicians for these companies, is it really that hard to write "%30 income tax".
But instead it's something like 20,000 pages of tax code.
I never understood the self righteousness that some possess when discussing taxing success. I understand taxing lack of success, which isn't done (you don't rack up debt when you are on social programs). I also understand the victimization of employees that was rampant decades past, which is really the sole reason for taxing rich people, and the sole reason for a progressive tax system. The internet combined with globalization is destroying the 'company town' mentality and ability to operate, although there is still a long, long way to go. As the democratizing effect of the internet takes hold, and since small business is the largest block of employers in the country, will the intellectual position of Austrian economists finally flourish? Will true capitalistic markets emerge?
As geographic location erodes monopolies, and the internet erodes conspiracies, successful companies should be embraced. The protectionist government that was required to keep companies from taking advantage of employees has grown out of control and is countering progress. A flat tax is becoming more and more rational, I can only hope that in the future, there is a taxable limit on your income, like how social security taxes currently work. Many other regulations regarding minimum wage, breaks, work hours, overtime, and especcially ease of firing, are completely anti capitalistic, and destroy millions of jobs.
I don't buy yachts, which would be taxed. I don't buy nearly as much as Gates'. But any any event, all the money Gates isn't spending on beer is going into the banks or stocks, where the money is invested into new businesses. He's not burying gold in his backyard, he's making available his profits for investment, would you rather the government take his money? Are the government's social programs as effective as Gates' charities? Are the tax breaks they give as good as the investments Gates would make?
And almost all of those scams start with them giving you a REVERSIBLE payment. Because that first payment is REVERSIBLE, you send them their portion, which happens to go through. Remove their payment getting reversed, and the scam is removed.
I agree E-gold with non-reversible transactions would be great. What would be much better is if capital gains taxes on gold were eliminated, thereby elimination the need of records of every transaction along with calculations and taxes incurred, sent to the government and kept on record. Until that happens, I don't see Gold being able to give us what it's can, monetary freedom, which is actually is large part of freedom.
The US government is giving them tax breaks in their income in the US. Their income made outside the US shouldn't be taxed, and currently other 'tax breaks' cover those too..
You still want the second, you want to tax consumption, or sales. Money people don't spend goes into a bank or stocks as is also invested or creates jobs. That's why a national sales tax and 0 income and 0 capital gains is the best environment for economic growth. This also promotes freedom, since now the government doesn't have to have detailed information about your job.
So Hulu doesn't receive ad money? They can't calculate how many video views they get? Just because it's not in the metric you pick, doesn't mean the value is less, or that shareholders wouldn't understand. Everyone understands the online ad market, and everyone is chasing it!
That's not a fair comparison. Tethering generally uses a lot more data, about an order of magnitude more. The amount of connections also increases by an order of magnitude. People sporadically using data on their smartphones is vastly different to tethered laptops on all day long. So it makes perfect sense that it costs more for this service.
This is almost the opposite scenario, I don't understand the complaint, either way the channels get the same revenue, and the ads are shown to a wider audience, win win. Comcast is the one losing, now they have to carry that video over tcp and to the cable box. Comcast is incurring the extra cost, not the networks.
I can't even copy paste to google things because I can't right click on their site, what a horrible idea.
It seems to me most of the really eye opening reports lately came from Wikileaks. I don't see a reason ads can't provide them and their staff with enough revenue. Google has plenty of employees, yet a lot of their products are free. It's the new age of the internet, and bloggers and the new true freedom of press the internet provides has decimated these old companies.
Now that anyone with a cell phone and internet can be a blogger, there is often no need to send in your highly paid reporters to location for weeks or months, there are thousands of independent reporters, young volunteers in new countries, already on site with even more in depth knowledge as well as cultural experience. A lot of these old companies need to disappear as these new entities emerge. I will simply embrace the revolution.
Where was the most truthful information given about the Libya attacks? For free from some Dutch nerd. Where were the best reports on the Tsunami, from cell phone cameras people gave out the footage for free. I'm not saying there shouldn't be organizations similar to NYT, but if they ask for money for information, I'll take a pass. If they were worth the money I would. I'd like to see HD cameras given to say a thousand rebels in Libya. That might cost $100,000 and we would see amazing, exclusive news. That people would pay for, but not what they are currently offering.
Money; as the money aspect becomes more important, the need for simultaneous releases will be more apparent. I'm sure circumvention and proxy services will crop up as more money is involved.
And they still release US first. Maybe they hedge their bets on the quality of the product. So they release to half the market, the US, and figure if there is a major bug only half their market will need replacements.
Let the games be released with no extra regulations to hop through, and they would always be released at the same time. Make companies hop through a million hoops, ban some games entirely from your country/continent, and yes, it might be a day or two delay. I'm surprised there isn't a lot more backlash.
Slashdot Mirror
You seem to not be concerned that the government would need records of every transaction you make, odd, and one of the reasons the income tax is so invasive already.
Mines opening and closing is usually not controlled by governments. Gold stored in central banks would be part of the money supply, and since the governments never just destroy their gold, it doesn't influence the supply at all. They influence supply through regulations and permits for gold mining.
Even with fractional reserve banking removed, any timed deposit can still be loaned out, or invested, although I'm not opposed to fractional reserve banking, as long as the capital requirement is backed by gold, not paper dollars.
Inflation tends to increase spending and borrowing.
That's the entire problem, we want to encourage saving and investment, not spending and borrowing. Inflation also increases riskier investments, since not investing gives a negative return. The tax code further encourages spending and borrowing, they are tax deductible, but savings and investments are taxed again.
It's the fact that paying a lot more now for shitty electric cars make no sense. Why would government directed research suddenly lead to new discoveries? Will the government direct the research into the right areas? It's not like companies haven't noticed, and as prices for new tech go down, and prices for oil go up, there will be a point where we switch over.
You want to force that switch on us earlier. Do you really wanna be paying 2-4x for a slower less practical vehicle? Will collapsing the economy be worth switching to electric cars a decade sooner?
Even if we aren't yet, by then it won't 'probably', it will be far too expensive. The bleek future of quiet electric cars is ever looming in the future. Why ban them for the few of us left with classic cars in 2050?
Synthesis of gold? I mean besides neutron absorption (billions of times more expensive than mining), that technology seems extremely far off. By the time that occurs, I assume everything will basically be free, and I won't be working. Creating gold from other elements may likely come far after molecular and atomic 3d printers are available. If that's the case, I could already print anything I desire.
Deflation is the entire point of a growing economy, my wages and savings gain value, and everything is cheaper, life gets better. Why do you think technology is so great, because electronics prices deflation outpaces the US dollar inflation, so cells phones and computers are getting cheaper. Wouldn't it be nice if everything else also got cheaper, it's just that 10% inflation in money supply outpaces the lower deflation rates other products have, like cars, food, and energy.
You missed the point, the Capital Gains Tax on gold makes every transaction, every time you sell gold for dollars to make a purchase, every time you transact in gold, if the price of gold went up, you need to report those capital gains to the government and pay 15% taxes on those gains. Therefore, every transaction is required to be recorded and sent with appropriate forms to the government, every single legal transaction every time the price of gold goes up from the date you originally purchased it. It makes using gold as money infinitely more complex and less free.
Gold only grows by about 1%/yr, it's still an exponential increase in money supply, but it's very stable, and for the most part uncontrolled by governments. Swings in gold supply aren't drastic and aren't short term, it takes years for a new mine to open, let alone enough to effect the money supply in a meaningful way. Hording is a problem, but most people will just leave it in banks, hording is more a problem now since people don't trust paper dollars to keep their value.
I think they spend any free time they have thinking of how to avoid being a juror again.
More like McAfee infected. One time I got McAfee on my computer, no idea how it happened, but it interfered terribly and was probably one of the hardest things to get rid of.
And it's $99/yr to be a xbox arcade developer. Super easy to write and deploy. Sony on the other hand?
I think solar will become practical and cheap within 5-10 yrs, and by cheap, I mean cheaper than coal.
Nuclear is expensive and dangerous.It's not really getting much cheaper and needs to be subsidized just to exist. Just leave the market alone and let Coal work for now, and solar will come online soon enough.
I just meant the trail isn't kept by the government. Private companies keeping their OWN paper trails to conduct business is fine with me. By freedom, I mean't my bank account can't be undermined by inflation, and lose 50% or more of it's value over my lifetime.
Using a monopolistic tactic like price setting will only result in the same effects as a monopoly using price setting, higher prices for everyone, that was my point.
They aren't gaming any system except ours. They pay all their overseas taxes. Unless you intentionally wrote in loopholes you can't avoid taxes. Comparably structured is a completely socialist idea. Some countries have no taxes, they rely on charities and a small government. That does not give the US a right to demand money from businesses operating there. It also doesn't give the US a right to demand the government start taxing businesses that operate in that country.
We currently give tax breaks if they are already paying higher taxes in the foreign country where they incur profits. The US is a unique case in this scenario, as almost every other country doesn't tax profits earned overseas. If we did tax those earnings again, the US companies would most likely split into a foreign owned part, as many US companies are forced to everyday if they can't receive similar tax breaks, or the paperwork is too excessive.
Giving them tax breaks on income earned in the US is odd. If it was all 'green tech' subsidies, then yell at the democrats. If it was another loophole they used, then we should fix it. But considering the fact that Google, MS, and Facebook all skirt tax laws via a 'loophole' shows the extent of the problem. The 'system' has been gamed by politicians for these companies, is it really that hard to write "%30 income tax".
But instead it's something like 20,000 pages of tax code.
I never understood the self righteousness that some possess when discussing taxing success. I understand taxing lack of success, which isn't done (you don't rack up debt when you are on social programs). I also understand the victimization of employees that was rampant decades past, which is really the sole reason for taxing rich people, and the sole reason for a progressive tax system. The internet combined with globalization is destroying the 'company town' mentality and ability to operate, although there is still a long, long way to go. As the democratizing effect of the internet takes hold, and since small business is the largest block of employers in the country, will the intellectual position of Austrian economists finally flourish? Will true capitalistic markets emerge?
As geographic location erodes monopolies, and the internet erodes conspiracies, successful companies should be embraced. The protectionist government that was required to keep companies from taking advantage of employees has grown out of control and is countering progress. A flat tax is becoming more and more rational, I can only hope that in the future, there is a taxable limit on your income, like how social security taxes currently work. Many other regulations regarding minimum wage, breaks, work hours, overtime, and especcially ease of firing, are completely anti capitalistic, and destroy millions of jobs.
I don't buy yachts, which would be taxed. I don't buy nearly as much as Gates'. But any any event, all the money Gates isn't spending on beer is going into the banks or stocks, where the money is invested into new businesses. He's not burying gold in his backyard, he's making available his profits for investment, would you rather the government take his money? Are the government's social programs as effective as Gates' charities? Are the tax breaks they give as good as the investments Gates would make?
How does 'price fixing' or taxing prices way up help me? Global taxation? and I thought the UN was bad enough.
And almost all of those scams start with them giving you a REVERSIBLE payment. Because that first payment is REVERSIBLE, you send them their portion, which happens to go through. Remove their payment getting reversed, and the scam is removed.
I agree E-gold with non-reversible transactions would be great. What would be much better is if capital gains taxes on gold were eliminated, thereby elimination the need of records of every transaction along with calculations and taxes incurred, sent to the government and kept on record. Until that happens, I don't see Gold being able to give us what it's can, monetary freedom, which is actually is large part of freedom.
The US government is giving them tax breaks in their income in the US. Their income made outside the US shouldn't be taxed, and currently other 'tax breaks' cover those too..
You still want the second, you want to tax consumption, or sales. Money people don't spend goes into a bank or stocks as is also invested or creates jobs. That's why a national sales tax and 0 income and 0 capital gains is the best environment for economic growth. This also promotes freedom, since now the government doesn't have to have detailed information about your job.
So Hulu doesn't receive ad money? They can't calculate how many video views they get? Just because it's not in the metric you pick, doesn't mean the value is less, or that shareholders wouldn't understand. Everyone understands the online ad market, and everyone is chasing it!
That's not a fair comparison. Tethering generally uses a lot more data, about an order of magnitude more. The amount of connections also increases by an order of magnitude. People sporadically using data on their smartphones is vastly different to tethered laptops on all day long. So it makes perfect sense that it costs more for this service.
This is almost the opposite scenario, I don't understand the complaint, either way the channels get the same revenue, and the ads are shown to a wider audience, win win. Comcast is the one losing, now they have to carry that video over tcp and to the cable box. Comcast is incurring the extra cost, not the networks.
It seems to me most of the really eye opening reports lately came from Wikileaks. I don't see a reason ads can't provide them and their staff with enough revenue. Google has plenty of employees, yet a lot of their products are free. It's the new age of the internet, and bloggers and the new true freedom of press the internet provides has decimated these old companies.
Now that anyone with a cell phone and internet can be a blogger, there is often no need to send in your highly paid reporters to location for weeks or months, there are thousands of independent reporters, young volunteers in new countries, already on site with even more in depth knowledge as well as cultural experience. A lot of these old companies need to disappear as these new entities emerge. I will simply embrace the revolution.
Where was the most truthful information given about the Libya attacks? For free from some Dutch nerd. Where were the best reports on the Tsunami, from cell phone cameras people gave out the footage for free. I'm not saying there shouldn't be organizations similar to NYT, but if they ask for money for information, I'll take a pass. If they were worth the money I would. I'd like to see HD cameras given to say a thousand rebels in Libya. That might cost $100,000 and we would see amazing, exclusive news. That people would pay for, but not what they are currently offering.
Is making a game so good that I'm willing and glad to give them my money really abuse?
Money; as the money aspect becomes more important, the need for simultaneous releases will be more apparent. I'm sure circumvention and proxy services will crop up as more money is involved.
And they still release US first. Maybe they hedge their bets on the quality of the product. So they release to half the market, the US, and figure if there is a major bug only half their market will need replacements.
Let the games be released with no extra regulations to hop through, and they would always be released at the same time. Make companies hop through a million hoops, ban some games entirely from your country/continent, and yes, it might be a day or two delay. I'm surprised there isn't a lot more backlash.