It is not stealing to take back stolen property. The rich have bought themselves laws that transferred wealth to them, well, we can vote ourselves laws that transfer it back to us.
I've seen research that shows that the point on the Laffer curve of maximum government revenue comes at 60-70 percent. Much, much higher than we have today. Ninety percent may be too high.
Well, according to this research, taking money away from those making quite a bit more than $75k per year and giving it to those making quite a bit less would raise total happiness. Let's reverse the policies of upwards wealth transfer put into place by the wealthy. Let's go back to the 90% marginal tax rate on the highest earners we had in the 50s. The system worked better for them, they should pay more because they got more from society. Let's stop letting the rich set policy that benefits them at our expense. We need to re-transfer the wealth they have spent the last fifty years "transferring" to themselves. Remember, taking back what was stolen from you is not stealing.
That's stupid. Ecosystems aren't designed to serve humanity. Economic systems have no other purpose. When humans manage ecosystems, they take steps to reduce periodic die backs and extinctions. If a herd of cows drop dead, someone done screwed up. You've fallen victim to the is/aught fallacy.
That's funny, I always thought force, not freedom, was central to Republicans. So much force, so many things to tell people to do or not to do, go to church, don't get an abortion, don't have anal sex, don't smoke pot, don't drink on Sundays, no sex out of wedlock, don't use condoms, the list goes on.
Funny thing, that. Democrats want to regulate actions that harm other people. Republicans want to regulate actions that make their God sad. Democrats increase freedom by protecting the little guy from exploitation by the powerful. Republicans reduce freedom by interfering with your personal life.
Who let their cat moderate this guy offtopic? Look, we know you furry fuckers don't like being laughed at, but if you weren't so goddamn illiterate, we wouldn't do it. Except when you fall off shit and pretend like it didn't happen. Yeah, we saw that. That's why we're laughing.
Interesting. I bet the people with bad ideas get told that before anyone commits to anything. Nobody has much family money to blow on bad business plans. I don't see that as a bad thing.
The fact is that here in America we overvalue the entrepreneur, the leader, the risk taker. Which leads to people unsuited to the position attempting it, for status. I think that's why we have so many failures here.
Over there, if you aren't cut out to start your own business, you work in a cooperative. You still get a say in how things are run and you get a decent middle class life. They used to have a society wide income cap of ten to one, richest to poorest. Now it's fifty to one. They voted on that. People felt, you know, we're doing pretty good as a society now, we can afford to give our best and brightest more.
I don't find that the least bit surprising. Do you?
No, I'd have to genetically engineer them and then find some way to clone them very quickly. It's possible, but you have to do something, wishing won't get it done.
Good question. They have a website, a page on wiki, you know, but I just had to type 'toddler keyboard' into Google on another thread, so I'm done looking stuff up for people for the day.:P
While I agree with your philosophy in general, a computer isn't one thing, there is no specific 'adult version.' It (and input devices for it) are infinitely adaptable. We have input devices and software for special needs adults, we have input devices and software that adapts to the user, we have educational software for all ages, and we know a great deal, thanks to science, about early childhood development. Toddlers are all little scientists, making and testing hypothesis about the world. Giving them adult equipment to test and hypothesize about is certainly a good idea, but with computers, we can do so much more.
I would think that an ideal keyboard for a toddler might be arranged like a simplified adult keyboard, with as many keys, but larger and laid out in a rectangular grid, not offset. They would be color coded with perhaps six colors. Groups of adjacent keys would have the same color. There should also be flexible overlays with pictures on them, again, perhaps six per overlay. When the kid was young, you'd use simple software and the colors on the keys or the pictures on the overlays. Have little game like what's the same, what's different, match the picture or color on the screen, stuff like that. As they got older, you'd introduce them to letters and numbers using the keyboard as an actual keyboard. The whole thing would have to be sturdy and dishwasher safe. Are there such things out there? A quick Google search says, yeah, there are.
While toddler drool can eventually corrode copper fire button contacts, and food particles may become lodged in the joystck boot, the TAC-2 is easy to disassemble and clean.
Pando Media Booster = slows down your internet connection Norton Antivirus = makes your computer vulnerable to hacking Trusted Computing = you can't be sure if you have control of your computer etc.
Your contribution to this discussion is sort of depressing.
We could try what Chile started to try with Project Cybersyn. Right before we had Allende killed and replaced by Pinochet. The problem with a planned economy is the lack of price signals. As soon as a socialist figured out a way to make a planned economy work, we killed him. It's pretty simple: modern communications systems plus participatory shop-floor democracy plus democratically elected socialist government equals a working planned economy with no recessions.
Or, if you want a modern day, working and profitable example, look at the Mondragon Collective. They took one of the poorest, most isolated regions of Spain and turned it into an industrial powerhouse in under fifty years. Everything there is a cooperative, and everyone with a good idea is encouraged to start their own. Your cooperative bank lends you money, hooks you up with a cooperative staffing firm, helps you with your business plans, gets you a cooperative marketing firm, and points you towards cooperative suppliers. Around ninety percent of new business there survive more than five years, what's the survival rate for new businesses under a capitalist system? Try the inverse of that, about ten percent.
Capitalism is all about protecting the interests of the elite. It is the opposite of a free market. In fact, socialist societies like Mondragon pull off a true free market better than any capitalist system. And nobody has to be homeless and starving to death on the streets.
Despite the clever use of the misspelling "Hai", your grammar is obviously much too polished. You, sir, are no LOLcat. Buy your own damned cheeseburger.
Vietnam was never really socialist. Like most places claiming to be, they were and are an oligarchy. If you want to see real socialism, look at countries where socialists come to power through free elections, like many European countries. Or Chile, oh wait, we had Allende killed.
Dude, I just DID refute them. This amateur partisan hack used made up figures, and a simple sanity check shows us that for the higher figures to be true, the entire mall would have to be packed shoulder to shoulder, and you would not be able to see so much green grass. People at the Beck rally were laying out blankets to sit on. If there were as many people as Beck claims, there would have been no room for sitting.
Here is an explanation of how crowd size is estimated by professionals. Today, we use aerial photography and computers to make highly accurate crowd size estimates.
Chef: You see, chidren, sometimes a man needs to be with a woman. But sometimes, when the lovin' is over, the woman just wants to talk and talk and talk and talk.
[song] But a prostitute is someone who would love you No matter who you are, or what you look like. Yes, it's true, children. That's not why you pay a prostitute, No, you don't pay her to stay, you pay her to leave afterwards. That's why I pays a lot for prostitutes! Ladies and Gentlemen, Mr. James Taylor.
James Taylor: A prostitute is like any other woman They all trade somethin' for sex and they do it well. Chef: And that's why I say- Chef and James Taylor: Prostitutes! Prostitutes! They- Chef: Oohhhh [sees principal] James Taylor, what the hell are you doin' in here?! Singing' about prostitutes to the children! Get out of here!
You're the second person to be confused by my statement. Read the person I was responding to. You have basically repeated my point back to me, as if I did not understand what I was saying, or saying the exact opposite.
Pajamas Media? Really? You point to amateur "analysis" by a hyper-partisan blog as "factual?" Please, there were no more than 100,000 people at the rally, at most. Do the math. By your estimates, everyone in the entire vicinity must have been attending the event, rather than mere summer tourists there by chance, and they all must have been standing shoulder to shoulder. Funny how you can see plenty of green grass showing in all the pictures, the crowd was not that dense.
Slashdot Mirror
It is not stealing to take back stolen property. The rich have bought themselves laws that transferred wealth to them, well, we can vote ourselves laws that transfer it back to us.
I've seen research that shows that the point on the Laffer curve of maximum government revenue comes at 60-70 percent. Much, much higher than we have today. Ninety percent may be too high.
Well, according to this research, taking money away from those making quite a bit more than $75k per year and giving it to those making quite a bit less would raise total happiness. Let's reverse the policies of upwards wealth transfer put into place by the wealthy. Let's go back to the 90% marginal tax rate on the highest earners we had in the 50s. The system worked better for them, they should pay more because they got more from society. Let's stop letting the rich set policy that benefits them at our expense. We need to re-transfer the wealth they have spent the last fifty years "transferring" to themselves. Remember, taking back what was stolen from you is not stealing.
That's stupid. Ecosystems aren't designed to serve humanity. Economic systems have no other purpose. When humans manage ecosystems, they take steps to reduce periodic die backs and extinctions. If a herd of cows drop dead, someone done screwed up. You've fallen victim to the is/aught fallacy.
That's funny, I always thought force, not freedom, was central to Republicans. So much force, so many things to tell people to do or not to do, go to church, don't get an abortion, don't have anal sex, don't smoke pot, don't drink on Sundays, no sex out of wedlock, don't use condoms, the list goes on.
Funny thing, that. Democrats want to regulate actions that harm other people. Republicans want to regulate actions that make their God sad. Democrats increase freedom by protecting the little guy from exploitation by the powerful. Republicans reduce freedom by interfering with your personal life.
Who let their cat moderate this guy offtopic? Look, we know you furry fuckers don't like being laughed at, but if you weren't so goddamn illiterate, we wouldn't do it. Except when you fall off shit and pretend like it didn't happen. Yeah, we saw that. That's why we're laughing.
Luxury. In my day, we had to torch kids with whale oil.
Interesting. I bet the people with bad ideas get told that before anyone commits to anything. Nobody has much family money to blow on bad business plans. I don't see that as a bad thing.
The fact is that here in America we overvalue the entrepreneur, the leader, the risk taker. Which leads to people unsuited to the position attempting it, for status. I think that's why we have so many failures here.
Over there, if you aren't cut out to start your own business, you work in a cooperative. You still get a say in how things are run and you get a decent middle class life. They used to have a society wide income cap of ten to one, richest to poorest. Now it's fifty to one. They voted on that. People felt, you know, we're doing pretty good as a society now, we can afford to give our best and brightest more.
I don't find that the least bit surprising. Do you?
No, I'd have to genetically engineer them and then find some way to clone them very quickly. It's possible, but you have to do something, wishing won't get it done.
Good question. They have a website, a page on wiki, you know, but I just had to type 'toddler keyboard' into Google on another thread, so I'm done looking stuff up for people for the day. :P
While I agree with your philosophy in general, a computer isn't one thing, there is no specific 'adult version.' It (and input devices for it) are infinitely adaptable. We have input devices and software for special needs adults, we have input devices and software that adapts to the user, we have educational software for all ages, and we know a great deal, thanks to science, about early childhood development. Toddlers are all little scientists, making and testing hypothesis about the world. Giving them adult equipment to test and hypothesize about is certainly a good idea, but with computers, we can do so much more.
I would think that an ideal keyboard for a toddler might be arranged like a simplified adult keyboard, with as many keys, but larger and laid out in a rectangular grid, not offset. They would be color coded with perhaps six colors. Groups of adjacent keys would have the same color. There should also be flexible overlays with pictures on them, again, perhaps six per overlay. When the kid was young, you'd use simple software and the colors on the keys or the pictures on the overlays. Have little game like what's the same, what's different, match the picture or color on the screen, stuff like that. As they got older, you'd introduce them to letters and numbers using the keyboard as an actual keyboard. The whole thing would have to be sturdy and dishwasher safe. Are there such things out there? A quick Google search says, yeah, there are.
While toddler drool can eventually corrode copper fire button contacts, and food particles may become lodged in the joystck boot, the TAC-2 is easy to disassemble and clean.
Did you miss the title of the Anonymous Coward's post? "Sort of depressing" was as close to the opposite of "Totally hilarious" as I could get.
Pando Media Booster = slows down your internet connection
Norton Antivirus = makes your computer vulnerable to hacking
Trusted Computing = you can't be sure if you have control of your computer
etc.
Your contribution to this discussion is sort of depressing.
We could try what Chile started to try with Project Cybersyn. Right before we had Allende killed and replaced by Pinochet. The problem with a planned economy is the lack of price signals. As soon as a socialist figured out a way to make a planned economy work, we killed him. It's pretty simple: modern communications systems plus participatory shop-floor democracy plus democratically elected socialist government equals a working planned economy with no recessions.
Or, if you want a modern day, working and profitable example, look at the Mondragon Collective. They took one of the poorest, most isolated regions of Spain and turned it into an industrial powerhouse in under fifty years. Everything there is a cooperative, and everyone with a good idea is encouraged to start their own. Your cooperative bank lends you money, hooks you up with a cooperative staffing firm, helps you with your business plans, gets you a cooperative marketing firm, and points you towards cooperative suppliers. Around ninety percent of new business there survive more than five years, what's the survival rate for new businesses under a capitalist system? Try the inverse of that, about ten percent.
Capitalism is all about protecting the interests of the elite. It is the opposite of a free market. In fact, socialist societies like Mondragon pull off a true free market better than any capitalist system. And nobody has to be homeless and starving to death on the streets.
Despite the clever use of the misspelling "Hai", your grammar is obviously much too polished. You, sir, are no LOLcat. Buy your own damned cheeseburger.
I understand that recessions and depressions are considered a normal part of capitalism. That is one of the reasons I consider it a failure.
Vietnam was never really socialist. Like most places claiming to be, they were and are an oligarchy. If you want to see real socialism, look at countries where socialists come to power through free elections, like many European countries. Or Chile, oh wait, we had Allende killed.
Socialism for the rich isn't really socialism, though.
Dude, I just DID refute them. This amateur partisan hack used made up figures, and a simple sanity check shows us that for the higher figures to be true, the entire mall would have to be packed shoulder to shoulder, and you would not be able to see so much green grass. People at the Beck rally were laying out blankets to sit on. If there were as many people as Beck claims, there would have been no room for sitting.
Here is an explanation of how crowd size is estimated by professionals. Today, we use aerial photography and computers to make highly accurate crowd size estimates.
http://www.slate.com/id/2265622/
Chef: You see, chidren, sometimes a man needs to be with a woman.
But sometimes, when the lovin' is over, the woman just wants to talk and talk
and talk and talk.
[song]
But a prostitute is someone who would love you
No matter who you are, or what you look like.
Yes, it's true, children.
That's not why you pay a prostitute,
No, you don't pay her to stay, you pay her to leave afterwards.
That's why I pays a lot for prostitutes! Ladies and Gentlemen, Mr. James Taylor.
James Taylor: A prostitute is like any other woman
They all trade somethin' for sex and they do it well.
Chef: And that's why I say-
Chef and James Taylor: Prostitutes! Prostitutes! They-
Chef: Oohhhh [sees principal]
James Taylor, what the hell are you doin' in here?!
Singing' about prostitutes to the children! Get out of here!
You're the second person to be confused by my statement. Read the person I was responding to. You have basically repeated my point back to me, as if I did not understand what I was saying, or saying the exact opposite.
Neither has anyone else, because liberals don't care about that crap, which is why every attempt to make a liberal talk network has failed.
That's right, we prefer to think for ourselves rather than being spoon fed regurgitated talking points by moronic pundits.
Pajamas Media? Really? You point to amateur "analysis" by a hyper-partisan blog as "factual?" Please, there were no more than 100,000 people at the rally, at most. Do the math. By your estimates, everyone in the entire vicinity must have been attending the event, rather than mere summer tourists there by chance, and they all must have been standing shoulder to shoulder. Funny how you can see plenty of green grass showing in all the pictures, the crowd was not that dense.
I don't know, it's something I heard Lady Mondegreen sing once.