Of course, that is assuming that there is some need to break up a 'monopoly' in the first place.
The sad thing is the proof of the need for antitrust laws has been staring us in the face for months now. Since the bailout of AIG how many times have we heard the phrase, "too big to fail." How many companies are now trying to convince us that they also are too big to fail? In effect these companies are telling us that they represent a single point of failure for the entire US economy.
The leftist view that we need to prop up these companies is completely wrong. The righties' hands-off approach to all things private inevitably leads to wild fluctuations as companies consolidate and dominate government and individual roles followed by epic collapses and rebuilding periods.
Those that worship at the alter of the free market either don't understand: 1. That competition is the heart of capitalism, or 2. Companies hate, and will suppress, competition because it cuts into profits.
The government should play a role in enforcing competition in a healthy market place. Too much government intervention leads to inefficiency and no government intervention leads to corruption. It is through the involvement of an INFORMED electorate that WE THE PEOPLE control how our government interacts with the private sector.
I say use the bailout money to break these companies up into more manageable and competitive pieces that, once established, will be made into private companies again.
Boiling your opinions down to oversimplifications like, "no government intervention ever!" is an excuse to remain uninformed and ignorant of what the problems actually are and will lead us away from any real solutions.
Both parties spend large sums of money on propaganda campaigns through right and left wing media outlets to convince us of the correctness of their oversimplified slogans and misrepresentations of the other side. If you believe them, know that you are being used.
Didn't you read my post?! I am not getting involved in any holiday activities, festivities, celebrations or indulgences of any kind; no matter how tempting they may be!
Oh...
*sighs, slumps shoulders, puts pitchfork and torch back into closet sits back down on the couch*
I applaud your efforts. Also, it is impressive you can separate the Christmas madness that starts after Thanksgiving from the actual holidays of Dec. 23rd to 31st.
Personally, I have given up on the distinction. I HATE the holidays. I hate the insipid music, the rampant consumerism, the insufferable group think, the over indulgences, the peer-pressure induced family traditions, the bell ringing beggars in front of the stores that think somehow now, instead of the rest of the year, is the time to help those less fortunate than ourselves.
I hate them all; every mindless, consumption-driven holiday that the populous slides into as a Pavlovian response to the day on the calendar. I find them similar to hazing rituals that one generation went through so now they can't wait to inflict it upon the next. A sort of "Pay it Backwards" system of traditions our ancestors use to shackle us to their own superstitions from beyond the grave.
The indignity of the whole thing sends me into a blind frothing rage and causes me to cry out.
RISE UP! Oh, oppressed people ground under the jackboots of Santa Claus. We will be cleansed in the blood of carolers and bell-ringers. FIGHT ON! FIGHT ON! Free our righteous minds from the tyranny of low low prices, today only, on plasma screens and blue-ray DVD players. We will snuff the multi-colored lights from the trees and eaves and find sanctuary in the darkness once again my brothers and sisters. FOR I AM THE WRATH OF GOD!!!!... who is with me?
Paragraphs man, paragraphs! It's a wall of bloody text up there. Not to mention a premature and gratuitous execution of Godwin's Law That said:
Power should be given to government only as much as necessary. Such databases should be in the private sphere, held by someone like the clergy with the "seal of the confessional", or by attorneys in a fashion similar to attorney-client privilege. We need a system of internetized public notaries/attorneys holding confidential private information, regarding issues of identity, privacy, will/testament etc.
So, government bad, but combining the clergy and attorneys "in the private sector" WhatCouldPossiblyGoWrong?!? Or in other words, what we need to do is create another quasi-governmental agency (that answers to whom?) to entrust this super secret information to, but since it isn't called "government" it's somehow better than what it really is?
You then go on to say that this entire mythical structure you've created would be useless because they wouldn't actually give out the information law enforcement is looking for. So why the hell are you suggesting we create it in the first place?
You're entire post can be reduced to, "No! The gub'mint can't have my bodily fluid data." Saving you time you could use to add another layer to your tinfoil hat and haul a few more wheelbarrows of dirt out of your survivalist's bunker.
I actually had that reaction to all the characters when I read the first book. I had high expectations after a glowing review by someone I mistakenly thought had good taste.
I'm sure the entire first book could be condensed down to the size of a pamphlet if you took out the constant whining by the characters about being tired, cold and hungry. I get that it's supposed to be realistic and a real adventure is going to consist of hardships, but come on! If I wanted to read hundreds of pages of whining I'd steal a teenage girls diary.
On the bright side, that's how you make a movie out of this series. After you take out all the whining you may have to create new content to fill out a basic trilogy of movies.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present
* and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientifictechnological elite.
It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system -- ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.
I voted straight Republican, because I think they are unfairly being blamed (by folks like you) for the current mess, which properly lies on the head of ONE man (Bush).
So George Bush Jr. is really a brilliant mastermind that was able to corral his entire party and remold them into his personal vision then march them blindly off a cliff? That's absurd. He was put into power by Republican stalwarts like Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and the rest of the Republican machine. Four of his cabinet members were convicted felons pardoned by Reagan and Bush Sr. after the Iran-Contra hearings.
W. and the Neo-Con movement are a direct extension of the vision set out by Ronald Reagan. Perhaps the movement has been caricaturized a bit over time, especially by ideologues like Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Anne Coulter, etc. pushing the right ever farther to the fringe, but it's still the same blue print.
1. Cut taxes
2. Spend like mad
3. Use war to whip up patriotic fervor
4. Profit
And finally the Democrats held Congress for two years; did anything improve? Nope.
You underestimate just how ineffective at governing the Democrats are. First of all they had a very slim majority in congress but were still unable to get anything past "Mastermind Bush" and his bully pulpit. They're still going to be incompetent as long as Pelosi and Reed are at the cameral helms in congress.
Until citizens can stop being blinded by partisan stupidity and start trying to hold the people they vote for accountable, regardless of party, our government is going to be defined by these wild swings in power as we blame parties for not solving our problems. The first thing we need is a move toward the center and to drive away the extremist influences of the right and left.
While 50% is an interesting number to watch for, what's more important is how we get there.
The fact that our presidential elections are popularity contests where contestants pander to the populous with tax cuts, is one way.
The false logic behind trickle down economics which has lead to a growing disparity in income earned, is another. Look at the numbers, since Reagan and the rich have gotten much richer while the poor have gotten much poorer. Thus pushing more people below the level where they need to pay taxes.
While I don't agree with the stereotype, for brevities sake, I'll use the tax and spend liberal label that defines one side, while our only other option currently is the borrow and spend conservative on the other.
The majority will take more and more from the minority, and there will be nothing they can do but leave the country.
Where are you proposing they should go?
Atlas very well may shrug at some point in the near future, but it's more likely to be the high earning liberal elitists that will leave the country if there is a strong conservative backlash after this Democratic majority isn't able to fix all the worlds problems in the next 4 years. They are, after all, the ones unafraid of the socialist nanny states that provide the kind of society Americans are accustomed to.
As for the wealthy moving their businesses over seas, they're already doing that.
Do you know how inefficient that is?!? In order to use your body's power you need to convert food energy into muscle movement. Did you even consider all the water, pesticides and fertilizer it took to grow you food, or grow the food of the animal you ate? Not to mention the transportation cost of getting that food to your local grocery store and from there to your house.
You probably cooked it too, you insensitive clod.
When are you hippies going to learn that the free market is going to save the environment. Fossil fuels pack more energy into a smaller package than anything this side of plutonium.
That's why I never use elbow grease. In order to improve efficiency and save $$$$ I lie motionless in a diesel powered bed with robotic legs that walk me anywhere I need to go. Not that I ever go anywhere. My coal-fire-powered house provides me with everything I need. Also, I drink gasoline because it's cheaper than milk.
So you see, who is really the environmentally friendly one here? I'm self sufficient and I don't need to kill any plants or animals to feed my selfish "needs." I let God do all my killing for me 6000 years ago when he created the earth and instantaneously converted the dinosaurs into oil for my personal use. I'm still not sure why he put so much of it on the wrong side of the planet, but he works in mysterious ways.
While I agree with all the excuses cited for why people feel justified in acting like a D-Bag online, I have a different theory for the cause. If you've ever been fortunate enough to know a hard working person, and I mean a really hard working person, that isn't making a lot of money than you've often met a person that is strangely positive about life.
Paradoxically is seems to be the people living comfortable lives, that have time to sit around and post on websites or play lots of video games, that are the most angry. I don't believe it's the games or online anonymity that makes them angry as much as a sense of futility, or not having anything better to do with their time. People that work a lot or have productive hobbies seem a lot happier in general.
There's an interesting book, that I actually haven't read yet, called "The Progress Paradox: How Life Gets Better While People Feel Worse". The most interesting citation I've heard from this book is that according to studies quadriplegics have a more positive outlook on life than millionaires.
I've extrapolated this out figuring that those people that don't have time, or have better things to do, than sweat the small stuff are going to be a lot happier than those wasting their precious time on meaningless entertainment.
So your solution is to bring those who sell them the junk to power?
Good call.
In addition:
What could do what I say? Ah yes, that's it, the Fair Tax - taxing consumption instead of savings and earning as the current ridiculous system does.
Fist of all savings aren't taxed. And while earnings are, the problem with reversing the model is that our economy is driven by consumer spending, aka consumption. But a high barrier on consumption and watch our ridiculous global economic system crash and burn.
The "fair" tax could work in the long run (probably about 1 generation or roughly 30 years), but it would be absolutely brutal in the short term.
Also, this siren song of getting rid of the IRS sounds nice except that it would have to be replaced with a tax law enforcement agency to police the system and make sure everyone is playing "fair."
I can't believe the government suddenly wants to regulate a merger. I thought that went out the window the day they let Microsoft off the hook with a slap on the wrist. Funny what a little economic meltdown will do.
At least the Fed didn't decide Yahoo needs a bailout. Why not throw a few billion their way while they're at it? And I hate to bring it up, but my company could use a little propping up too. It's a one person business so a few million would probably do it.
Agreed, that is the biggest concern one can have about him, but that said I don't think anything can prepare a person for running the most powerful country on earth. The closest thing would be a governorship of an extremely powerful state like New York or California, but even then it's not even close.
The most important part of being president is having the judgment to appoint the best people possible to fill your cabinet positions and get you the best information. After that, an understanding of the constitution and some knowledge of world history would be my biggest qualifiers.
- I'm quite certain America's enemies in the middle east will be routing for an Obama victory -
They might be, but they will pay dearly for it. Obama has said that he's actually going to fight terrorism where they are and with the help of our allies. This will weaken terrorist forces, unlike launching headfirst into reckless wars which have strengthened it worldwide. War is far too blunt an instrument to fight a decentralized enemy. Diplomacy and surgical strikes at targets vetted by good intelligence is how you fight terrorist cells. Or to quote Obama in the second debate, "You don't fight an enemy that operates in 60 countries by occupying one of them."
All that being said, it may be time for a change of the guard. McCain probably should have been President in 2000.
Without a doubt. McCain would have had my vote if it were McCain vs. Gore in 2000--as it should have been. Sadly, time seems to have passed him by. And it's too bad. The man has served his country for 50 years, but his party betrayed him, and itself, 8 years ago and they are going to need to lose badly before they can take a good look at themselves, shake the parasites free, and come back to their party's roots--hopefully by 2012.
Of course the opposite could happen, and the party could simply further become an enraged parody of itself if they lose. God help us all if that happens.
--
Bill O'Reilly/Keith Olbermann -- Rush Limbaugh/Michael Moore
Two heads to the same coin. Reject extremism and think for yourself.
NO NO NO NO NO NO!! It is NOT the federal governments job to mold a citizen's legal behavior!!!
+5 Insightful? If the government's job is not to, "mold a citizen's legal behavior" then why do they have the ability to make laws? What exactly do laws do if not, "mold a citizen's legal behavior."
While I agree with the parent comment's sentiment that the government has opened up a pandora's box with all the different things they give tax incentives to, at the same time, I don't believe that jail should be the only deterrent available to keep the citizenry within the laws that make our society possible. Taxing for the usage of resources and the creation of waste strikes me as one of the fairest ways to allow excessive consumption by those that can afford it while giving some benefit to those that have to live with the repercussions.
ciaohound, take note of megamerican's response. You see, if you want to convince conservatives to do what's in their own best interest you need to phrase it in terms of how it will hurt other people.
For example when you say, "Excuse me Mr. Conservative, maybe we should try to develop alternative energy sources so we aren't dependent on a single source that is damaging to our environment."
Instead you should say, "Hey fellow conservative, we needs us some plant fuels, or some such shit, so that we ain't sendin' so much God damned money over to those towel-headed sand-niggers that keep blowin' everyone up."
Obviously it's repulsive to say it that way but otherwise your just wasting your breath talking to a really ignorant, angry and misinformed brick wall.
Textbooks are probably the single largest waste of school funds, after sports (nothing against sports but that's another comment). Bad teachers use textbooks as a crutch to hide their own ignorance on their subject while letting the book do their job. They also teach students bad habits by getting all their data from a single source, generally not even a very accurate source.
In the United States a move to open source would be nice but I would prefer a move away from textbooks and toward better teachers that teach their students how to research their topics. Research is a much easier task with the internet than it has been in the past with projects like Google's book search and Amazon's A9 make it much easier to incorporate real books into said research. But such a move would be strongly opposed by both the teachers unions and the book publishers. And as such hasn't a snowball's chance in hell of actually happening.
I don't know if they are unrelated. Gmail has now been integrated with Google Homepage (which is pretty cool) so the two may very well be connected.
It looks like not all the style information is correct yet but it looks like they expanded the widget architecture to embed more complex apps. My/. RSS feed is now expanded as well so I can rank articles and preview the summaries better from within the homepage.
I bet Obama is hilarious when he's drunk. People that speak very well sober are really funny when they start slurring their speech and their long sentences start breaking down as their train of thought wanders.
Now I really want to get Obama drunk... and then take him behind a middle school, and get him pregnant...
Thank you Dave Schroeder for that insightful and informative response all my fears have been put to rest and I can't wait to vote republican again. And if you don't mind me saying so, my that's a low UID you have--very impressive:o)
What's the point of getting invested in one of his strips?
How invested can you be? It's a comic strip. It doesn't cost you anything to read it in the papers, and if you don't have the patience for that you can buy the collected works as they are released in book form.
I realize some people get really into these things, but I wish they would realize that if every comic strip in America were to disappear one day life would go on unchanged. That people get overly invested in their entertainment is a problem for those people not the artists, athletes, musicians, etc. that create the entertainment.
It comes down to perspective and knowing the difference between getting what you need vs. getting what you want.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, that is assuming that there is some need to break up a 'monopoly' in the first place.
The sad thing is the proof of the need for antitrust laws has been staring us in the face for months now. Since the bailout of AIG how many times have we heard the phrase, "too big to fail." How many companies are now trying to convince us that they also are too big to fail? In effect these companies are telling us that they represent a single point of failure for the entire US economy.
The leftist view that we need to prop up these companies is completely wrong. The righties' hands-off approach to all things private inevitably leads to wild fluctuations as companies consolidate and dominate government and individual roles followed by epic collapses and rebuilding periods.
Those that worship at the alter of the free market either don't understand: 1. That competition is the heart of capitalism, or 2. Companies hate, and will suppress, competition because it cuts into profits.
The government should play a role in enforcing competition in a healthy market place. Too much government intervention leads to inefficiency and no government intervention leads to corruption. It is through the involvement of an INFORMED electorate that WE THE PEOPLE control how our government interacts with the private sector.
I say use the bailout money to break these companies up into more manageable and competitive pieces that, once established, will be made into private companies again.
Boiling your opinions down to oversimplifications like, "no government intervention ever!" is an excuse to remain uninformed and ignorant of what the problems actually are and will lead us away from any real solutions.
Both parties spend large sums of money on propaganda campaigns through right and left wing media outlets to convince us of the correctness of their oversimplified slogans and misrepresentations of the other side. If you believe them, know that you are being used.
Didn't you read my post?! I am not getting involved in any holiday activities, festivities, celebrations or indulgences of any kind; no matter how tempting they may be!
Oh...
*sighs, slumps shoulders, puts pitchfork and torch back into closet sits back down on the couch*
And the wrath of God weeps softly too himself.
I applaud your efforts. Also, it is impressive you can separate the Christmas madness that starts after Thanksgiving from the actual holidays of Dec. 23rd to 31st.
Personally, I have given up on the distinction. I HATE the holidays. I hate the insipid music, the rampant consumerism, the insufferable group think, the over indulgences, the peer-pressure induced family traditions, the bell ringing beggars in front of the stores that think somehow now, instead of the rest of the year, is the time to help those less fortunate than ourselves.
I hate them all; every mindless, consumption-driven holiday that the populous slides into as a Pavlovian response to the day on the calendar. I find them similar to hazing rituals that one generation went through so now they can't wait to inflict it upon the next. A sort of "Pay it Backwards" system of traditions our ancestors use to shackle us to their own superstitions from beyond the grave.
The indignity of the whole thing sends me into a blind frothing rage and causes me to cry out.
RISE UP! Oh, oppressed people ground under the jackboots of Santa Claus. We will be cleansed in the blood of carolers and bell-ringers. FIGHT ON! FIGHT ON! Free our righteous minds from the tyranny of low low prices, today only, on plasma screens and blue-ray DVD players. We will snuff the multi-colored lights from the trees and eaves and find sanctuary in the darkness once again my brothers and sisters. FOR I AM THE WRATH OF GOD!!!!... who is with me?
--
I'm really a glass half full kind of guy.
Paragraphs man, paragraphs! It's a wall of bloody text up there. Not to mention a premature and gratuitous execution of Godwin's Law That said:
So, government bad, but combining the clergy and attorneys "in the private sector" WhatCouldPossiblyGoWrong?!? Or in other words, what we need to do is create another quasi-governmental agency (that answers to whom?) to entrust this super secret information to, but since it isn't called "government" it's somehow better than what it really is?
You then go on to say that this entire mythical structure you've created would be useless because they wouldn't actually give out the information law enforcement is looking for. So why the hell are you suggesting we create it in the first place?
You're entire post can be reduced to, "No! The gub'mint can't have my bodily fluid data." Saving you time you could use to add another layer to your tinfoil hat and haul a few more wheelbarrows of dirt out of your survivalist's bunker.
Thank you.
Hmmm... There needs to be a "sad but true" mod option because I don't really find this funny at all--insightful if anything.
"iPhone Bitch!"
I actually had that reaction to all the characters when I read the first book. I had high expectations after a glowing review by someone I mistakenly thought had good taste.
I'm sure the entire first book could be condensed down to the size of a pamphlet if you took out the constant whining by the characters about being tired, cold and hungry. I get that it's supposed to be realistic and a real adventure is going to consist of hardships, but come on! If I wanted to read hundreds of pages of whining I'd steal a teenage girls diary.
On the bright side, that's how you make a movie out of this series. After you take out all the whining you may have to create new content to fill out a basic trilogy of movies.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present
* and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientifictechnological elite.
It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system -- ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.
I voted straight Republican, because I think they are unfairly being blamed (by folks like you) for the current mess, which properly lies on the head of ONE man (Bush).
So George Bush Jr. is really a brilliant mastermind that was able to corral his entire party and remold them into his personal vision then march them blindly off a cliff? That's absurd. He was put into power by Republican stalwarts like Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and the rest of the Republican machine. Four of his cabinet members were convicted felons pardoned by Reagan and Bush Sr. after the Iran-Contra hearings.
W. and the Neo-Con movement are a direct extension of the vision set out by Ronald Reagan. Perhaps the movement has been caricaturized a bit over time, especially by ideologues like Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Anne Coulter, etc. pushing the right ever farther to the fringe, but it's still the same blue print.
1. Cut taxes
2. Spend like mad
3. Use war to whip up patriotic fervor
4. Profit
You underestimate just how ineffective at governing the Democrats are. First of all they had a very slim majority in congress but were still unable to get anything past "Mastermind Bush" and his bully pulpit. They're still going to be incompetent as long as Pelosi and Reed are at the cameral helms in congress.
Until citizens can stop being blinded by partisan stupidity and start trying to hold the people they vote for accountable, regardless of party, our government is going to be defined by these wild swings in power as we blame parties for not solving our problems. The first thing we need is a move toward the center and to drive away the extremist influences of the right and left.
While 50% is an interesting number to watch for, what's more important is how we get there.
The fact that our presidential elections are popularity contests where contestants pander to the populous with tax cuts, is one way.
The false logic behind trickle down economics which has lead to a growing disparity in income earned, is another. Look at the numbers, since Reagan and the rich have gotten much richer while the poor have gotten much poorer. Thus pushing more people below the level where they need to pay taxes.
While I don't agree with the stereotype, for brevities sake, I'll use the tax and spend liberal label that defines one side, while our only other option currently is the borrow and spend conservative on the other.
Where are you proposing they should go?
Atlas very well may shrug at some point in the near future, but it's more likely to be the high earning liberal elitists that will leave the country if there is a strong conservative backlash after this Democratic majority isn't able to fix all the worlds problems in the next 4 years. They are, after all, the ones unafraid of the socialist nanny states that provide the kind of society Americans are accustomed to.
As for the wealthy moving their businesses over seas, they're already doing that.
...good old elbow grease is always there.
Do you know how inefficient that is?!? In order to use your body's power you need to convert food energy into muscle movement. Did you even consider all the water, pesticides and fertilizer it took to grow you food, or grow the food of the animal you ate? Not to mention the transportation cost of getting that food to your local grocery store and from there to your house.
You probably cooked it too, you insensitive clod.
When are you hippies going to learn that the free market is going to save the environment. Fossil fuels pack more energy into a smaller package than anything this side of plutonium.
That's why I never use elbow grease. In order to improve efficiency and save $$$$ I lie motionless in a diesel powered bed with robotic legs that walk me anywhere I need to go. Not that I ever go anywhere. My coal-fire-powered house provides me with everything I need. Also, I drink gasoline because it's cheaper than milk.
So you see, who is really the environmentally friendly one here? I'm self sufficient and I don't need to kill any plants or animals to feed my selfish "needs." I let God do all my killing for me 6000 years ago when he created the earth and instantaneously converted the dinosaurs into oil for my personal use. I'm still not sure why he put so much of it on the wrong side of the planet, but he works in mysterious ways.
While I agree with all the excuses cited for why people feel justified in acting like a D-Bag online, I have a different theory for the cause. If you've ever been fortunate enough to know a hard working person, and I mean a really hard working person, that isn't making a lot of money than you've often met a person that is strangely positive about life.
Paradoxically is seems to be the people living comfortable lives, that have time to sit around and post on websites or play lots of video games, that are the most angry. I don't believe it's the games or online anonymity that makes them angry as much as a sense of futility, or not having anything better to do with their time. People that work a lot or have productive hobbies seem a lot happier in general.
There's an interesting book, that I actually haven't read yet, called "The Progress Paradox: How Life Gets Better While People Feel Worse". The most interesting citation I've heard from this book is that according to studies quadriplegics have a more positive outlook on life than millionaires.
I've extrapolated this out figuring that those people that don't have time, or have better things to do, than sweat the small stuff are going to be a lot happier than those wasting their precious time on meaningless entertainment.
So your solution is to bring those who sell them the junk to power?
Good call.
In addition:
What could do what I say? Ah yes, that's it, the Fair Tax - taxing consumption instead of savings and earning as the current ridiculous system does.
Fist of all savings aren't taxed. And while earnings are, the problem with reversing the model is that our economy is driven by consumer spending, aka consumption. But a high barrier on consumption and watch our ridiculous global economic system crash and burn.
The "fair" tax could work in the long run (probably about 1 generation or roughly 30 years), but it would be absolutely brutal in the short term.
Also, this siren song of getting rid of the IRS sounds nice except that it would have to be replaced with a tax law enforcement agency to police the system and make sure everyone is playing "fair."
I can't believe the government suddenly wants to regulate a merger. I thought that went out the window the day they let Microsoft off the hook with a slap on the wrist. Funny what a little economic meltdown will do.
At least the Fed didn't decide Yahoo needs a bailout. Why not throw a few billion their way while they're at it? And I hate to bring it up, but my company could use a little propping up too. It's a one person business so a few million would probably do it.
- Obama's lack of experience -
Agreed, that is the biggest concern one can have about him, but that said I don't think anything can prepare a person for running the most powerful country on earth. The closest thing would be a governorship of an extremely powerful state like New York or California, but even then it's not even close.
The most important part of being president is having the judgment to appoint the best people possible to fill your cabinet positions and get you the best information. After that, an understanding of the constitution and some knowledge of world history would be my biggest qualifiers.
- I'm quite certain America's enemies in the middle east will be routing for an Obama victory -
They might be, but they will pay dearly for it. Obama has said that he's actually going to fight terrorism where they are and with the help of our allies. This will weaken terrorist forces, unlike launching headfirst into reckless wars which have strengthened it worldwide. War is far too blunt an instrument to fight a decentralized enemy. Diplomacy and surgical strikes at targets vetted by good intelligence is how you fight terrorist cells. Or to quote Obama in the second debate, "You don't fight an enemy that operates in 60 countries by occupying one of them."
All that being said, it may be time for a change of the guard. McCain probably should have been President in 2000.
Without a doubt. McCain would have had my vote if it were McCain vs. Gore in 2000--as it should have been. Sadly, time seems to have passed him by. And it's too bad. The man has served his country for 50 years, but his party betrayed him, and itself, 8 years ago and they are going to need to lose badly before they can take a good look at themselves, shake the parasites free, and come back to their party's roots--hopefully by 2012.
Of course the opposite could happen, and the party could simply further become an enraged parody of itself if they lose. God help us all if that happens.
--
Bill O'Reilly/Keith Olbermann -- Rush Limbaugh/Michael Moore Two heads to the same coin. Reject extremism and think for yourself.
C'mon post a link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZrr7AZ9nCY
+5 Insightful? If the government's job is not to, "mold a citizen's legal behavior" then why do they have the ability to make laws? What exactly do laws do if not, "mold a citizen's legal behavior."
While I agree with the parent comment's sentiment that the government has opened up a pandora's box with all the different things they give tax incentives to, at the same time, I don't believe that jail should be the only deterrent available to keep the citizenry within the laws that make our society possible. Taxing for the usage of resources and the creation of waste strikes me as one of the fairest ways to allow excessive consumption by those that can afford it while giving some benefit to those that have to live with the repercussions.
If I had mod points... I would kiss you...
ciaohound, take note of megamerican's response. You see, if you want to convince conservatives to do what's in their own best interest you need to phrase it in terms of how it will hurt other people.
For example when you say, "Excuse me Mr. Conservative, maybe we should try to develop alternative energy sources so we aren't dependent on a single source that is damaging to our environment."
Instead you should say, "Hey fellow conservative, we needs us some plant fuels, or some such shit, so that we ain't sendin' so much God damned money over to those towel-headed sand-niggers that keep blowin' everyone up."
Obviously it's repulsive to say it that way but otherwise your just wasting your breath talking to a really ignorant, angry and misinformed brick wall.
Textbooks are probably the single largest waste of school funds, after sports (nothing against sports but that's another comment). Bad teachers use textbooks as a crutch to hide their own ignorance on their subject while letting the book do their job. They also teach students bad habits by getting all their data from a single source, generally not even a very accurate source.
In the United States a move to open source would be nice but I would prefer a move away from textbooks and toward better teachers that teach their students how to research their topics. Research is a much easier task with the internet than it has been in the past with projects like Google's book search and Amazon's A9 make it much easier to incorporate real books into said research. But such a move would be strongly opposed by both the teachers unions and the book publishers. And as such hasn't a snowball's chance in hell of actually happening.
--
I'm a glass half full kind of guy.
I don't know if they are unrelated. Gmail has now been integrated with Google Homepage (which is pretty cool) so the two may very well be connected.
It looks like not all the style information is correct yet but it looks like they expanded the widget architecture to embed more complex apps. My /. RSS feed is now expanded as well so I can rank articles and preview the summaries better from within the homepage.
I bet Obama is hilarious when he's drunk. People that speak very well sober are really funny when they start slurring their speech and their long sentences start breaking down as their train of thought wanders.
Now I really want to get Obama drunk... and then take him behind a middle school, and get him pregnant...
Did I just say that out loud?
Thank you Dave Schroeder for that insightful and informative response all my fears have been put to rest and I can't wait to vote republican again. And if you don't mind me saying so, my that's a low UID you have--very impressive :o)
...
..
...
..
Is he gone?...
..
..
Quick! Ide Hay the Ugs Dray from the Arc Nay!!!!!
What's the point of getting invested in one of his strips?
How invested can you be? It's a comic strip. It doesn't cost you anything to read it in the papers, and if you don't have the patience for that you can buy the collected works as they are released in book form.
I realize some people get really into these things, but I wish they would realize that if every comic strip in America were to disappear one day life would go on unchanged. That people get overly invested in their entertainment is a problem for those people not the artists, athletes, musicians, etc. that create the entertainment.
It comes down to perspective and knowing the difference between getting what you need vs. getting what you want.