He was talking about her economical view; which actually conflicts with her state objectivism view.
Ann Rand* wasn't a true objectivists when it came to politics and economics. She refused to base her opinion on actual facts of the time. It was rooted deeply into her experience as a teen when the new government took her fathers shop away. She was a person who believe that corporations would take care of the people if left to their own devices; something history show is wrong.
Ron Paul is a libertarian the same way Robber Barons where libertarians. You can't take whats mine, but I'm more important then you so I can take whats yours.
laissez-fair economics do not work in a global market place. hell, they don't even work when the goods in one are are produced by people on the other side of the country. You just end up with bullies and the bullied.
It's the.com for a potential presidential candidate. Presidential candidate will pay 250K+ for a few 30 second spot on TV that will only happen over a few short weeks. The.com is a long term investment. Clearly worth more the 250K.
Wow, you had to go pretty far into lala land to make up that excuse for Ron Paul in order to satisfy your emotional attachment to an indefensible ideal.
Another libertarian who doesn't know what the UN does. Shocking.
Libertarian a re a group of people who don't know history, and use scare word to show why they don't like something and not facts..mostly because they have no clue about the organizations the hate. Incapable of thinking deeply, or realizing they aren't the only people on the planet.
Adam Smith is hopelessly outdated. Let me know when the products people buy are also produce in the town the buy them in. When that happens again you can wave that archaic book around.
"any domain names that they can get for cheap and then selling them for many orders of magnitude more than they got them for" and? so investing is wrong now?
It's not different the buying gold i hopes it will become more valuable.
"Scalping goes on in sporting events for much the same reasons. " If scalping is going on, the the people selling tickets weren't selling them for enough money.
No, most of them are not. You kind of need proof. Funny hoe when proof is asked for about a political lie some thinks has happen,s the vast majority of time there isn't any.
Does Ron Paul own the Name 'Ron Paul'? no, no he doesn't. Nor does he have copyright to it.
So you're snippet doesn't apply.
If I buy an acre of land on the corner of McDonalds and Hamburger street with the hopes of reselling it to McDonalds, should McDonalds be able to just take that land from me?
There is nothing wrong with domain squatting. And yes, I've been saying that since Domain came into existence. It got a bad rap because people with foresight bought a bunch, and geeks without foresight deemed it unfair.
"ow, nobody in their right mind would appraise the site at 250k based on its code base and email list," no, it has the name of a potential presidential candidate, it's is clearly worth at least 250K.
You must also think he is a king and not a president. But you can continue to be the Republicans bitch and buy there 'Obama doesn't do anything' line even though i every case it's the pubs refusing to budge, or moving the goalpost,
'Jobs' will become obsolete. While thinking about it and preparing for that eventuality would be smart, it would get labeled as 'Socialist' by people and pundits who have no fucking clue what that means.
No, it shows how much we hate kids getting shot. and by 'We' I mean everyone but the NRA who seems to think more bullets flying around a school is a good thing.
um, no. The point of this is accidental death. SO even if 20% of the time it can be bypassed, that's still better then 100% of the time killing people accidentally.
And the mythbuster about this was pretty much laughable to anyone not from 1999.
Slashdot Mirror
He was talking about her economical view; which actually conflicts with her state objectivism view.
Ann Rand* wasn't a true objectivists when it came to politics and economics. She refused to base her opinion on actual facts of the time. It was rooted deeply into her experience as a teen when the new government took her fathers shop away. She was a person who believe that corporations would take care of the people if left to their own devices; something history show is wrong.
Ron Paul is a libertarian the same way Robber Barons where libertarians. You can't take whats mine, but I'm more important then you so I can take whats yours.
laissez-fair economics do not work in a global market place. hell, they don't even work when the goods in one are are produced by people on the other side of the country. You just end up with bullies and the bullied.
*Yes I did that on purpose. neener neener.
It's the .com for a potential presidential candidate. Presidential candidate will pay 250K+ for a few 30 second spot on TV that will only happen over a few short weeks. .com is a long term investment. Clearly worth more the 250K.
The
Wow, you had to go pretty far into lala land to make up that excuse for Ron Paul in order to satisfy your emotional attachment to an indefensible ideal.
Another libertarian who doesn't know what the UN does. Shocking.
Libertarian a re a group of people who don't know history, and use scare word to show why they don't like something and not facts..mostly because they have no clue about the organizations the hate. Incapable of thinking deeply, or realizing they aren't the only people on the planet.
Not unreasonable if it was just parked.
Politician pay more for that for advertising all the time.
Adam Smith is hopelessly outdated.
Let me know when the products people buy are also produce in the town the buy them in. When that happens again you can wave that archaic book around.
Same thing with Wealth of Nations.
"any domain names that they can get for cheap and then selling them for many orders of magnitude more than they got them for"
and? so investing is wrong now?
It's not different the buying gold i hopes it will become more valuable.
"Scalping goes on in sporting events for much the same reasons. "
If scalping is going on, the the people selling tickets weren't selling them for enough money.
No, it's free market. I think something is going to be worth more latter, so I invest in that thing. EOL.
And he isn't ransoming it to the owner. Unless Ron Paul isn't the owner.
I suppose Apple stock is exploitation becasue I expect Apple to take something away from 'owners'" i.e. Money from people.
I don't see how you petroleum comparison applies. The petroleum industries relies heavily on finders keepers.
Actually, there are almost no sociopaths in either of those positions, they wouldn't do well.
Many are deeper into the psychopath spectrum then average.
No, most of them are not. You kind of need proof. Funny hoe when proof is asked for about a political lie some thinks has happen,s the vast majority of time there isn't any.
Does Ron Paul own the Name 'Ron Paul'? no, no he doesn't. Nor does he have copyright to it.
So you're snippet doesn't apply.
If I buy an acre of land on the corner of McDonalds and Hamburger street with the hopes of reselling it to McDonalds, should McDonalds be able to just take that land from me?
There is nothing wrong with domain squatting. And yes, I've been saying that since Domain came into existence. It got a bad rap because people with foresight bought a bunch, and geeks without foresight deemed it unfair.
/. where a statement of fact is a screech.
"ow, nobody in their right mind would appraise the site at 250k based on its code base and email list,"
no, it has the name of a potential presidential candidate, it's is clearly worth at least 250K.
You must also think he is a king and not a president.
But you can continue to be the Republicans bitch and buy there 'Obama doesn't do anything' line even though i every case it's the pubs refusing to budge, or moving the goalpost,
Ford didn't make a device that made buggy whips better and faster without needing any people.
Robots are smart. They want you to continue to believe they want take over until it's too late. also known as the year 2019.
Having a maintenance person come out is cheaper then a full time data server employee.
Eventual a robot will fix it.
Yeah, that's a stopper. cause no one could put a rail on stairs robots could attach to.
It's the 21st century, stairs don't even stop Daleks anymore.
'Jobs' will become obsolete.
While thinking about it and preparing for that eventuality would be smart, it would get labeled as 'Socialist' by people and pundits who have no fucking clue what that means.
Will robots take over [x]? Yes, eventually.
"99.999999% "
I"m not going to finish reading a post from some one who doesn't know maths.
Except that bad guy might be you 10 year old child who figured out where you keep your spare key to you gun lock.
No, it shows how much we hate kids getting shot. and by 'We' I mean everyone but the NRA who seems to think more bullets flying around a school is a good thing.
um, no. The point of this is accidental death. SO even if 20% of the time it can be bypassed, that's still better then 100% of the time killing people accidentally.
And the mythbuster about this was pretty much laughable to anyone not from 1999.
Until you can proves 100% the innocent people will not die with a fire arm, I don't want anyone to have a gun.
wait, you can't get 100%? well then, fucking apply the same standard across the board or STFU.
There is no law that says you have to allow people to wear gloves to shoot a firearm.