Facebook's advertising is all about micro targeting based on a user's behavior, open to all with the smarts to read it via the Open Graph API.
Advertising (TV, Radio, Banners, Internet) is sold on an open market bidding system. You bid for impressions (CPI) and clicks (CPC). Coveted demographics - such as 16-20 year old females, or wealthy folks have very high bid rates. So being able to infer people's income makes good business sense.
Facebook has a good model, as you bid for placement based on age, location, brands they fan, web pages they like, number of friends, etc. as opposed to blindly putting advertising out there and hoping the right folks read it. Many local small businesses would be out of business if it wasn't for this. Those are the folks who are creating most of the new jobs. Google, on the other hand, uses your search behavior, and tracking cookies left by banner ads + stuff you look at. If you use free or paid gmail the emails you send and receive come into play. That's why it's free, of course. The other "free" email services do the same thing.
There's a database called PRIZM that's in widespread use that determines relative income based on zip code - PRIZM has been around since the direct mail days. My guess is that Facebook either does not want to pay for this, or because it doesn't have user's zip codes, only cities, it thinks it can do better based on data it has in the social stream.
Being able to predict the precise moment when purchase intent is realized... is the holy grail of digital marketing right now, with billions of dollars being spent on the problem. Every piece of data about your online behavior is being analyzed against what you actually bought (and if you're on a mobile device, where you were at the time). It is only a matter of time before this is perfected - e.g. the moment you realize you are hungry an ad for nearest food joint of your preference will appear in front of you... This trend is as unstoppable as dawn, and if you're smart, you're trying to patent every single idea that might remotely be involved in this.
If you really think you can protect yourself from companies analyzing your behavior, you're dreaming. Being able to deliver the ad to you at the precise moment of purchase intent will save businesses large and small billions and billions of dollars... And the first company to make that work, will be profitable beyond belief.
Can we limit the income of politicians to the lowest paid constituent? How about limiting campaign contributions to $5 per person? That would solve a real problem, as opposed to this idea, which is stoking the fires of class warfare....
So you're not paranoid, but you know that "they" are out to get you, and me?
Reading your posts, you're a die hard Marxist, probably young, and very passionate about the evils of the world. Marxists have the blood of around 150 to 200 million people on your hands, whereas I a stand guilty of stating the patently obvious and making a few sarcastic remarks - the humor of which were lost on you, apparently.
I'm not worried, those horrible evil corporations, oppressing the masses blah blah blah will be where you work someday, and you'll find they are full of ordinary humans, trying to get along and survive, and not all the cabals of evil indifferent oppression that you imagine. I wish you luck, and please, for the sake of those around you, lighten up...
The carbon tax exchange was setup by Al Gore, run out of Chicago (Obama's home town). Al Gore stands to make millions and millions of dollars from this - and will repay the Democratic party with huge contributions. Thats why they want it so badly. Unions, the former big supporters, are losing influence, so they have to find a new cash cow. Look at where their money REALLY comes from, and surprise, that's what they push on you.
The Ethanol subsidy is a classic case of political corruption, greed, and pay to play. At the time it was passed, Corn prices were low due to a large supply. Working with the farm lobby, spearheaded by ADM, a pay to play deal was reached that guaranteed agribusiness a yearly purchase of a large amount of the crop at a fixed price that was above market. Refiners were mandated by law to purchase a fixed quantity of ethanol, regardless of demand. Farmers planted corn like crazy, destroying grassland, using way too much fertilizer, and doing major environmental damage. The fixed price government contract insured that corn went to ethanol, and not food, and there were food riots in Mexico, Latin, and Central America. Yes, we starved people to death to save the planet. Then, the economy went south, and the demand for gasoline dropped, but refiners were forced to buy the same amount of Ethanol and now they are literally drowning in the stuff. As the price of corn went down, more and more it was sold for Ethanol at the fixed price agreed to, insuring high profits for agribusiness - who returned the money to the Democratic party in return for the great deal they had. All the while, the Democrats told us how GREAT Ethanol was, and how important it was, and how the cared about us, etc. etc. It was all a complete fabrication. They favored the bio fuel that put the most money in their greedy pockets, thus insuring that bio fuel research would be set back several years.
Ethanol reduces mileage - to cover this up the EPA only does mileage tests with non ethanol fuel. Now, the EPA, never one to admit a mistake, wants to "mandate" the refiners to push us to E15 and even E20, which will destroy any engine more than 10 years old, hurting poor people, and minorities the most. So here we have one government agency colluding with another in order to keep the money flowing into the party, and hide the truth from the public. If corporations acted this way, they would be sued, exposed, and treated like criminals. The new story is that if we all buy new, flex fuel vehicles it will all be great! Guess who owns a third of a car company that's drowning in red ink?
Guess who gives money to Republicans? Big Oil, of course. That's why they are evil, pure evil, and need to be stopped. It's insane.
The huge contributions from the farm lobby? They keep on comin! And the Democrats praise the glory of Ethanol. When it's the MONEY they are praising.
I am not against biofuels at all. What I am against is environmentalism as a cover up for GREED and MONEY LAUNDERING where contribution X is repaid with legislation Y that gives a corporation a free ride at the taxpayer's expense. What I am against is the propaganda machine that fills people minds with complete nonsense to cover up the GREED that is behind so much of what the parties do.
Wind, same story. Wind turbines are primarily made by GE. Jeffry Immelt, CEO of GE, is a good friend of Obama. He brokered the deal for MSNBC, which is how it turned into the mouthpiece of the party, in return for huge tax breaks for GE on guess what? Wind Turbines. This was followed huge incentives to the blue states to buy the things, resulting in more income for GE, who paid almost no taxes, but contributed major amounts to the Democratic Party. Without the subsidies, Wind Turbines are not economically viable over the long term. Guess who benefits from these subsidies? General Electric... Who returns the favor by giving big contributions to Democrats. It's the same, exact story as ethanol.
You really expect a sane, rational person to look at the implementation of the ACA and put forth the argument that if the program had been much larger it would have worked so much better?
The problem is clear for everyone to see. When you remove incentive (profit) the output of the organization is abysmal, the costs are absurd, and the value proposition (the services received for dollars spent) is negative.
The Carbon Tax idea looks good on paper. The reality is that the result will be similar to the ACA - The political party in power when the law is passed will exempt all of their "friends" (defined as the people who gave the most to the party), and punish their "enemies" (defined as the people who don't give enough to the party).
Just look at the howling over oil subsidies - which are a medicine dropper in the ocean compared to what's been given to big agriculture... or the ACA, which is a subsidy of the Health Insurance companies on a level that exceeds all other corporate bribes ever paid to any industry, ever.
I agree, but what's happening is that the money for the research and investment goes to the politically favorable company, not the one with the best ideas. As long as it costs a fortune to get elected, this is not going to change.
Like a lot of liberals ideas, its well intention-ed and altruistic but when put into actual practice it ends up being crony capitalism, and the return is far less than the investment. The free market actually works, it ensures that the most cost effective idea wins.
Your unjustified personal attack on how I live my life, how I treat the people I work with, and whether or not I am honest or not - followed by a vague assertion that I am guilty of some horrible thought crime that's going to result in my eventual death is one of the most bizarre, psychotic online attacks I have ever seen. I hope you get help before you hurt someone. Really.
A PR agency. EVERYBODY and I mean EVERYBODY does this. They use tools such as Radian 6 to identify the "groundswell" and actively respond to it.
Generally in PR agencies the actual work is performed by the folks just out of college with a marketing or communications degree.
It's only news when an evil oil company does it. Of course the biggest crime committed by the oil companies is that they refused to pay big bribes to Democrats, but the liberal leaning folks who have been brainwashed beyond hope will never accept that.
The Democratic Party is probably spending a million dollars a minute on the taxpayer dime to monitor offensive comments about ObamaCare, sending the complainers list over to the IRS for special targeting, but you won't read that on the news either. Blue State Digital probably has that contract...
I work in Digital Interactive, building software for agencies & marketing departments, all of which ends up on the Internet. The software is what we call "consumable" in that it has a short life span, and only needs to be just good enough to work, and no better. It's not at all unusual to have the client redesign half of the project a week before launch. You write functional specs, nobody reads them. You create wire frames, nobody understands them. You get a creative brief that's all marketing speak, and layered photoshop files that are the design spec.
Coming from traditional I.T. the first six months were spent in a state of shock, refusing to believe that this process can actually work. Then you realize that 99% of the software on the Internet was written exactly this way... There is a "process" but you won't fit it into any SDLC you can find. It's CMMI level zero ALL THE WAY, everywhere.
This entire thread would have the Digital Interactive crowd going "Huh? What's this go to do with building websites?"
It was a little more than that. Ford put all of their eggs in the Model T, and refined the production process to a level that set new standards in performance. At the time, most cars were one off hand built jobs, whereas he made a car for the masses.
GM came along with newer cars, new features, more styling, etc. Ford stuck with the Model-T for a lot longer than it should have, thus giving GM a foot hold. The Model A was a superior car in every respect, it just came out about four years too late.
GM didn't really "beat" Ford. Ford expanded the market to the point that there was room for other makes.
Today, Ford is still the only American car company that has taken no bailout money,and is still family owned. An amazing story, really.
There are similarities between Soviet Communism and Democratic Party progressiveness too, so can I declare progressives to be communists? Guess so.
FACT: The first attempt at Healthcare reform was during the Clinton era. Hillary held closed, secret meetings where all Republicans were excluded. When the truth came out about the shady, dirty, crony deals they had made with the insurance companies, it fell apart.
FACT: Obamacare was done in much the same way, except that Obama had a majority in both houses.
FACT: Romney care started with open doors, and three years of bipartisan meetings, where all sides had a seat at the table, and contributed.
FACT: No major piece of social legislation of this size has ever been passed the way ObamaCare was. Not ever. Not once.
FACT: Romney Care was implemented slowly, is not a mandate to purchase insurance, and did not result in the cancellation of existing health plans. Romney care is NOT single payer.
You can't rewrite history here. The Democrats could have done this differently, but they did not. It was Chicago Style crony capitalism all the way. The only thing I don't get is how they managed to screw just about every constituency the Democratic party has so carefully cultivated over the years except the LGBT crowd.
For the record, I am unhappy with both parties, am registered as an independent. I lean fiscally conservative and socially progressive. Being from the Detroit area, I am very familiar with corrupt Democrats, probably more than most folks here, as we have seen it first hand, and in our neighbor to the west, Chicago. This type of Democrat talks with a silver tongue, but governs in such a way that the distinction between the Mafia and the party is negligible. Our last fine crop of Democratic leaders in Detroit are mostly in prison, leaving us a bankrupt city that is about as safe as any in the middle east.
FACT: Our group insurance plan was cancelled because it is not ACA compliant. Premiums went up 20%, deductible doubled, co-pays are all higher. So don't give me the "current truth" where only 5% of people with crappy individual plans got cancelled. We are getting worse insurance, for more money, I feel betrayed, lied to, and mad as h*ll right now. It is no longer a "theoretical" proposition. I do not know a SINGLE PERSON who is getting better insurance, not one. I do not know a SINGLE PERSON who is paying less, or getting to keep their doctors. The two biggest lies ever told about a domestic program are tied to Obama and the Democratic party FOREVER. I used to admire Democrats, now I despise them, they have turned into greedy. manipulative liars, using Alinsky tactics to try and achieve one party rule. Well, we've lived under one party Democratic rule here for 40 years, come on down and visit and see what the result is. Bring a bullet proof vest.... you'll need it.
The issue at hand is the website PLUS the fact that insurance premiums are going up for nearly everyone, along with deductibles going down (Not just the 5% of individual plans, which is the current version of the truth, that is a lie) PLUS the fact that there is no assurance that once you sign up you'll actually be able to get HealthCare.
Our group insurance is going up 20%, with double the deductible and lower co-pays for everything. It is not a "Better Plan than the one we had". Some companies deferred this pain, that they knew was coming, by changing the plan renewal dates into next year.
Yesterday, the Administration eliminated the high risk pool, meaning that for all practical purposes, a set of pre-existing conditions have been defined that will prevent you from getting Obamacare.
I think the biggest issue for your average American consumer is that they were lied to, about everything, and there is zero remorse coming out of Obama's mouth.
The Alinsky tactics started with the Clintons. You might want to read Hillary;'s College Thesis, that they paid lawyers millions of dollars to hide from the public. The Republicans aren't very good at these tactics although they have tried. Your argument is classic Alinsky - force the opponent to live up to an impossible set of rules - they have to be perfect, whereas you can commit any crime you want.
Then you create a straw man (put words in my mouth) and declare the words I never said are "ridiculous" - essentially another insulting remark from you.
Yes, the house has repealed Obamacare 47 times. The Senate has failed to bring any of these bills to the floor for debate. The Democrats howls and screams about Republican obstructionism. Again, textbook Alinsky tactics. Claiming that this means that the "Republicans have failed to repeal the ACA" is an astounding lie, that you know is a lie. It is a demonstration of arrogance to lie like this. What it says is that you believe other people are really stupid, they are inferior to you, and you can easily trick them with lies like this.
I feel very sorry for you, and the people who have to work with you. I have faith that you'll mature, and grow out of acting this way, and perhaps learn to get along with others, respect them as human beings, and quit treating them like idiots - you don't realize it, but you are diminishing yourself by acting the way you act.
Thank you for not calling me a name. There's hope for you in life in general. I can say that because I am sure I am older than you are.
Negotiation and compromise is what makes organizations (including governments) work.
The playbook that the Obama's follow, that Michelle Obama says is her favorite book, that all Democrats should read, says you never negotiate with your opponent because it legitimizes them. To defeat them utterly, you demonize them, making them an all encompassing, evil, larger than life threat. The minute you negotiate with them, you have diminished the effect you created by demonizing them.
This is a great strategy if you want to get elected. It is a horrible strategy if you want to accomplish anything successfully. One gets things done... by building relationships, and obtaining consensus. Most folks figure this out at some point in their lives, drop the prima-donna egotistical ass act, and start acting like mature adults.
By following this strategy, the Democrats increasingly look like idiots.
You don't call your opponent a terrorist on the floor of the Senate because they suggested that individuals should receive the same break the Democrats gave corporations.... and then turn around five weeks later and start talking about delaying the individual mandate. What you are saying is "I am a drama queen who is full of hot air. I am a big pain in the ass who is impossible to work with" Because of their playbook, they actually argued that corporations are more important than individuals. This, from the same people who howled and wailed about Citizen United. Following the playbook guarantees this outcome, we have seen it over and over.
Let me try and simplify this for you. As soon as you call your opponent a sorry excuse for a human being, you have proven yourself to be an ass, caused the other person to dislike you, and reduced your chance of winning the hearts and minds of anyone.
Governance, and Management, is the act of bringing together a bunch of people, each of which are unique individuals with unique opinions, different levels of intelligence, different levels of experience, different ways of communicating, and different levels of maturity -- and creating an atmosphere where everyone gets along, every works towards a common goal, and everybody contributes at their individual level.
If you think good management is barking orders at people and threatening them, you might be able to manage a McDonalds for a few months, but you won't survive in a real executive or leadership position.
This is why the Democrats need to throw out the playbook, and start negotiating. Not calling your opponent over for lunch for a photo-op and then calling them every name in the book an hour later.
You left out the most important factor in all of this.
MegaCorp pays huge bribe to politician, is given pass attached to some completely unrelated piece of legislation. Politician then tells supporters how evil megacorp is, filling their heads with all kinds of emotional nonsense, goes on all expense paid lavish vacation at megacorp's expense. Politician comes back, tells followers huge lies about the evil opposition party, who is then blamed for all of megacorp's crimes and misdemeanors. Supporters then fill message boards and comment sections with propaganda fed to them to by politician, without ever considering that politician has lied to them, and is, in fact in megacorp's pockets.
This is the essence of crony capitalism. Both parties do it - but the Democrats have honed this far better than the Republicans. This is how they are able to outspend Republicans two to one, three to one, and more in election after election. The money... doesn't come from unicorns, or from individual contributors.
Farming is a permanent change to the environment. So using this logic, we should all stop eating to save the environment. I propose that you stop first, and let me know the results six months from now.
My exact words in my post were "I despise both parties"
Maybe you need to LISTEN a little more, and not assume that anyone who disagrees with you is an evil nasty horrible Rethugnican.
Negotiation and compromise is how people make progress and work together. Romneycare, touted as the same as ObamaCare, started with three years of bipartisan negotiation. Three years of working together, building consensus, give and take. Only after that did they start writing the law.
When you demonize your opponent, call them names, and refuse to negotiate with them, the wheels start coming off the bus. And that is exactly what is happening now.
Agreed. Just another case of the UNION protecting it's members, by spinning the wheel of blame, and finding a way not to be at fault.
Truth be told, we were more secure when the airlines were responsible for security. But we didn't get all those great bribes to the Democratic party by the loyal thugs of the SEIU.
Where did I suggest I would be in favor of a complete lack of regulation?
What I said was that wage and price controls have never worked, ever.
When somebody says "We need a LAW that....." History teaches us that this one shot, silver bullet, just outlaw "X" rarely fixes the problem it was intended to fix, because: The person don't understand economics. Didn't consider the law of unintended consequences. Doesn't take globalization into account. Fails to understand how smart humans are. Don't understand that while laws tend to be fixed at a point in time, the world is not. Fail to understand that once you pass a law, and create some agency to enforce it, you setup a self perpetuating entity that grows and grows, sucking more and more revenue, and eventually becomes solely interested in preserving itself.
It's damn near impossible to control people's behavior at a micro level.
This is the lesson of history. The "We need a LAW that..." mentality has a much to do with high prices, resource shortages, reduced innovation, public debt, deficit spending, crony capitalism, and many of the ills of our society as the conflicting ideologies of both parties...
That doesn't mean regulations are bad. What actually WORKS in the real world is systems that are setup with just the right amount of tension between two sides, in order to achieve a dynamic balance. Take business, for example. Customers demand high quality, low prices, and good service. Stockholders demand high profits because they expect a return on their investment. When these two forces balance out, you have a successful business that keeps both sides happy.
In the progressive model, the government decides what an acceptable level of quality is, the government decides what the lowest price will be, and the government decides what the highest profit allowed is. This insures that no innovation occurs, prices do not reflect reality, and stockholders have no motivation to invest. Business is over regulated, and controlled, there is no conflict built into the system, everything stagnates except for the corrupt political class, who takes every greedy penny they can get their hands on and distributes it among their greedy friends.
One has to regulate just enough to not kill the goose that one is trying to regulate. One of the best ways to demotivate the goose here is to run around in circles, screaming that the sky is falling, suggesting that all kinds of draconian laws are right around the corner, all the while passing plenty of stupid laws along the way to demonstrate a complete ignorance of what makes the goose lay eggs. The result is that the goose is demotivated, and hoards cash, because the whole atmosphere is that things are going to get a lot worse before they get better, and more stupid laws are coming any day. Sound familiar? And then the solution is to pass a law that the goose must lay 1.5 eggs a day OR ELSE.
Slashdot Mirror
Facebook's advertising is all about micro targeting based on a user's behavior, open to all with the smarts to read it via the Open Graph API.
Advertising (TV, Radio, Banners, Internet) is sold on an open market bidding system. You bid for impressions (CPI) and clicks (CPC). Coveted demographics - such as 16-20 year old females, or wealthy folks have very high bid rates. So being able to infer people's income makes good business sense.
Facebook has a good model, as you bid for placement based on age, location, brands they fan, web pages they like, number of friends, etc. as opposed to blindly putting advertising out there and hoping the right folks read it. Many local small businesses would be out of business if it wasn't for this. Those are the folks who are creating most of the new jobs. Google, on the other hand, uses your search behavior, and tracking cookies left by banner ads + stuff you look at. If you use free or paid gmail the emails you send and receive come into play. That's why it's free, of course. The other "free" email services do the same thing.
There's a database called PRIZM that's in widespread use that determines relative income based on zip code - PRIZM has been around since the direct mail days. My guess is that Facebook either does not want to pay for this, or because it doesn't have user's zip codes, only cities, it thinks it can do better based on data it has in the social stream.
Being able to predict the precise moment when purchase intent is realized... is the holy grail of digital marketing right now, with billions of dollars being spent on the problem. Every piece of data about your online behavior is being analyzed against what you actually bought (and if you're on a mobile device, where you were at the time). It is only a matter of time before this is perfected - e.g. the moment you realize you are hungry an ad for nearest food joint of your preference will appear in front of you... This trend is as unstoppable as dawn, and if you're smart, you're trying to patent every single idea that might remotely be involved in this.
If you really think you can protect yourself from companies analyzing your behavior, you're dreaming. Being able to deliver the ad to you at the precise moment of purchase intent will save businesses large and small billions and billions of dollars... And the first company to make that work, will be profitable beyond belief.
Can we limit the income of politicians to the lowest paid constituent? How about limiting campaign contributions to $5 per person? That would solve a real problem, as opposed to this idea, which is stoking the fires of class warfare....
Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, you're a looney.
Happy now?
So you're not paranoid, but you know that "they" are out to get you, and me?
Reading your posts, you're a die hard Marxist, probably young, and very passionate about the evils of the world. Marxists have the blood of around 150 to 200 million people on your hands, whereas I a stand guilty of stating the patently obvious and making a few sarcastic remarks - the humor of which were lost on you, apparently.
I'm not worried, those horrible evil corporations, oppressing the masses blah blah blah will be where you work someday, and you'll find they are full of ordinary humans, trying to get along and survive, and not all the cabals of evil indifferent oppression that you imagine. I wish you luck, and please, for the sake of those around you, lighten up...
The carbon tax exchange was setup by Al Gore, run out of Chicago (Obama's home town). Al Gore stands to make millions and millions of dollars from this - and will repay the Democratic party with huge contributions. Thats why they want it so badly. Unions, the former big supporters, are losing influence, so they have to find a new cash cow. Look at where their money REALLY comes from, and surprise, that's what they push on you.
The Ethanol subsidy is a classic case of political corruption, greed, and pay to play. At the time it was passed, Corn prices were low due to a large supply. Working with the farm lobby, spearheaded by ADM, a pay to play deal was reached that guaranteed agribusiness a yearly purchase of a large amount of the crop at a fixed price that was above market. Refiners were mandated by law to purchase a fixed quantity of ethanol, regardless of demand. Farmers planted corn like crazy, destroying grassland, using way too much fertilizer, and doing major environmental damage. The fixed price government contract insured that corn went to ethanol, and not food, and there were food riots in Mexico, Latin, and Central America. Yes, we starved people to death to save the planet. Then, the economy went south, and the demand for gasoline dropped, but refiners were forced to buy the same amount of Ethanol and now they are literally drowning in the stuff. As the price of corn went down, more and more it was sold for Ethanol at the fixed price agreed to, insuring high profits for agribusiness - who returned the money to the Democratic party in return for the great deal they had. All the while, the Democrats told us how GREAT Ethanol was, and how important it was, and how the cared about us, etc. etc. It was all a complete fabrication. They favored the bio fuel that put the most money in their greedy pockets, thus insuring that bio fuel research would be set back several years.
Ethanol reduces mileage - to cover this up the EPA only does mileage tests with non ethanol fuel. Now, the EPA, never one to admit a mistake, wants to "mandate" the refiners to push us to E15 and even E20, which will destroy any engine more than 10 years old, hurting poor people, and minorities the most. So here we have one government agency colluding with another in order to keep the money flowing into the party, and hide the truth from the public. If corporations acted this way, they would be sued, exposed, and treated like criminals. The new story is that if we all buy new, flex fuel vehicles it will all be great! Guess who owns a third of a car company that's drowning in red ink?
Guess who gives money to Republicans? Big Oil, of course. That's why they are evil, pure evil, and need to be stopped. It's insane.
The huge contributions from the farm lobby? They keep on comin! And the Democrats praise the glory of Ethanol. When it's the MONEY they are praising.
I am not against biofuels at all. What I am against is environmentalism as a cover up for GREED and MONEY LAUNDERING where contribution X is repaid with legislation Y that gives a corporation a free ride at the taxpayer's expense. What I am against is the propaganda machine that fills people minds with complete nonsense to cover up the GREED that is behind so much of what the parties do.
Wind, same story. Wind turbines are primarily made by GE. Jeffry Immelt, CEO of GE, is a good friend of Obama. He brokered the deal for MSNBC, which is how it turned into the mouthpiece of the party, in return for huge tax breaks for GE on guess what? Wind Turbines. This was followed huge incentives to the blue states to buy the things, resulting in more income for GE, who paid almost no taxes, but contributed major amounts to the Democratic Party. Without the subsidies, Wind Turbines are not economically viable over the long term. Guess who benefits from these subsidies? General Electric... Who returns the favor by giving big contributions to Democrats. It's the same, exact story as ethanol.
Solar mig
You really expect a sane, rational person to look at the implementation of the ACA and put forth the argument that if the program had been much larger it would have worked so much better?
The problem is clear for everyone to see. When you remove incentive (profit) the output of the organization is abysmal, the costs are absurd, and the value proposition (the services received for dollars spent) is negative.
The Carbon Tax idea looks good on paper. The reality is that the result will be similar to the ACA - The political party in power when the law is passed will exempt all of their "friends" (defined as the people who gave the most to the party), and punish their "enemies" (defined as the people who don't give enough to the party).
Just look at the howling over oil subsidies - which are a medicine dropper in the ocean compared to what's been given to big agriculture... or the ACA, which is a subsidy of the Health Insurance companies on a level that exceeds all other corporate bribes ever paid to any industry, ever.
I agree, but what's happening is that the money for the research and investment goes to the politically favorable company, not the one with the best ideas. As long as it costs a fortune to get elected, this is not going to change.
Like a lot of liberals ideas, its well intention-ed and altruistic but when put into actual practice it ends up being crony capitalism, and the return is far less than the investment. The free market actually works, it ensures that the most cost effective idea wins.
Your unjustified personal attack on how I live my life, how I treat the people I work with, and whether or not I am honest or not - followed by a vague assertion that I am guilty of some horrible thought crime that's going to result in my eventual death is one of the most bizarre, psychotic online attacks I have ever seen. I hope you get help before you hurt someone. Really.
A PR agency. EVERYBODY and I mean EVERYBODY does this. They use tools such as Radian 6 to identify the "groundswell" and actively respond to it.
Generally in PR agencies the actual work is performed by the folks just out of college with a marketing or communications degree.
It's only news when an evil oil company does it. Of course the biggest crime committed by the oil companies is that they refused to pay big bribes to Democrats, but the liberal leaning folks who have been brainwashed beyond hope will never accept that.
The Democratic Party is probably spending a million dollars a minute on the taxpayer dime to monitor offensive comments about ObamaCare, sending the complainers list over to the IRS for special targeting, but you won't read that on the news either. Blue State Digital probably has that contract...
Case in point: Microsoft .net :-)
I work in Digital Interactive, building software for agencies & marketing departments, all of which ends up on the Internet. The software is what we call "consumable" in that it has a short life span, and only needs to be just good enough to work, and no better. It's not at all unusual to have the client redesign half of the project a week before launch. You write functional specs, nobody reads them. You create wire frames, nobody understands them. You get a creative brief that's all marketing speak, and layered photoshop files that are the design spec.
Coming from traditional I.T. the first six months were spent in a state of shock, refusing to believe that this process can actually work. Then you realize that 99% of the software on the Internet was written exactly this way... There is a "process" but you won't fit it into any SDLC you can find. It's CMMI level zero ALL THE WAY, everywhere.
This entire thread would have the Digital Interactive crowd going "Huh? What's this go to do with building websites?"
It was a little more than that. Ford put all of their eggs in the Model T, and refined the production process to a level that set new standards in performance. At the time, most cars were one off hand built jobs, whereas he made a car for the masses.
GM came along with newer cars, new features, more styling, etc. Ford stuck with the Model-T for a lot longer than it should have, thus giving GM a foot hold. The Model A was a superior car in every respect, it just came out about four years too late.
GM didn't really "beat" Ford. Ford expanded the market to the point that there was room for other makes.
Today, Ford is still the only American car company that has taken no bailout money,and is still family owned. An amazing story, really.
There are similarities between Soviet Communism and Democratic Party progressiveness too, so can I declare progressives to be communists? Guess so.
FACT: The first attempt at Healthcare reform was during the Clinton era. Hillary held closed, secret meetings where all Republicans were excluded. When the truth came out about the shady, dirty, crony deals they had made with the insurance companies, it fell apart.
FACT: Obamacare was done in much the same way, except that Obama had a majority in both houses.
FACT: Romney care started with open doors, and three years of bipartisan meetings, where all sides had a seat at the table, and contributed.
FACT: No major piece of social legislation of this size has ever been passed the way ObamaCare was. Not ever. Not once.
FACT: Romney Care was implemented slowly, is not a mandate to purchase insurance, and did not result in the cancellation of existing health plans. Romney care is NOT single payer.
You can't rewrite history here. The Democrats could have done this differently, but they did not. It was Chicago Style crony capitalism all the way. The only thing I don't get is how they managed to screw just about every constituency the Democratic party has so carefully cultivated over the years except the LGBT crowd.
For the record, I am unhappy with both parties, am registered as an independent. I lean fiscally conservative and socially progressive. Being from the Detroit area, I am very familiar with corrupt Democrats, probably more than most folks here, as we have seen it first hand, and in our neighbor to the west, Chicago. This type of Democrat talks with a silver tongue, but governs in such a way that the distinction between the Mafia and the party is negligible. Our last fine crop of Democratic leaders in Detroit are mostly in prison, leaving us a bankrupt city that is about as safe as any in the middle east.
FACT: Our group insurance plan was cancelled because it is not ACA compliant. Premiums went up 20%, deductible doubled, co-pays are all higher. So don't give me the "current truth" where only 5% of people with crappy individual plans got cancelled. We are getting worse insurance, for more money, I feel betrayed, lied to, and mad as h*ll right now. It is no longer a "theoretical" proposition. I do not know a SINGLE PERSON who is getting better insurance, not one. I do not know a SINGLE PERSON who is paying less, or getting to keep their doctors. The two biggest lies ever told about a domestic program are tied to Obama and the Democratic party FOREVER. I used to admire Democrats, now I despise them, they have turned into greedy. manipulative liars, using Alinsky tactics to try and achieve one party rule. Well, we've lived under one party Democratic rule here for 40 years, come on down and visit and see what the result is. Bring a bullet proof vest.... you'll need it.
They dumped the hgh risk pool out of Obamacare yesterday. So surprise, they brought pre-existing conditions right back in.
"Better Coverage"? ACCORDING TO WHO? Our new group plan is 20% more expensive, with higher deductibles, and lower co-pays. How is that BETTER?
It's only better if you are not an evil rich person, that ObamaCare defines as anyone making more than FIFTY THOUSAND A YEAR.
No, it started from the botched attempt by the Clintons to implement Healthcare.
Romney care started with THREE YEARS of bipartisan meetings before the law was written. The lie that ObamaCare is RomneyCare is just that, a lie.
The state websites are not working all that great either....
The issue at hand is the website PLUS the fact that insurance premiums are going up for nearly everyone, along with deductibles going down (Not just the 5% of individual plans, which is the current version of the truth, that is a lie) PLUS the fact that there is no assurance that once you sign up you'll actually be able to get HealthCare.
Our group insurance is going up 20%, with double the deductible and lower co-pays for everything. It is not a "Better Plan than the one we had". Some companies deferred this pain, that they knew was coming, by changing the plan renewal dates into next year.
Yesterday, the Administration eliminated the high risk pool, meaning that for all practical purposes, a set of pre-existing conditions have been defined that will prevent you from getting Obamacare.
I think the biggest issue for your average American consumer is that they were lied to, about everything, and there is zero remorse coming out of Obama's mouth.
The Alinsky tactics started with the Clintons. You might want to read Hillary;'s College Thesis, that they paid lawyers millions of dollars to hide from the public. The Republicans aren't very good at these tactics although they have tried. Your argument is classic Alinsky - force the opponent to live up to an impossible set of rules - they have to be perfect, whereas you can commit any crime you want.
Then you create a straw man (put words in my mouth) and declare the words I never said are "ridiculous" - essentially another insulting remark from you.
Yes, the house has repealed Obamacare 47 times. The Senate has failed to bring any of these bills to the floor for debate. The Democrats howls and screams about Republican obstructionism. Again, textbook Alinsky tactics. Claiming that this means that the "Republicans have failed to repeal the ACA" is an astounding lie, that you know is a lie. It is a demonstration of arrogance to lie like this. What it says is that you believe other people are really stupid, they are inferior to you, and you can easily trick them with lies like this.
I feel very sorry for you, and the people who have to work with you. I have faith that you'll mature, and grow out of acting this way, and perhaps learn to get along with others, respect them as human beings, and quit treating them like idiots - you don't realize it, but you are diminishing yourself by acting the way you act.
Thank you for not calling me a name. There's hope for you in life in general. I can say that because I am sure I am older than you are.
Negotiation and compromise is what makes organizations (including governments) work.
The playbook that the Obama's follow, that Michelle Obama says is her favorite book, that all Democrats should read, says you never negotiate with your opponent because it legitimizes them. To defeat them utterly, you demonize them, making them an all encompassing, evil, larger than life threat. The minute you negotiate with them, you have diminished the effect you created by demonizing them.
This is a great strategy if you want to get elected. It is a horrible strategy if you want to accomplish anything successfully. One gets things done... by building relationships, and obtaining consensus. Most folks figure this out at some point in their lives, drop the prima-donna egotistical ass act, and start acting like mature adults.
By following this strategy, the Democrats increasingly look like idiots.
You don't call your opponent a terrorist on the floor of the Senate because they suggested that individuals should receive the same break the Democrats gave corporations.... and then turn around five weeks later and start talking about delaying the individual mandate. What you are saying is "I am a drama queen who is full of hot air. I am a big pain in the ass who is impossible to work with" Because of their playbook, they actually argued that corporations are more important than individuals. This, from the same people who howled and wailed about Citizen United. Following the playbook guarantees this outcome, we have seen it over and over.
Let me try and simplify this for you. As soon as you call your opponent a sorry excuse for a human being, you have proven yourself to be an ass, caused the other person to dislike you, and reduced your chance of winning the hearts and minds of anyone.
Governance, and Management, is the act of bringing together a bunch of people, each of which are unique individuals with unique opinions, different levels of intelligence, different levels of experience, different ways of communicating, and different levels of maturity -- and creating an atmosphere where everyone gets along, every works towards a common goal, and everybody contributes at their individual level.
If you think good management is barking orders at people and threatening them, you might be able to manage a McDonalds for a few months, but you won't survive in a real executive or leadership position.
This is why the Democrats need to throw out the playbook, and start negotiating. Not calling your opponent over for lunch for a photo-op and then calling them every name in the book an hour later.
You left out the most important factor in all of this.
MegaCorp pays huge bribe to politician, is given pass attached to some completely unrelated piece of legislation. Politician then tells supporters how evil megacorp is, filling their heads with all kinds of emotional nonsense, goes on all expense paid lavish vacation at megacorp's expense. Politician comes back, tells followers huge lies about the evil opposition party, who is then blamed for all of megacorp's crimes and misdemeanors. Supporters then fill message boards and comment sections with propaganda fed to them to by politician, without ever considering that politician has lied to them, and is, in fact in megacorp's pockets.
This is the essence of crony capitalism. Both parties do it - but the Democrats have honed this far better than the Republicans. This is how they are able to outspend Republicans two to one, three to one, and more in election after election. The money... doesn't come from unicorns, or from individual contributors.
Farming is a permanent change to the environment. So using this logic, we should all stop eating to save the environment. I propose that you stop first, and let me know the results six months from now.
My exact words in my post were "I despise both parties"
Maybe you need to LISTEN a little more, and not assume that anyone who disagrees with you is an evil nasty horrible Rethugnican.
Negotiation and compromise is how people make progress and work together. Romneycare, touted as the same as ObamaCare, started with three years of bipartisan negotiation. Three years of working together, building consensus, give and take. Only after that did they start writing the law.
When you demonize your opponent, call them names, and refuse to negotiate with them, the wheels start coming off the bus. And that is exactly what is happening now.
Agreed. Just another case of the UNION protecting it's members, by spinning the wheel of blame, and finding a way not to be at fault.
Truth be told, we were more secure when the airlines were responsible for security. But we didn't get all those great bribes to the Democratic party by the loyal thugs of the SEIU.
Where did I suggest I would be in favor of a complete lack of regulation?
What I said was that wage and price controls have never worked, ever.
When somebody says "We need a LAW that....." History teaches us that this one shot, silver bullet, just outlaw "X" rarely fixes the problem it was intended to fix, because: The person don't understand economics. Didn't consider the law of unintended consequences. Doesn't take globalization into account. Fails to understand how smart humans are. Don't understand that while laws tend to be fixed at a point in time, the world is not. Fail to understand that once you pass a law, and create some agency to enforce it, you setup a self perpetuating entity that grows and grows, sucking more and more revenue, and eventually becomes solely interested in preserving itself.
It's damn near impossible to control people's behavior at a micro level.
This is the lesson of history. The "We need a LAW that..." mentality has a much to do with high prices, resource shortages, reduced innovation, public debt, deficit spending, crony capitalism, and many of the ills of our society as the conflicting ideologies of both parties...
That doesn't mean regulations are bad. What actually WORKS in the real world is systems that are setup with just the right amount of tension between two sides, in order to achieve a dynamic balance. Take business, for example. Customers demand high quality, low prices, and good service. Stockholders demand high profits because they expect a return on their investment. When these two forces balance out, you have a successful business that keeps both sides happy.
In the progressive model, the government decides what an acceptable level of quality is, the government decides what the lowest price will be, and the government decides what the highest profit allowed is. This insures that no innovation occurs, prices do not reflect reality, and stockholders have no motivation to invest. Business is over regulated, and controlled, there is no conflict built into the system, everything stagnates except for the corrupt political class, who takes every greedy penny they can get their hands on and distributes it among their greedy friends.
One has to regulate just enough to not kill the goose that one is trying to regulate. One of the best ways to demotivate the goose here is to run around in circles, screaming that the sky is falling, suggesting that all kinds of draconian laws are right around the corner, all the while passing plenty of stupid laws along the way to demonstrate a complete ignorance of what makes the goose lay eggs. The result is that the goose is demotivated, and hoards cash, because the whole atmosphere is that things are going to get a lot worse before they get better, and more stupid laws are coming any day. Sound familiar? And then the solution is to pass a law that the goose must lay 1.5 eggs a day OR ELSE.
Rgds!