>>>there are people who actively argue against government regulation of industry?
Yes.
Because that's like asking the Bear to guard the henhouse from foxes. Sure you eliminated the fox problem, but now you've got a far, far more dangerous Bear to deal with, and he's hungry. .
"On a June evening two years ago, Dan Rather made many stiff British upper lips quiver by reporting that England had a crime problem and that, apart from murder, 'theirs is worse than ours.'..... None of this was supposed to happen in the country whose stringent gun laws and 1997 ban on handguns have been hailed as the "gold standard" of gun control...... In reality, the English approach has not re-duced violent crime. Instead it has left law-abiding citizens at the mercy of criminals who are confident that their victims have neither the means nor the legal right to resist them."
"In the two years following the 1997 handgun ban, the use of handguns in crime rose by 40 percent, and the upward trend has continued. From April to November 2001, the number of people robbed at gunpoint in London rose 53 percent...... Your chances of being mugged in London are now six times greater than in New York. England's rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are far higher than America's, and 53 percent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 percent in the U.S., where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners....."
Yeah I know. I'll be modded troll. People hate to face Facts (cognitive dissonance) - but there they are.
"In 1969 police were informed "it should never be necessary for anyone to possess a firearm for the protection of his house or person." These changes were made without public knowledge or debate. Their enforcement has consumed hundreds of thousands of police hours. Finally, in 1997 handguns were banned. Proposed exemptions for handicapped shooters and the British Olympic team were rejected."
You're right. The Supreme Law aka Constitution actually has force, by which all US Citizens are bound, even Congressmen and Presidents. In contrast the Bible is just a fictional work, like the greek and viking myths.
We were still paying the 1890s Spanish-American War tax in the 1990s. When the Republicans finally took Congress it was one of the things they repealed.... [100] years too late.
>>>Nintendo didn't want to give Sony complete control over something that Nintendo had essentially created.
False. Sony and Nintendo had created a partnership for the CD addon and of course would share both expenses and profits. The arrangement was similar to the Sony/Phillips arrangement (they both bore the cost of developing the Audio CD). Then Nintendo decided they didn't want a CD addon after all because it would be too easy to pirate the games, so they jumped ship, leaving Sony with all the incurred debt.
So YES Nintendo screwed Sony, just the same as if we agreed to buy a car together but then I suddenly backed-out, leaving you with the $20,000 bill.
Actually I've never licked any carts either, since I never owned an NES.
But I saw plenty of college roommate/dormates do it back in the past. When I first saw it I said, "What on earth are you doing???" but then quickly realized that it was an effective way to fix the NES' broken design. (The water creates an electrical connection.)
>>>Ever notice the same people who call Net Neutrality a government takeover of the internet are usually pretty quiet whenever somebody in Congress proposes a law that'd allow them to block or shut websites down?
No. In fact Limbaugh, Beck, and others have been complaining about it for awhile. Nice troll though. You got me and several others to respond to your Strawman Argument.
"Atari" is actually Infogrames, but with a new name. Likewise "Commodore" is now some European company that apparently produces nothing.
AMERICANS OUTSPEND JAPANESE
That's the gist of the article. The Americans aren't winning because of better quality, but because they have deeper pockets. The same was true in the 70s and 80s but after the 1983 crash, Mattel, Coleco, and Atari folded-up their game divisions, giving Nintendo/Sega/Sony the chance to become top dogs. The Japanese didn't "win" - they simply moved into the giant gaping hole the Americans foolishly left behind.
And now things are tipping back to America, because of folks like Microsoft with deep pockets spending gobs of money.
Well Abraham Lincoln was shot by a single man, and yes he deserved it. Lincoln suspended the rights of people in the North/Union to a trial. Tyrant. Other examples of tyrants that deserved death were the Dictator Nero, Dictator Caesar, and the Last King of Rome (circa 500 BC). Of course they used swords/knives instead of guns, but it's the same principle - "from time to time the Tree of Liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants..." - Jefferson
>>>And to provide counterpoint: Communist governments in the central and eastern Europe were overthrown by unarmed populace.
That was only true in HALF the former communist countries. The other half did require some violence (with bodies littering the streets), and in one case the use of guns to kill the Communist Dictator who refused to step down.
Which is why I provided a link to an article (which you did not read so I'll quote SOME of it for you). "On a June evening two years ago, Dan Rather made many stiff British upper lips quiver by reporting that England had a crime problem and that, apart from murder, 'theirs is worse than ours.'..... In the two years since Dan Rather was so roundly rebuked, violence in England has gotten markedly worse. Over the course of a few days in the summer of 2001, gun-toting men burst into an English court and freed two defendants; a shooting outside a London nightclub left five women and three men wounded; and two men were machine-gunned to death in a residential neighborhood of north London. And on New Year's Day this year a 19-year-old girl walking on a main street in east London was shot in the head by a thief who wanted her mobile phone. London police are now looking to New York City police for advice."
"None of this was supposed to happen in the country whose stringent gun laws and 1997 ban on handguns have been hailed as the "gold standard" of gun control...... The results -- the toughest firearm restrictions of any democracy -- are credited by the world's gun control advocates with producing a low rate of violent crime...... In reality, the English approach has not re-duced violent crime. Instead it has left law-abiding citizens at the mercy of criminals who are confident that their victims have neither the means nor the legal right to resist them."
"In the two years following the 1997 handgun ban, the use of handguns in crime rose by 40 percent, and the upward trend has continued. From April to November 2001, the number of people robbed at gunpoint in London rose 53 percent...... Your chances of being mugged in London are now six times greater than in New York. England's rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are far higher than America's, and 53 percent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 percent in the U.S., where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners....."
Yeah I know. I'll be modded troll. People hate to face Facts - it makes their brains hurt (cognitive dissonance).
"In 1969 police were informed "it should never be necessary for anyone to possess a firearm for the protection of his house or person." These changes were made without public knowledge or debate. Their enforcement has consumed hundreds of thousands of police hours. Finally, in 1997 handguns were banned. Proposed exemptions for handicapped shooters and the British Olympic team were rejected."
>>>The nuance between a pure democracy and a democratic republic is academic
Not really. Ask the ancient Greek philosopher if he thinks the difference is "academic". Had he lived in a modern Republic, he would not have been executed. The Supreme Law would have protected his right to a trial, as well as his right to speak his ideas regardless how controversial they may be, so he'd quickly be left go to enjoy the rest of his life.
BUT because Socrates lived in a Democracy, all that was needed was a 51% vote to silence him (permanently).
So you see the difference is not academic. It is quite literally life or death. And when we ignore the laws, and go with simple Democracy (majority rules), that is when we commit heinous offenses like locking-up innocent Americans of japanese descent. Had we followed the Supreme Law of the Republic, that would have never happened. So again: It's not merely academic. It's an important difference that affects people's liberty.
The PS1 was more than just a CD addon. After Nintendo screwed Sony, the company decided to avoid that massive loss by adding a 32-bit CPU and GPU. Thus it became more than just a CD player.
I knew something looked different about Barb, but my first guess was she had her natural breasts replaced with manmade ones. A new hat would be cheaper.
Do you think it's okay to steal (example: Win7) from these "privileged prats"?
If no then why is it okay for the Voters to use the hired gun of government to steal (and get free cars, homes, etc)? Genuine question. Think about it. If theft is wrong, then it's wrong no matter if you do it yourself, or through an agent.
Yeah but how much of it was taxable, and how much was nontaxable stocks/bonds/healthcare benefits? I could claim I got ~$200,000 "total compensation" from my job but only $90,000 of it is taxable. The rest is nontaxable benefits.
We were still paying the 1890s Spanish-American War tax in the 1990s. When the Republicans finaly took Congress it was one of the things they repealed.... 1000 years too late.
The former. Government only returns 45% of the money it takes. The rest gets squandered on internal corruption, white collar welfare (my previous no-work job), and interest payments to China.
And trickle-down isn't bullshit, when you consider that it's the rich who hire the workers. If the government takes away all the rich person's money (say 100% income over 1 million) then the rich can't hire anyone.
Obama? Since when is he the governor of Washington State? Personally I don';t care because I don't live there. Me worrying about WA's tax would be like some guy in Poland worrying about a tax increase in Portugal.
However I like the idea of 0% income tax on the first $200,000. I wish my state had that. Heck I wish the whole continent had that.
Slashdot Mirror
>>>In China or Iran, maybe. In the civilised world, not so much.
This statement would be funny if it were uttered circa 1930 in Germany or Italy or Spain. Or 1910 in Russia.
Those were part of the civilized world and yet still fell to governments that exterminated millions of their own citizens.
>>>there are people who actively argue against government regulation of industry?
Yes.
Because that's like asking the Bear to guard the henhouse from foxes. Sure you eliminated the fox problem, but now you've got a far, far more dangerous Bear to deal with, and he's hungry.
.
cite - http://reason.com/archives/2002/11/01/gun-controls-twisted-outcome
quote of relevant portions -
"On a June evening two years ago, Dan Rather made many stiff British upper lips quiver by reporting that England had a crime problem and that, apart from murder, 'theirs is worse than ours.' ..... None of this was supposed to happen in the country whose stringent gun laws and 1997 ban on handguns have been hailed as the "gold standard" of gun control. ..... In reality, the English approach has not re-duced violent crime. Instead it has left law-abiding citizens at the mercy of criminals who are confident that their victims have neither the means nor the legal right to resist them."
"In the two years following the 1997 handgun ban, the use of handguns in crime rose by 40 percent, and the upward trend has continued. From April to November 2001, the number of people robbed at gunpoint in London rose 53 percent. ..... Your chances of being mugged in London are now six times greater than in New York. England's rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are far higher than America's, and 53 percent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 percent in the U.S., where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners....."
Yeah I know.
I'll be modded troll.
People hate to face Facts (cognitive dissonance) - but there they are.
"In 1969 police were informed "it should never be necessary for anyone to possess a firearm for the protection of his house or person." These changes were made without public knowledge or debate. Their enforcement has consumed hundreds of thousands of police hours. Finally, in 1997 handguns were banned. Proposed exemptions for handicapped shooters and the British Olympic team were rejected."
>>>The Supreme Law is not the Bible
You're right. The Supreme Law aka Constitution actually has force, by which all US Citizens are bound, even Congressmen and Presidents. In contrast the Bible is just a fictional work, like the greek and viking myths.
[Fixed typo]
We were still paying the 1890s Spanish-American War tax in the 1990s. When the Republicans finally took Congress it was one of the things they repealed.... [100] years too late.
>>>Nintendo didn't want to give Sony complete control over something that Nintendo had essentially created.
False. Sony and Nintendo had created a partnership for the CD addon and of course would share both expenses and profits. The arrangement was similar to the Sony/Phillips arrangement (they both bore the cost of developing the Audio CD). Then Nintendo decided they didn't want a CD addon after all because it would be too easy to pirate the games, so they jumped ship, leaving Sony with all the incurred debt.
So YES Nintendo screwed Sony, just the same as if we agreed to buy a car together but then I suddenly backed-out, leaving you with the $20,000 bill.
Actually I've never licked any carts either, since I never owned an NES.
But I saw plenty of college roommate/dormates do it back in the past. When I first saw it I said, "What on earth are you doing???" but then quickly realized that it was an effective way to fix the NES' broken design. (The water creates an electrical connection.)
>>>Ever notice the same people who call Net Neutrality a government takeover of the internet are usually pretty quiet whenever somebody in Congress proposes a law that'd allow them to block or shut websites down?
No. In fact Limbaugh, Beck, and others have been complaining about it for awhile.
Nice troll though. You got me and several others to respond to your Strawman Argument.
"Atari" is actually Infogrames, but with a new name. Likewise "Commodore" is now some European company that apparently produces nothing.
AMERICANS OUTSPEND JAPANESE
That's the gist of the article. The Americans aren't winning because of better quality, but because they have deeper pockets. The same was true in the 70s and 80s but after the 1983 crash, Mattel, Coleco, and Atari folded-up their game divisions, giving Nintendo/Sega/Sony the chance to become top dogs. The Japanese didn't "win" - they simply moved into the giant gaping hole the Americans foolishly left behind.
And now things are tipping back to America, because of folks like Microsoft with deep pockets spending gobs of money.
Well Abraham Lincoln was shot by a single man, and yes he deserved it. Lincoln suspended the rights of people in the North/Union to a trial. Tyrant. Other examples of tyrants that deserved death were the Dictator Nero, Dictator Caesar, and the Last King of Rome (circa 500 BC). Of course they used swords/knives instead of guns, but it's the same principle - "from time to time the Tree of Liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants..." - Jefferson
>>>And to provide counterpoint: Communist governments in the central and eastern Europe were overthrown by unarmed populace.
That was only true in HALF the former communist countries. The other half did require some violence (with bodies littering the streets), and in one case the use of guns to kill the Communist Dictator who refused to step down.
>>>You have no idea what you are talking about
You're right.
Which is why I provided a link to an article (which you did not read so I'll quote SOME of it for you). "On a June evening two years ago, Dan Rather made many stiff British upper lips quiver by reporting that England had a crime problem and that, apart from murder, 'theirs is worse than ours.' ..... In the two years since Dan Rather was so roundly rebuked, violence in England has gotten markedly worse. Over the course of a few days in the summer of 2001, gun-toting men burst into an English court and freed two defendants; a shooting outside a London nightclub left five women and three men wounded; and two men were machine-gunned to death in a residential neighborhood of north London. And on New Year's Day this year a 19-year-old girl walking on a main street in east London was shot in the head by a thief who wanted her mobile phone. London police are now looking to New York City police for advice."
"None of this was supposed to happen in the country whose stringent gun laws and 1997 ban on handguns have been hailed as the "gold standard" of gun control. ..... The results -- the toughest firearm restrictions of any democracy -- are credited by the world's gun control advocates with producing a low rate of violent crime. ..... In reality, the English approach has not re-duced violent crime. Instead it has left law-abiding citizens at the mercy of criminals who are confident that their victims have neither the means nor the legal right to resist them."
"In the two years following the 1997 handgun ban, the use of handguns in crime rose by 40 percent, and the upward trend has continued. From April to November 2001, the number of people robbed at gunpoint in London rose 53 percent. ..... Your chances of being mugged in London are now six times greater than in New York. England's rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are far higher than America's, and 53 percent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 percent in the U.S., where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners....."
Yeah I know.
I'll be modded troll.
People hate to face Facts - it makes their brains hurt (cognitive dissonance).
"In 1969 police were informed "it should never be necessary for anyone to possess a firearm for the protection of his house or person." These changes were made without public knowledge or debate. Their enforcement has consumed hundreds of thousands of police hours. Finally, in 1997 handguns were banned. Proposed exemptions for handicapped shooters and the British Olympic team were rejected."
>>>I'm sure in the last 30 years better has been concieved.
Well we tried the new 90s-era PowerPC, but that didn't work out. (PPC couldn't scale much faster than 2 gigahertz, due to heat issues.)
>>>The nuance between a pure democracy and a democratic republic is academic
Not really. Ask the ancient Greek philosopher if he thinks the difference is "academic". Had he lived in a modern Republic, he would not have been executed. The Supreme Law would have protected his right to a trial, as well as his right to speak his ideas regardless how controversial they may be, so he'd quickly be left go to enjoy the rest of his life.
BUT because Socrates lived in a Democracy, all that was needed was a 51% vote to silence him (permanently).
So you see the difference is not academic. It is quite literally life or death. And when we ignore the laws, and go with simple Democracy (majority rules), that is when we commit heinous offenses like locking-up innocent Americans of japanese descent. Had we followed the Supreme Law of the Republic, that would have never happened. So again: It's not merely academic. It's an important difference that affects people's liberty.
Such a gadget would be useful so that it pops-up my MS Word document automatically when someone walks up behind me.
Then once said person is gone, I can go back to surfing the web,
>>>the SNES CD addon that became the PS1?
The PS1 was more than just a CD addon. After Nintendo screwed Sony, the company decided to avoid that massive loss by adding a 32-bit CPU and GPU. Thus it became more than just a CD player.
Really?
I knew something looked different about Barb, but my first guess was she had her natural breasts replaced with manmade ones. A new hat would be cheaper.
>>>When you reap rewards from a community you are obliged to help support that community.
That's exactly right Guv'nor! So then you won't mind if I extract your wallet and remove the money. I need money for food. Thanks guv.
Do you think it's okay to steal (example: Win7) from these "privileged prats"?
If no then why is it okay for the Voters to use the hired gun of government to steal (and get free cars, homes, etc)? Genuine question. Think about it. If theft is wrong, then it's wrong no matter if you do it yourself, or through an agent.
>>>total compensation of $1,276,627
Yeah but how much of it was taxable, and how much was nontaxable stocks/bonds/healthcare benefits? I could claim I got ~$200,000 "total compensation" from my job but only $90,000 of it is taxable. The rest is nontaxable benefits.
We were still paying the 1890s Spanish-American War tax in the 1990s. When the Republicans finaly took Congress it was one of the things they repealed.... 1000 years too late.
>>>The latter. Trickle-down is bullshit.
The former. Government only returns 45% of the money it takes. The rest gets squandered on internal corruption, white collar welfare (my previous no-work job), and interest payments to China.
And trickle-down isn't bullshit, when you consider that it's the rich who hire the workers. If the government takes away all the rich person's money (say 100% income over 1 million) then the rich can't hire anyone.
I figured most of their pay is not subject to income tax, like stocks and bonds.
Also 1 million would be a $45k + $15k == $60,000 tax
Obama? Since when is he the governor of Washington State? Personally I don';t care because I don't live there. Me worrying about WA's tax would be like some guy in Poland worrying about a tax increase in Portugal.
However I like the idea of 0% income tax on the first $200,000. I wish my state had that. Heck I wish the whole continent had that.
>>>"contributed $100,000 each"
It would be cheaper for them to just pay the tax.