One reason to have sales tax, is to give states money (other than state income tax) Right now our federal gov't uses tax money (such as for roads) as a tether to force states to pass laws. Is this really a good thing? Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
Still trying to figure out why the gov't wants 33%, but God only wants 10%
The point was, we paid taxes on the money when we *earned* it, then we have to pay taxes on the goods we buy with it.
Then, when we sell it the money is added to your income to be taxed again, as well as having to collect sales tax from the person we sold it to.
If we then invest the money, we're taxed on it (but mainly the interest, that, at least is "new" income), then when we leave it to someone, there is an estate tax levied.
Basically the government gets their cut every time money changes hands. Soon we'll see the left->right tax:)
From the latest issue of Wired magazine (and my memory) something like 1/3 to 1/2 of US is online. Something like 1/4 to 1/3 of Jp is online. Most other countries had a smaller fraction online, but this is definitely not a tiny club and it is one which is growing rapidly.
And, much of the ``gifts'' of which you speak are written by poor students and academicians and not culturally-elite rich.
But still, that means that 1/2 to 2/3 of the US doesn't have internet, and as I recently heard on NPR, it's the poor, typically non-white people who don't. It is a tiny club, yes it's growing, but the hacker culture that grew out of the early net is mostly young white males from affluent families.
How do I know they are affluent? Because they can afford college with enough extra time to code, and play on the net -- without working a job to pay for school. Sure, the students themselves are poor, but they aren't necessarily from poor familes or backgrounds.
Nepotism is favoritism shown to family members. The free software culture is about the freedom for anyone to use and modify software. For the former, anyone can play, for the latter, admittedly one must be technically able
Agreed. But we do need to see that everyone can get, use, and take advantage of OSS, not just those affluent enough to have computers, second phone lines, or cable modems.
My understanding is that the GPL makes future projecs which use it potentially GPL'd as well, whereas public domain is free for any use, and can therefore get "trapped" in commercial software.
Yes, the original public domain software is out there but none of the added code needs to be released, as it would under the GPL. That was always one of the things I admired about the copyleft.
Yes, I'll generally agree that SW is basically a fantasy. I didn't want to say that for fear of a flame war. In fact (and I'd venture to say that *this* is why Campbell liked it so much) StarWars is nothing but the monomyth tied up in in Sci-Fi clothing. {Just to go out on a limb, so is Bab5}
It's basically a story about this boy, who was really a prince, who apprentices himself to a great wizard to fight the evil emporor and his evil wizard henchman. They travel to the great citadel of the Evil Wizard, and destroy it.
I have to completely disagree with you on the "braininess" of Star Trek and Star Wars, as well as what is appealing about them. Now, I have always enjoyed both, and while I was only 10 when Star Wars came out, I'd already been exposed to Star Trek even then. Both are worthwhile, but they have completely different messages, even to the point that Star Wars isn't classified as scient fiction by some. {Personally, I prefer a broader definition.} First, let's look at typical plots from the movies, with regards to technology. Let's face it, Technology is how we determine the 'braininess' of these movies, since technologists are people we consider brainy in the "Real World". Star Trek's typical plot involves a man vs man or man vs nature conflict where the solution is found using reason, knowledge or science. Examples abound of this: A wierd virus which McCoy must syntesize a vaccine/cure for, Kirk putting together the parts of a "gun", which required thought and knowldege (and was contrasted against the more bestial knife of his opponent: Kirk won not because he was stonger, but because he was *smarter*). I'm useing Original Series examples, in part because the methods used in the earlier episodes were less wild than the later ones, where the technological solution was pulled out of someone's hat. Contrast this with StarWars where the central theme was almost anti-technology. Part of the reason Darth Vader was bad was that he was mostly machine. The straying of Luke to the "Dark side" was symbolized by his mechanical hand. Even in TPM, the enemies were droids and machines, and the good guys were fighting with almost medieval tools. The best exmpale of this is from the first movie, when everyone using the computers failed to "hit the spot" but Luke could do it by cutting off the computers and using the Force--which was something only living beings had access to. Star Trek's message is very similar to the one of classic science fiction, especially that kind called "hard sci-fi." While Trek probably doesn't qualify as hard sci-fi, the message that our problems can be solved by applying science, reason and technology is there, whereas Star Wars seems to have an almost Luddite message in comparison. From this it's easy to see why Trekkies are more interested in technical details and the technology of Star Trek, and why Star Wars afficionados care more about plot and the humanistic parts of it. Personally, I think the Trekkies have missed part of the point, but that's just my humble opinion:).
This is also why I don't think the appeal of Trek has anything to do with campy acting and so forth. Perhaps that's why *you* like it, but the people I know who like Trek like it for it's vision of a rational hopeful universe, where there are still things to do, things to explore, but those problems are soluble through science, reason and knowledge.
Slashdot Mirror
Why not just have a flat tax?
One reason to have sales tax, is to give states money (other than state income tax) Right now our federal gov't uses tax money (such as for roads) as a tether to force states to pass laws. Is this really a good thing? Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
Still trying to figure out why the gov't wants 33%, but God only wants 10%
The point was, we paid taxes on the money when we *earned* it, then we have to pay taxes on the goods we buy with it.
:)
Then, when we sell it the money is added to your income to be taxed again, as well as having to collect sales tax from the person we sold it to.
If we then invest the money, we're taxed on it (but mainly the interest, that, at least is "new" income), then when we leave it to someone, there is an estate tax levied.
Basically the government gets their cut every time money changes hands. Soon we'll see the left->right tax
From the latest issue of Wired magazine (and my memory) something like 1/3 to 1/2 of US is online. Something like 1/4 to 1/3 of Jp is online. Most other countries had a smaller fraction online, but this is definitely not a tiny club and it is one which is growing rapidly.
And, much of the ``gifts'' of which you speak are written by poor students and academicians and not culturally-elite rich.
But still, that means that 1/2 to 2/3 of the US doesn't have internet, and as I recently heard on NPR, it's the poor, typically non-white people who don't. It is a tiny club, yes it's growing, but the hacker culture that grew out of the early net is mostly young white males from affluent families.
How do I know they are affluent? Because they can afford college with enough extra time to code, and play on the net -- without working a job to pay for school. Sure, the students themselves are poor, but they aren't necessarily from poor familes or backgrounds.
Nepotism is favoritism shown to family members. The free software culture is about the freedom for anyone to use and modify software. For the former, anyone can play, for the latter, admittedly one must be technically able
Agreed. But we do need to see that everyone can get, use, and take advantage of OSS, not just those affluent enough to have computers, second phone lines, or cable modems.
My understanding is that the GPL makes future
projecs which use it potentially GPL'd as well,
whereas public domain is free for any use, and
can therefore get "trapped" in commercial software.
Yes, the original public domain software is out there
but none of the added code needs to be released,
as it would under the GPL. That was always one of
the things I admired about the copyleft.
Yes, I'll generally agree that SW is basically a fantasy. I didn't want to say that for fear of a flame war. In fact (and I'd venture to say that *this* is why Campbell liked it so much) StarWars is nothing but the monomyth tied up in in Sci-Fi clothing. {Just to go out on a limb, so is Bab5}
It's basically a story about this boy, who was really a prince, who apprentices himself to a great wizard to fight the evil emporor and his evil wizard henchman. They travel to the great citadel of the Evil Wizard, and destroy it.
hrm...
I have to completely disagree with you on the "braininess" of Star Trek and Star Wars, as well as what is appealing about them. Now, I have always enjoyed both, and while I was only 10 when Star Wars came out, I'd already been exposed to Star Trek even then. Both are worthwhile, but they have completely different messages, even to the point that Star Wars isn't classified as scient fiction by some. {Personally, I prefer a broader definition.}
First, let's look at typical plots from the movies, with regards to technology. Let's face it, Technology is how we determine the 'braininess' of these movies, since technologists are people we consider brainy in the "Real World".
Star Trek's typical plot involves a man vs man or man vs nature conflict where the solution is found using reason, knowledge or science. Examples abound of this: A wierd virus which McCoy must syntesize a vaccine/cure for, Kirk putting together the parts of a "gun", which required thought and knowldege (and was contrasted against the more bestial knife of his opponent: Kirk won not because he was stonger, but because he was *smarter*). I'm useing Original Series examples, in part because the methods used in the earlier episodes were less wild than the later ones, where the technological solution was pulled out of someone's hat.
Contrast this with StarWars where the central theme was almost anti-technology. Part of the reason Darth Vader was bad was that he was mostly machine. The straying of Luke to the "Dark side" was symbolized by his mechanical hand. Even in TPM, the enemies were droids and machines, and the good guys were fighting with almost medieval tools. The best exmpale of this is from the first movie, when everyone using the computers failed to "hit the spot" but Luke could do it by cutting off the computers and using the Force--which was something only living beings had access to.
Star Trek's message is very similar to the one of classic science fiction, especially that kind called "hard sci-fi." While Trek probably doesn't qualify as hard sci-fi, the message that our problems can be solved by applying science, reason and technology is there, whereas Star Wars seems to have an almost Luddite message in comparison.
From this it's easy to see why Trekkies are more interested in technical details and the technology of Star Trek, and why Star Wars afficionados care more about plot and the humanistic parts of it. Personally, I think the Trekkies have missed part of the point, but that's just my humble opinion:).
This is also why I don't think the appeal of Trek has anything to do with campy acting and so forth. Perhaps that's why *you* like it, but the people I know who like Trek like it for it's vision of a rational hopeful universe, where there are still things to do, things to explore, but those problems are soluble through science, reason and knowledge.
Yeah, I know.
That's why I give 'em a 'javascript stupidity' award.
Now if only I had a piece of hardware everytime I'd seen javascript stupidity...
I mean, I've got 4.5, why should I have to go download it again.
They get my award for javascript stupidity of the day.