Not nearly so much as if you were to use the same funds to give tax breaks to the middle class or poor, where marginal spending on increased income is near 100%.
Except that poor people and all but the topmost layers of middle class don't pay any income tax to which you can give a a break. Median household income in the USA is $50K but a typical married couple with 2 children and income less than $44K pay no federal income tax.
Rich people keep vast amounts of wealth locked away in their personal savings/investments. Poor people spend just about everything that they make.
I'm no economist, so I have no idea what other factors are relevant.
When you say 'wealth locked away in savings and investments' it makes it sound like rich people keep their money in a cave under the mansion. Investments and savings aren't "locked away" - it's money as capital. Money spent in a store on purchases isn't the cause of economic growth; it's the end result. Someone needed to combine capital (AKA that savings and investments you deride as locked away) with labor (AKA someone who isn't rich but wants a job) to make the product in the first place to have something to try to sell.
Encouraging the rich people to invest and save so that the person who isn't rich but can provide labor will have a job when combined with capital is called supply side economics. You will hear hard core leftists deride this as "trickle down" economics and that may be why you have some to think of savings and investments as money "locked away". BTW, I'm not an economist either but I did get a degree in economics way back when.
You do realise that America gets twice as much oil from Canada as from Saudi, right?
It doesn't matter; oil is a commodity so the price is set by any producer who can have a sizable impact on the marginal supply. Since the Saudis are the largest producer on the world market by themselves, never mind when combined into OPEC, so they set the price.
Parent was making a joke, probably, but back when 10Mbit network hubs were the latest thing the LEDs would flicker directly with activity and it actually was possible to spy on the network given determination and the proper equipment.
Depends on how much power it puts out. Home units are low enough power they don't need any extra licensing but model for large enterprises using over 1 watt of power, do need a license.
You need to recheck your definition of hilarious. Hilarious would be if the wife was having a secret affair with his mistress. Still seeing the guy who beat her is pathetic and disturbed.
...you don't see intelligence in Jerry Lewis movies. Nor do you see it in Marx Brothers, Laural and Hardy, or other slapstick movies. I won't watch a lot of the comedy I come across today because I find it stupid, actually I don't watch comedy much.
No argument on Jerry Lewis, but you need to re-watch Marx Brothers movies and Laurel and Hardy if you thought they were just stupid slapstick. Both were satire acts using comedy for cover.
If you provided even one example of Franken acting against the Constitution, you wouldn't sound so juvenile
He's probably irritated at the heavy handed way the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled there was no merit to re-checking all ~12K discarded absentee ballots in that state after a statistical check on a ~400 of them showed slightly more were for Franken than his opponent. On a race that tight, the opposition will naturally feel all of them should be checked.
Slight correction, Congress as a body CAN cut funding to an ongoing NSF funded project, which is what this article is about. But they can do this for any federal program.
OK, all you hyperventilating science lovers, just relax!! No one is going to cut all of NSF's funding!!! All that will be cut are grants that are just idiotic, like the ones cited at the YouCut site!! So, just chill!!!!!!!
Except that Congress gives $x +/- $y to the NSF who then gives it out to people who submitted grant proposals. Congress itself as a body is not involved in deciding what proposals get the money (although I'm sure select committee members "suggest" projects in their home states). Like you don't get to say your tax money only goes to needy welfare recipients and not to military expenses. The thing about this uproar is that the NSF is just a foundation - it does not science itself. They just hand out grant money. If they are given less tax money then would-be researchers will need to seek money from other grant providers (the NSF is not the only one) or they will have to come up with projects that at least sound like the payoff to society is more immediate / tangible. Less hysterics about cuts to this foundation, please.
And while we're on the subject of cuts, please put National Endowment for the Arts and National Public Broadcasting on the chopping block.
Wow, I feel totally out of it. Someone who looks like (posing with cash and handsign) that is doing facebook and I don't. On the other hand, the geeks have won if computing has become so pervasive.
I hadn't heard of it anyway - it looks like just a collection of random links people post; kinda like slashdot except without the banal comments. WTF? Guess I'll make a clone and sell it to Google next year, muahahaha!
Ummmm. No. This has virtually nothing to do with donations. What you are running into is human nature. People generally do not pay for things they can get for free.
You are confusing paying for something that can be had for free with donating to a worthwhile nonprofit organization. People donate lots of money to what they perceive to be worthwhile nonprofits. Ever heard of the Red Cross or the Humane Society? The GP is complaining that he doesn't see WP as a worthwhile nonprofit, so he doesn't donate to it. It has nothing to do with getting anything from it for free.
It also takes on-line take-out orders in several places of the world, which also requires personal information -- at least a name and an address, but I suppose they ask for more info than that on the order form.
There are places where McDonald's provides *delivery* which definitely requires a name and an address.
He slows the presentation to show World War 1 and the Spanish Flu epidemic but he didn't mention the Cultural Revolution in China during the 60's when the large circle representing China takes a HUGE dive. Some analysis relating political/economic systems to this graph is needed. When Smith wrote An Inquiry into the Causes and Effects of the Wealth of Nations, it was because the UK was the outlier in the top right of this graph. Now that a lot of countries are in that quadrant, it is worth noting the outliers are now the few remaining in the lower left. These are the countries whose political systems most interfere with market forces and prevent their citizens from being productive.
I don't think Moore has ever denied that he has an agenda, and that he's telling the story his way.
Then you've never seen any of Moore's work. His wildly skewed to the left shows, skewed to the point of being "creative edits" that completely misrepresent the truth, are presented as documentaries. Most people understand that term to mean factual and attempting to be unbiased. Ever watch Fahrenheit 9/11? That's the wildest piece of creative editing slant to the left ever and it won awards as a "documentary". You think calling that a documentary doesn't hide that he's pushing an agenda???
you have no idea what you're talking about. ask the guys in Antartica, or scientists who have remote glider-type sensors that are in the middle of the Pacific or Atlantic oceans, or even folks out in countries without infrastructure. there is no cellular or wireless service there. satellite phones address these problems and more.
The population of Antarctica is 4,000 in the summer (less in the winter). If all of them bought one of these phones then at a dollar a minute, 4000 people all chattering away 24/7 would generate 2.1B in revenues after a year. Wow, you're right! Researchers in Antarctica are a mass market big enough to support 1.2B$$ of startup debt! You've just solved this company's woes with a simple Slashdot post! What kind of idiot managers work there that they don't know this?!
Sincerely, Person with a Ph.D. in EE who has worked with hardware development for 15 years.
All those years working with hardware has cut down on your reading comprehension. It's clear the questioner is asking about makes and models of desks/benches/shelves, not what work to do in his new lab.
Free advice is often more reliable then paid advice.
What kind though? I once had an econ prof assert there was no product everyone was willing to produce and give away for free but no one wanted to buy. I responded with "personal advice" and ruined that premise. Fortunately he didn't take it personally and I got a good grade.
2. Confucius said, "Among us, in our part of the country, those who are upright are different from this. The father conceals the misconduct of the son, and the son conceals the misconduct of the father. Uprightness is to be found in this."
This is alive and well today. Just google for 'my dad is Li Gang'
Why ask the Chinese? The USAF has missiles to knock out satellites. They tested one by blowing up a perfectly good solar research satellite a few years ago.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm tired of reading these same truth-twisting canards.
That makes us even since I'm tired of the Keynesians trotting out the same old spending-stimulates-the-economy canards.
Not nearly so much as if you were to use the same funds to give tax breaks to the middle class or poor, where marginal spending on increased income is near 100%.
Except that poor people and all but the topmost layers of middle class don't pay any income tax to which you can give a a break. Median household income in the USA is $50K but a typical married couple with 2 children and income less than $44K pay no federal income tax.
Rich people keep vast amounts of wealth locked away in their personal savings/investments. Poor people spend just about everything that they make.
I'm no economist, so I have no idea what other factors are relevant.
When you say 'wealth locked away in savings and investments' it makes it sound like rich people keep their money in a cave under the mansion. Investments and savings aren't "locked away" - it's money as capital. Money spent in a store on purchases isn't the cause of economic growth; it's the end result. Someone needed to combine capital (AKA that savings and investments you deride as locked away) with labor (AKA someone who isn't rich but wants a job) to make the product in the first place to have something to try to sell.
Encouraging the rich people to invest and save so that the person who isn't rich but can provide labor will have a job when combined with capital is called supply side economics. You will hear hard core leftists deride this as "trickle down" economics and that may be why you have some to think of savings and investments as money "locked away". BTW, I'm not an economist either but I did get a degree in economics way back when.
You do realise that America gets twice as much oil from Canada as from Saudi, right?
It doesn't matter; oil is a commodity so the price is set by any producer who can have a sizable impact on the marginal supply. Since the Saudis are the largest producer on the world market by themselves, never mind when combined into OPEC, so they set the price.
Parent was making a joke, probably, but back when 10Mbit network hubs were the latest thing the LEDs would flicker directly with activity and it actually was possible to spy on the network given determination and the proper equipment.
Depends on how much power it puts out. Home units are low enough power they don't need any extra licensing but model for large enterprises using over 1 watt of power, do need a license.
You need to recheck your definition of hilarious. Hilarious would be if the wife was having a secret affair with his mistress. Still seeing the guy who beat her is pathetic and disturbed.
...you don't see intelligence in Jerry Lewis movies. Nor do you see it in Marx Brothers, Laural and Hardy, or other slapstick movies. I won't watch a lot of the comedy I come across today because I find it stupid, actually I don't watch comedy much.
No argument on Jerry Lewis, but you need to re-watch Marx Brothers movies and Laurel and Hardy if you thought they were just stupid slapstick. Both were satire acts using comedy for cover.
If you provided even one example of Franken acting against the Constitution, you wouldn't sound so juvenile
He's probably irritated at the heavy handed way the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled there was no merit to re-checking all ~12K discarded absentee ballots in that state after a statistical check on a ~400 of them showed slightly more were for Franken than his opponent. On a race that tight, the opposition will naturally feel all of them should be checked.
Slight correction, Congress as a body CAN cut funding to an ongoing NSF funded project, which is what this article is about. But they can do this for any federal program.
OK, all you hyperventilating science lovers, just relax!! No one is going to cut all of NSF's funding!!! All that will be cut are grants that are just idiotic, like the ones cited at the YouCut site!! So, just chill!!!!!!!
Except that Congress gives $x +/- $y to the NSF who then gives it out to people who submitted grant proposals. Congress itself as a body is not involved in deciding what proposals get the money (although I'm sure select committee members "suggest" projects in their home states). Like you don't get to say your tax money only goes to needy welfare recipients and not to military expenses. The thing about this uproar is that the NSF is just a foundation - it does not science itself. They just hand out grant money. If they are given less tax money then would-be researchers will need to seek money from other grant providers (the NSF is not the only one) or they will have to come up with projects that at least sound like the payoff to society is more immediate / tangible. Less hysterics about cuts to this foundation, please.
And while we're on the subject of cuts, please put National Endowment for the Arts and National Public Broadcasting on the chopping block.
Wow, I feel totally out of it. Someone who looks like (posing with cash and handsign) that is doing facebook and I don't. On the other hand, the geeks have won if computing has become so pervasive.
I hadn't heard of it anyway - it looks like just a collection of random links people post; kinda like slashdot except without the banal comments. WTF? Guess I'll make a clone and sell it to Google next year, muahahaha!
Yes, lord knows the solar energy people don't want to literally make a pillar of salt.
It would drive the Fundies nuts, that they could then equate solar energy with Sodom and Gomorrah.
Not only that but I prefer my utility bill as it is: measured in kwh not in Lot's Wives.
The people that wrote that report might want to look up the word liberal in the dictionary. The democratic party isn't even close to being "liberal".
They, like the republicans, are authoritarian statists....
No, no, no, both parties are liberal; very liberal with spending my money (and my children's money, grandchildren's money, etc)
Ummmm. No. This has virtually nothing to do with donations. What you are running into is human nature. People generally do not pay for things they can get for free.
You are confusing paying for something that can be had for free with donating to a worthwhile nonprofit organization. People donate lots of money to what they perceive to be worthwhile nonprofits. Ever heard of the Red Cross or the Humane Society? The GP is complaining that he doesn't see WP as a worthwhile nonprofit, so he doesn't donate to it. It has nothing to do with getting anything from it for free.
It also takes on-line take-out orders in several places of the world, which also requires personal information -- at least a name and an address, but I suppose they ask for more info than that on the order form.
There are places where McDonald's provides *delivery* which definitely requires a name and an address.
He slows the presentation to show World War 1 and the Spanish Flu epidemic but he didn't mention the Cultural Revolution in China during the 60's when the large circle representing China takes a HUGE dive. Some analysis relating political/economic systems to this graph is needed. When Smith wrote An Inquiry into the Causes and Effects of the Wealth of Nations, it was because the UK was the outlier in the top right of this graph. Now that a lot of countries are in that quadrant, it is worth noting the outliers are now the few remaining in the lower left. These are the countries whose political systems most interfere with market forces and prevent their citizens from being productive.
I don't think Moore has ever denied that he has an agenda, and that he's telling the story his way.
Then you've never seen any of Moore's work. His wildly skewed to the left shows, skewed to the point of being "creative edits" that completely misrepresent the truth, are presented as documentaries. Most people understand that term to mean factual and attempting to be unbiased. Ever watch Fahrenheit 9/11? That's the wildest piece of creative editing slant to the left ever and it won awards as a "documentary". You think calling that a documentary doesn't hide that he's pushing an agenda???
you have no idea what you're talking about. ask the guys in Antartica, or scientists who have remote glider-type sensors that are in the middle of the Pacific or Atlantic oceans, or even folks out in countries without infrastructure. there is no cellular or wireless service there. satellite phones address these problems and more.
The population of Antarctica is 4,000 in the summer (less in the winter). If all of them bought one of these phones then at a dollar a minute, 4000 people all chattering away 24/7 would generate 2.1B in revenues after a year. Wow, you're right! Researchers in Antarctica are a mass market big enough to support 1.2B$$ of startup debt! You've just solved this company's woes with a simple Slashdot post! What kind of idiot managers work there that they don't know this?!
Sincerely,
Person with a Ph.D. in EE who has worked with hardware development for 15 years.
All those years working with hardware has cut down on your reading comprehension. It's clear the questioner is asking about makes and models of desks/benches/shelves, not what work to do in his new lab.
Free advice is often more reliable then paid advice.
What kind though? I once had an econ prof assert there was no product everyone was willing to produce and give away for free but no one wanted to buy. I responded with "personal advice" and ruined that premise. Fortunately he didn't take it personally and I got a good grade.
2. Confucius said, "Among us, in our part of the country, those who are upright are different from this. The father conceals the misconduct of the son, and the son conceals the misconduct of the father. Uprightness is to be found in this."
This is alive and well today. Just google for 'my dad is Li Gang'
Why ask the Chinese? The USAF has missiles to knock out satellites. They tested one by blowing up a perfectly good solar research satellite a few years ago.
After Z they can go Swedish for one more: Aaron Aandersen, but after that, I have no idea.