Compensation? Compensation would mean they'd be paying for it from their own funds. The government gets money by taxation. This isn't compensation... it's giving money back to the people with some skimmed off for the bureaucrats.
Saving and holding on to your money is exactly what needs to happen. The lack of savings and constant borrowing is caused this in the first place. Demand for dollars is high. Good. Makes things cheaper. That high demand is what people want. What you advocate is forcing people buy things they don't want. That by definition is economically less efficient. The government can't and will never be able to assess the needs and wants of the people as well as the people, the market.
You can't spend your way to prosperity. There is no free lunch. Bastiat clearly explained this over 150 years ago. What's so difficult to follow?
Harmful to society? And exactly how does that jive with the fact that individuals have rights and not society? That you can't harm society you can only infringe on the rights of an individual... as only individuals can have rights?
Having child porn does not harm anyone. Especially when it's completely fictional. The person who committed the act with the child MAY have. The government definition of child is way out of line. A post pubescent individual is not a child.
A real crime, a natural crime has a victim. A real individual who has had their property rights infringed. Having images of a crime is not a crime. There is no victim. It's nothing more then a thought crime and totally illegitimate in a so called free country.
There is no such thing as a libertarian government. A government by definition must initiate aggression or threaten it in order to function. That is the antithesis of the libertarian NAP. The word has an absolute meaning and it is incorrect to call anyone who advocates any level of coercion or non-retaliatory force a libertarian.
And I think you should read up on economic theory, history, and libertarian theory before making such comments. Take a look at works by Ludwig von Mises or better his student Murray Rothbard. Mises.org has most of their work for free.
The first amendment doesn't give rights. It is a specifically enumerated restriction on infringing on your natural right to free speech which is simply derived from the right to property. A private company has their own property rights which allow them to restrict whatever they want just as you can restrict anyone from coming in your home.
Besides... how well has the 1st Amendment worked at keeping me free? McCain/Feingold? The FCC? Protest permits?
If the US Constitution is a document of enumerated powers. Which it is. And therefore it explicitly says what the general and state governments can and cant do. Why would it bother to list in Article 1, Section 8 anything? Could they not all be found in "general welfare?" "Defense" and "general Welfare" belong together and refer to the nation as a whole. The defense and welfare of the federation of states. Not of the people. Not to use eminent domain to take people's property from them for the falsity of defense like Eisenhower claimed. In addition the word welfare had a different usage then than it does now.
Besides, regardless of what the Constitution says, theft is not justifiable in any condition.
Bankers, stockbrokers, CEOs and economists all help make capital accumulation possible and are components of a free market. (Discounting all monetarists and Keynesians who go about destroying capital.) Without capital accumulation society would stagnant at best. Your implication that individuals in those fields are "obsessed with the accumulation of power and wealth" is fallacious as is the claim they have little or no role in making "the world a better place." Those who we need less of are those who really leach off the productivity of others and who 99% of the time are obsessed with the accumulation of power and wealth and have traditionally been the root cause of social problems like war, colonialism/imperialism, ecological/environmental destruction, social exploitation & inequality, etc. Politicians and other government employees.
The 1st Amendment nor the US Constitution disallow what occurred. The 1st amendment says Congress shall pass "no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Even if you accept incorporation theory and claim that the states must abide by it too that still doesn't cover this case. It has nothing to do with the State but a contract for employment between a business and an individual. Any federal legislation regarding this topic is likely unconstitutional leaving only state law. Unless state law says you can't make religious teachings part of one's employment requirements their is no case.
Even so... I'd still rule against the employees. The employer can place whatever requirements for employment they like. If the employee doesn't like them they can find some other job. No harm was done to the employees or their property so their is no crime. No one was forced to do anything here. The employees voluntarily accepted positions offered by Diskeeper. The only force that appears to be or will be going on is the State on those who owner Diskeeper.
Re:Irrelevant, since he never really meant to win
on
Has Ron Paul Quit?
·
· Score: 2
He's written several books.
He ran because he was asked to. It's very obvious if you pay any attention to the man that he doesn't enjoy running or thinks that the position is something he should do or even should be done. At 72 I have to doubt the man did this to gain fame in the way you describe. He has a long public history and I've not seen anything which would indicate your claims are true.
Because he's not a Libertarian. He's a constitutionalist Republican. He's also a 10 term congressman who was elected as a Republican and he ran on the LP ticket when he wasn't in office. I don't believe he could run as a R for Congress and L for president. If the message of freedom can be better spread through his congressional run than that's what he should do. On the LP ticket he wouldn't get in the debates. He'd only be heard by those already following him. It'd be pointless. But as a R in Congress he can continue the fight and support new "Ron Paul Republicans" like Murray Sabrin and Jim Forsythe.
And it's only a few percentage of a school's budget yet comes with very strong strings attached. Why should the federal government tax the people to just give it back to them with requirements on how to teach their kids? The DOE has only been around a short time and in that time the cost per child in real dollars has nearly doubled with almost no or negative change in student ability. How exactly can you justify the DOE except for it's wealth redistribution Pell Grant program?
Yes... because you can generalize an entire generation of people and their intents by the actions and intentions you believe those in power do/have. Seems to me you are one of those divorced from reality.
Actually they planed on software emulation but were unable to create the emulator in time so each PS3 actually contains an EE/GS chipset as used in the new PStwo's. At some point if/when the full software emulator is finished they will remove the EE/GS to save money.
I agree. The more I dig into the specifics of a lot of which is reported as new fact I find is complete conjecture. If all they have is conjecture and no direct causality... I'm not terribly interested in the findings.
The point is he does not have the right to have the copyrighted content without paying for it. He is hurting someone. He is violating the rights of the copyright owner. The only practical way for the laws to work is to require the copyright owner to take action against the offender... it does not change the fact the offender is breaking the law and is not entitled to the owners material.
the DS screen is backlit and sharper than the GBA... it's also a higher resolution so the gba game plays with a few extra black pixels on each side. not that you notice. It's also nicer with a DS because you can have a DS and a GBA game in the machine at once so you dont necessarily have to carry other games with you.
Brian Griffin: We have everything we need. And no crime, no guns, no pollution. Peter Griffin: Brian's right. Peter Griffin: We've left ourselves defenseless. Guys, we need to make some guns. Cleveland: Guns? Guns only lead to trouble. Peter Griffin: When that trouble happens, we'll be ready to blow its freakin' head off!
the cpu's these devices use are not all that special... it's the custom hardware that is around them that is undocumented... and it seems to me people have been quiet successful in figuring out many of the systems people actually care about.
Tekken? That's that shitty fighting game for the PSX/2 right? Everyone knows the best 3D fighter is Fight for Live on the Atari Jaguar. And Shadow for the 3DO is the best fighter period. If they made Tekken 6 more like DOA... i would so play it... or brought back Gon.
Slashdot Mirror
Compensation? Compensation would mean they'd be paying for it from their own funds. The government gets money by taxation. This isn't compensation... it's giving money back to the people with some skimmed off for the bureaucrats.
Saving and holding on to your money is exactly what needs to happen. The lack of savings and constant borrowing is caused this in the first place. Demand for dollars is high. Good. Makes things cheaper. That high demand is what people want. What you advocate is forcing people buy things they don't want. That by definition is economically less efficient. The government can't and will never be able to assess the needs and wants of the people as well as the people, the market.
You can't spend your way to prosperity. There is no free lunch. Bastiat clearly explained this over 150 years ago. What's so difficult to follow?
His understanding of software development and FOSS in The Conservative Nanny State was completely shallow and lacking.
Perhaps you need to better understand the history of the commerce clause. How it came about and how it has been completely abused.
Harmful to society? And exactly how does that jive with the fact that individuals have rights and not society? That you can't harm society you can only infringe on the rights of an individual... as only individuals can have rights?
Having child porn does not harm anyone. Especially when it's completely fictional. The person who committed the act with the child MAY have. The government definition of child is way out of line. A post pubescent individual is not a child.
A real crime, a natural crime has a victim. A real individual who has had their property rights infringed. Having images of a crime is not a crime. There is no victim. It's nothing more then a thought crime and totally illegitimate in a so called free country.
There is no such thing as a libertarian government. A government by definition must initiate aggression or threaten it in order to function. That is the antithesis of the libertarian NAP. The word has an absolute meaning and it is incorrect to call anyone who advocates any level of coercion or non-retaliatory force a libertarian.
And I think you should read up on economic theory, history, and libertarian theory before making such comments. Take a look at works by Ludwig von Mises or better his student Murray Rothbard. Mises.org has most of their work for free.
The first amendment doesn't give rights. It is a specifically enumerated restriction on infringing on your natural right to free speech which is simply derived from the right to property. A private company has their own property rights which allow them to restrict whatever they want just as you can restrict anyone from coming in your home.
Besides... how well has the 1st Amendment worked at keeping me free? McCain/Feingold? The FCC? Protest permits?
If the US Constitution is a document of enumerated powers. Which it is. And therefore it explicitly says what the general and state governments can and cant do. Why would it bother to list in Article 1, Section 8 anything? Could they not all be found in "general welfare?" "Defense" and "general Welfare" belong together and refer to the nation as a whole. The defense and welfare of the federation of states. Not of the people. Not to use eminent domain to take people's property from them for the falsity of defense like Eisenhower claimed. In addition the word welfare had a different usage then than it does now.
Besides, regardless of what the Constitution says, theft is not justifiable in any condition.
Bankers, stockbrokers, CEOs and economists all help make capital accumulation possible and are components of a free market. (Discounting all monetarists and Keynesians who go about destroying capital.) Without capital accumulation society would stagnant at best. Your implication that individuals in those fields are "obsessed with the accumulation of power and wealth" is fallacious as is the claim they have little or no role in making "the world a better place." Those who we need less of are those who really leach off the productivity of others and who 99% of the time are obsessed with the accumulation of power and wealth and have traditionally been the root cause of social problems like war, colonialism/imperialism, ecological/environmental destruction, social exploitation & inequality, etc. Politicians and other government employees.
The 1st Amendment nor the US Constitution disallow what occurred. The 1st amendment says Congress shall pass "no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Even if you accept incorporation theory and claim that the states must abide by it too that still doesn't cover this case. It has nothing to do with the State but a contract for employment between a business and an individual. Any federal legislation regarding this topic is likely unconstitutional leaving only state law. Unless state law says you can't make religious teachings part of one's employment requirements their is no case.
Even so... I'd still rule against the employees. The employer can place whatever requirements for employment they like. If the employee doesn't like them they can find some other job. No harm was done to the employees or their property so their is no crime. No one was forced to do anything here. The employees voluntarily accepted positions offered by Diskeeper. The only force that appears to be or will be going on is the State on those who owner Diskeeper.
He's written several books.
He ran because he was asked to. It's very obvious if you pay any attention to the man that he doesn't enjoy running or thinks that the position is something he should do or even should be done. At 72 I have to doubt the man did this to gain fame in the way you describe. He has a long public history and I've not seen anything which would indicate your claims are true.
Because he's not a Libertarian. He's a constitutionalist Republican. He's also a 10 term congressman who was elected as a Republican and he ran on the LP ticket when he wasn't in office. I don't believe he could run as a R for Congress and L for president. If the message of freedom can be better spread through his congressional run than that's what he should do. On the LP ticket he wouldn't get in the debates. He'd only be heard by those already following him. It'd be pointless. But as a R in Congress he can continue the fight and support new "Ron Paul Republicans" like Murray Sabrin and Jim Forsythe.
And it's only a few percentage of a school's budget yet comes with very strong strings attached. Why should the federal government tax the people to just give it back to them with requirements on how to teach their kids? The DOE has only been around a short time and in that time the cost per child in real dollars has nearly doubled with almost no or negative change in student ability. How exactly can you justify the DOE except for it's wealth redistribution Pell Grant program?
Perhaps you should look up what libertarianism is... read some John Stuart Mills maybe. You're obviously ignorant of it's actual meaning or a troll.
Yes... because you can generalize an entire generation of people and their intents by the actions and intentions you believe those in power do/have. Seems to me you are one of those divorced from reality.
Actually they planed on software emulation but were unable to create the emulator in time so each PS3 actually contains an EE/GS chipset as used in the new PStwo's. At some point if/when the full software emulator is finished they will remove the EE/GS to save money.
I agree. The more I dig into the specifics of a lot of which is reported as new fact I find is complete conjecture. If all they have is conjecture and no direct causality... I'm not terribly interested in the findings.
You also realize that CO2 is the major minor greenhouse gas. Water vapor is by far the most significant contributor to the greenhouse effect.
The point is he does not have the right to have the copyrighted content without paying for it. He is hurting someone. He is violating the rights of the copyright owner. The only practical way for the laws to work is to require the copyright owner to take action against the offender... it does not change the fact the offender is breaking the law and is not entitled to the owners material.
the DS screen is backlit and sharper than the GBA... it's also a higher resolution so the gba game plays with a few extra black pixels on each side. not that you notice. It's also nicer with a DS because you can have a DS and a GBA game in the machine at once so you dont necessarily have to carry other games with you.
OpenOffice.org was not built from the ground up as an open source project.
In Boston and New York City there were zombie walks yesterday also.
http://www.zombiecon.com/
Brian Griffin: We have everything we need. And no crime, no guns, no pollution.
Peter Griffin: Brian's right.
Peter Griffin: We've left ourselves defenseless. Guys, we need to make some guns.
Cleveland: Guns? Guns only lead to trouble.
Peter Griffin: When that trouble happens, we'll be ready to blow its freakin' head off!
PSP MIPS R4000 : http://www.comms.scitech.susx.ac.uk/fft/programmin g/R4400_Uman_book_Ed2.pdf
i lename=ARM7TDMI_Data_Sheet_'ARM_DDI_0029E'.zip
IPOD ARM7TDMI : http://www.gbadev.org/download.php?section=docs&f
the cpu's these devices use are not all that special... it's the custom hardware that is around them that is undocumented... and it seems to me people have been quiet successful in figuring out many of the systems people actually care about.
Tekken? That's that shitty fighting game for the PSX/2 right? Everyone knows the best 3D fighter is Fight for Live on the Atari Jaguar. And Shadow for the 3DO is the best fighter period. If they made Tekken 6 more like DOA... i would so play it... or brought back Gon.