Why is the government trying to take away every incentive to act prudently and responsibly?
Sometimes things are what they seem. In other words, has it occurred to you that the government (or the people behind it) doesn't want people to behave prudently and resposibly?
If so, why? Well, why do we have a huge deficit, which is the government itself failing to act prudently or responsibly?
I don't claim to have an answer. When the government acts in a way consistently from adminstration to administration, I have to wonder if they didn't want irresponsible behavior, why encourage it?
The above post should be modded informative, both for the victim in this case, and as yet another reason (as if one was needed) to stay the Hell out of Germany.
Hey, it's my ancestral homeland and all, they make great boardgames and that's important to boardgame fanatics like myself. However, it's not worth having your legs broke by some guys who got your home address off of a Website. (Or being dragged into court and being forced to pay a huge bill.)
"Aha! Once again the conservative sandwich-heavy portfolio pays off for the hungry investor!" [Eats Sandwich] "Oh.. I'm ruined! Wuahahahaaha why... why...."
Actually, though at this point saying Bush was illegitimate does nothing to harm Bush (though uncovering corrupt vote rigging might prevent such shenanigansin the future). What people who say Bush was illegitimately elected are trying to do is protect the concept of American Representative government. Because, you see, if Bush was legitimately elected in 2000 it means that the system is hopelessly broken and not a valid way to select leaders.
Because George W. Bush was a complete, bungling incompetant and a dangerous sociopath.
The truth is that both sides in most elections engage in various forms of vote rigging. Lyndon Johnson used to make jokes about the crooked way he won the White House after his election. (Another incompetant sociopath we had as president.)
Obama is only slightly better than Bush. Of course, he's managed to betray the people who voted him into office in very short order with most of his appointments. (Seriously, if people wanted Hillary Clinton in charge of foreign policy they'd have voted for her in the primary. I'm not even going to talk about the selection of Larry Summers, because what can one say, other than shaking one's head sadly.)
Still, whatever else one can say about him, he isn't George W. Bush.
That depends on what you mean by inefficient, though. If you mean, "digital signals can send the same information using less spectrum" it's true. However, digital recievers seem to be somewhat "all or nothing," which means that in the past I could recieve a badly snowed up but still somewhat watchable Farscape broadcast on my TV, whereas nowadays I'd probably get something like this as my picture for most of it. (In other words, the picture freezing like that with the sound and motion stopping.)
Still, I don't think that channel is broadcasting Farscape any more so:
Actually, you no longer have to steal shows over an Internet connection, because major networks are making them available on sites like hulu.com for free. (Or on the station's Website, like cartoon network.)
More obscure shows are also available as individual episodes on iTunes for a relatively low per episode price and they run acceptably even on cheap computers.
Truthfully, the computer is a better TV than the TV.
So far, and no doubt this will change, Hulu has limited commercial interruption on shows that when broadcast have so many commercials that you forget what the show was about by the time the commercial break finishes. iTunes is commercial free for a small price per episode.
Also, I really hated the fact that anybody could ask for coupons. I know people who have already invested over $10K in HDTV equipment who asked for them. I don't know if they used them, but it seems silly to me that they would, since they can only be used to purchase basically inferior devices (limited to 480i output). But, those coupons count against the budget.
Well, this isn't really true, you were only supposed to be allowed to get the coupons if the DTV changeover was going to make your analog reciever obsolete and you had no other means to recieve a TV signal (such as satellite or cable). Of course, it's probably unenforcable.
There is another problem though. I was a good little consumer, got my coupon, bought my digital converter box and tried to do the switch. Most of the channels don't get in on the digital box, only Public TV and the Spanish channel. To say it is very disappointing is an understatement, I was hoping to get improved reception, instead I find my selection to be much more limited.
I'm hoping that when the analog signal is turned off, I'll be able to get the digital signal in better, but I'm actually quite pessimistic about it.
For me the only downside is that I can't really use my computer and watch some silly nonsense on the TV while I'm doing whatever it is I'm doing. I was already watching more of the few shows that I actually am interested in on the Internet, than on the broadcast channels.
I can't afford cable/satellite right now (which means "my current priorities don't include cable/satellite in my list of expenses"), so I'm guessing I'll just learn to use my TV as a monitor for games and DVDs.
They've weakened the analog signal to the point where I get a lot of snow, currently (they mentioned on the station that they would be doing this in preparation for the switch), so I'm finding I put in a DVD of Road Runner or Ranma 1/2 and let it run while I'm messing with my computer. Better or worse than letting the millionth iteration or Seinfeld or the King of Queens run while I'm working? I don't know.
I know that seems counterintuitive, but the answer is ultimately fairly simple if you look at the politics behind the DTV switch. A while back, the US government (Clinton Era) decided to sell off the public airwaves to various companies. Of course, in order for these companies to take control of these airwaves and use them for cellphones and what-have-you the analog signal had to be cleared from the airwaves.
The only reason the government was able to do this was with a partially funded mandate, which was to force all analog signal consumers and all analog signal broadcasters to switch to a digital signal. The reason why that would work because in theory you could compress the same number of broadcast stations into the smaller remaining bandwith, provided that they were digitally encoded signals that would be decoded by a digital reciever.
So, the answer to your question is this, this isn't about DTV. This is about a problem that the government created of having sold the analog spectrum that is currently being used for analog TV broadcasts to companies that want to use something else. The government believes that a DTV switchover is the solution to this problem, so they are trying to get the majority of consumers and broadcasters to switch to DTV as soon as possible. That's why they are giving away coupons from the Commerce Department, and running ADs that say "you must switch to DTV."
I also believe that a lot of retailers were hoping that the confusion created in non-technical users regarding DTV was going to drive HD-TV sales, but that's a totally seperate issue.
Of course, the economy doesn't look quite the same now as it did when this switchover was originally mandated for 2009, and that's probably the real reason why there is talk of delaying the changeover.
This makes me think of the movie 28 Days Later. The animal rights activists who break into the lab are set up as naive bringers of disaster, but who thought it was a good idea to turn chimps into monsters in the first place?
I can just see the grant proposal interview now:
"So, can you describe your project proposal?"
"Well, we'll be infecting chimps with rage."
"What do you mean, infecting them with rage?"
"Well, the technical details are here and here" [Points to parts of some documents on the table]
"Oh, very good then, grant approved. You can start immediately. I'm off for a spot of tea, cheerio."
Jrrr: Hear me out. There are many good reasons to eat: Hunger, boredom, wanting to be the world's fattest man. But not revenge. Are we no better than they? Besides, Leela's my friend.
Lrrr: (mumbling) Is this true, Earthling?
Leela: (mumbling) Yeah, it is.
[He takes her out of his mouth.]
Lrrr: Leela's garbled words have opened my eyes.
[The crowd cheers and Leela spits out and pokes Jrrr, who giggles. Waterfall Jr. holds the mic and strokes his hair.]
Waterfall Jr.: OK, that's a start, that's very Earth-friendly. Now everyone join hands. Join hands, please. I'd like to lead you all in some swaying. Come on, pay attention. [The audience is not impressed.] I said do it! Yeah...
Lrrr: Is he your friend too?
Jrrr: No.
[Lrrr eats Waterfall Jr. He pokes his head out of Lrrr's mouth.]
Waterfall Jr.: This is not happening.
[Lrrr swallows him and everyone cheers and applauds. Lrrr clutches his stomach.]
Lrrr: I think there was something funny in that hippie.
You claim to be frugal, and let's see. You drive a car that's a road hazard and will probably kill yourself and other people when it gives out suddenly, you mooch off of the gym's water bill by using their shower for a purpose other than is intended for it, and you buy designer junk, the Mac Book Pro, and think it's a "nice thing."
Oh, and if you are buying second hand clothes and you are making $78k then that means that you are either mentally ill, or else you are spending money on something not indicated in your comments.
(Perhaps your "bit nicer" house was purchased at a ridiculously overpriced level and you are worse than the people who live in a cheap rental and indulge in iPhones and pricier (but road worthy) cars? Did your ARM reset? Were you thinking that prices couldn't stop going up and you'd refinance before the piper came along, and find yourself stuck with a white elephant with an impossible monthly bill? Hmmm... or maybe you are spending the excess on drugs and hookers... hopefully lithium or some other anti-psychotic drugs, Mr. Collyer.)
And my company has never had an engineering layoff in the entire 85+ year history of the company. I think I'm doing pretty good.
That's nice, Lehman Brother's survived the American Civil War and it just closed recently.
You probably aren't saving enough. You need to think about whether you are going to the cheapest second hand place you can find for clothes. In fact, maybe you need to exclusively buy your clothes at garage sales, those are usually cheaper. Also, you are certainly wasting money keeping your house at 45 degrees, don't you think 35 would be wiser? (By some blankets at your next garage sale, or perhaps raid the neighborhood recycling bins for some warm, cozy newspaper.)
Seriously, if you are indeed hoping for a Depression, you really need to think about whether your past thriftyness will be enough. Are you stretching the soup you eat by cutting it with tapwater (from the gym)? When was the last time you got food out of a trash can or dumpster? A lot of that is perfectly edible.
Sure you are trying, but are you trying hard enough? There should be some little doubt in the back of your mind, a little voice that says, "A penny saved is a penny earned." Can you afford not to listen to it? Can you?
The sad thing about this culture war? It's going to finish off the United States. As people who produce nothing but human misery and debt servitude have become so important that even industrial capitalism (note, I'm not even talking about industrial labor here) is to be offered in a bonfire so that they'll never even feel slighly uncomfortable. As industrial capitalism dies in the United States, the United States becomes more and more irrelevant.
Finance Capitalism? What a joke? You want to see the ultimate apotheosis of finance capitalism? Bernie Madoff. Subprime Mortgages. The great black joke that's destroying this country.
They'll be a few more years where the U. S.'s bloated and ridiculous military is still a great threat, but as the U. S. falls behind industrially and technologically as both new technology and production of that technology is in the hands of non-Americans even that will recede. We won't have the newest tech, and we won't be able to build it, and other countries will be pushing us around...
Which wouldn't be so terrible until you realize what shitty governments our new overlords have. I mean, China running the world? The entire British/American enlightenment devotion to the Rights of Man hasn't really made a dent over there. Ask some Falun Gong practitioners, sometime.
I mean, normally bosses are bosses and it doesn't matter who signs my paycheck, but this is the PRC we're talking about. A country that regularly inflicts Hell on Earth on its own citizens because they might think there is a mystical element to some forms of exercise. If they'll do that to them, what will they do to us?
And why are we giving it up? Well, the same reason why people give food to a tapeworm, until they die. The parasite wraps itself around the guts and becomes difficult to dislodge. Only in this case, the bowels of America reside in Washington D. C.
Well maybe (snort) that hardcore socialist (chortle) Barack Obama (snicker) will.... Ha Ha Ha... I can't continue, I'm sorry, my eyes are tearing up.
It's just not fun to get into arguments with people who believe that the Second Coming of Karl Marx would hire Larry Summers to be one of his bankers.
The Right believes that if you aren't an aristocrat, you need no retirement plan other than a straight razor and a warm bath.
(Or guns, pills, drowning... whatever, the important thing is, "If they are going to die, they'd better do it, and decrease the surplus population.")
Of course, if you are an aristocrat, Heaven and Earth must be moved to make sure that you continue to live in opulent splendor. Hence, the huge bailout for the bankers.
So much makes sense when you understand this, society just clicks into place.
Corporations tend not to care about morality. Many of the companies that complain the loudest about immorality, have done evil things themselves in the past. Electronic Arts is a good example, as is Sony.
Now, I'm pretty sure that Microsoft has never done anything morally wrong, ever, but I could be wrong about that. I'm open to the possiblity. (Incidentally, I hope people's sarcasm detectors are working.)
Does that morally excuse Software Piracy? (Shrug) It's kind of irrelevant to me whether it does or not, I just know I consider it laughable when almost any corporation appeals to "morality."
So, corporation use morality as just another tool in their marketing toolkit. I'm sure 20th Century Fox complains about morality when someone "pirates" Jingle All the Way without any trace of shame. (From the article about them "pirating" the script for that movie, "They obviously thought nobody would have the clout to fight.")
DRM is a business strategy, anti-"piracy" lobbying is another, and commercials on DVDs saying "you wouldn't steal a car" or the hoary old, "don't copy that floppy" are another.
Now, here's the thing a fine argument against piracy is that if companies can't make money in the business of selling copies, they might change to a business model that we won't like, cut back on product or something else. Sometimes these are uttered in the same breath as appeals to morality, as if to conflate them as being the same thing. However, what they really are are appeals to self interest or at best to community interest.
Heck, recently corporations have started to use moralistic sounding language to attack used product. (The difference in the price of new and used product just proves that most things they are selling are at ridiculously inflated prices. As indeed does the prevalence of piracy.)
None of the above should be considered an endorsement of piracy. I don't pirate games myself, but it's not because of morality.
"But if there are unions, then plutocrats will have less opulent luxury. Since one day, my faith in free markets, low taxes, and zero regulation will be rewarded by me being raised to the ranks of the plutocrats I don't want my opulent luxury reduced. Therefore, I will continue to keep my nose to the grindstone and forget this silly union nonsense."
Look, if your from the UK you mostly won't understand how this works. The American working class, at least the anti-union ones posting here, have been propagandized since birth to think "Union Bad!"
On the other hand, it eventually penetrates through this fog that IT people aren't treated very well. So, the anti-union IT people have a dilemma, "I wasn't able to take my vacation this year, I have to work weekends, holidays and long hours everyday. Oh, and my boss is threatening to replace me with cheap overseas labor. Hmm... maybe if I was part of some organization of all the other IT workers, my life wouldn't be so miserable."
Amongst this group, some will fear offending their god, "But if there are unions, then plutocrats will have less opulent luxury. Since one day, my faith in free markets, low taxes, and zero regulation will be rewarded by me being raised to the ranks of the plutocrats I don't want my opulent luxury reduced. Therefore, I will continue to keep my nose to the grindstone and forget this silly union nonsense."
Another part of the group will think, "Maybe our holy plutocrats just don't know about how miserable they are making us. That's it, they actually like and care about us, but we have no way to approach them about the unintended misery they are causing. If we had an organization, we could let them know how crummy it makes us feel that they are depressing wages and forcing us to work insane hours. But... but... Union Bad! Well, maybe if we just don't call our organization a union it will be ok."
The third part of the group thinks, "You know, my parents have healthcare, a pension and the ability to enjoy their retirement and take cruises and things. Meanwhile my retirement plan consists of a straight razor and a warm bath. You know, my Dad was in a union, and when he had to come in on weekends or work holidays he got paid extra money. Maybe the holy plutocrats are actually evil parasitic scumbags, and... I know this is heresy... unions are actually good and a path to prosperity for the working class."
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, and I think the most objectionable thing about it is that it wasn't funny. Think about it.
Sometimes things are what they seem. In other words, has it occurred to you that the government (or the people behind it) doesn't want people to behave prudently and resposibly?
If so, why? Well, why do we have a huge deficit, which is the government itself failing to act prudently or responsibly?
I don't claim to have an answer. When the government acts in a way consistently from adminstration to administration, I have to wonder if they didn't want irresponsible behavior, why encourage it?
The above post should be modded informative, both for the victim in this case, and as yet another reason (as if one was needed) to stay the Hell out of Germany.
Hey, it's my ancestral homeland and all, they make great boardgames and that's important to boardgame fanatics like myself. However, it's not worth having your legs broke by some guys who got your home address off of a Website. (Or being dragged into court and being forced to pay a huge bill.)
Hmm, I guess whoever modded the above offtopic doesn't know what the logo for Millenium was for it's 3 season run:
http://www.millennium-thisiswhoweare.net/cmeacg/img/millennium_logo.jpg
"Aha! Once again the conservative sandwich-heavy portfolio pays off for the hungry investor!" [Eats Sandwich] "Oh.. I'm ruined! Wuahahahaaha why ... why...."
http://www.gotfuturama.com/Multimedia/EpisodeSounds/3ACV21/
This is who we are.
K. C. Munchkin!, that's a good game:
http://www.gamespy.com/articles/488/488692p1.html
There's more than one way to skin a cat:
http://www.cpa.org.au/garchve04/1188florida.html
Actually, though at this point saying Bush was illegitimate does nothing to harm Bush (though uncovering corrupt vote rigging might prevent such shenanigansin the future). What people who say Bush was illegitimately elected are trying to do is protect the concept of American Representative government. Because, you see, if Bush was legitimately elected in 2000 it means that the system is hopelessly broken and not a valid way to select leaders.
Because George W. Bush was a complete, bungling incompetant and a dangerous sociopath.
The truth is that both sides in most elections engage in various forms of vote rigging. Lyndon Johnson used to make jokes about the crooked way he won the White House after his election. (Another incompetant sociopath we had as president.)
Obama is only slightly better than Bush. Of course, he's managed to betray the people who voted him into office in very short order with most of his appointments. (Seriously, if people wanted Hillary Clinton in charge of foreign policy they'd have voted for her in the primary. I'm not even going to talk about the selection of Larry Summers, because what can one say, other than shaking one's head sadly.)
Still, whatever else one can say about him, he isn't George W. Bush.
That depends on what you mean by inefficient, though. If you mean, "digital signals can send the same information using less spectrum" it's true. However, digital recievers seem to be somewhat "all or nothing," which means that in the past I could recieve a badly snowed up but still somewhat watchable Farscape broadcast on my TV, whereas nowadays I'd probably get something like this as my picture for most of it. (In other words, the picture freezing like that with the sound and motion stopping.)
Still, I don't think that channel is broadcasting Farscape any more so:
o/~ Gimme cracked corn, and I don't care o/~
Actually, you no longer have to steal shows over an Internet connection, because major networks are making them available on sites like hulu.com for free. (Or on the station's Website, like cartoon network.)
More obscure shows are also available as individual episodes on iTunes for a relatively low per episode price and they run acceptably even on cheap computers.
Truthfully, the computer is a better TV than the TV.
So far, and no doubt this will change, Hulu has limited commercial interruption on shows that when broadcast have so many commercials that you forget what the show was about by the time the commercial break finishes. iTunes is commercial free for a small price per episode.
Well, this isn't really true, you were only supposed to be allowed to get the coupons if the DTV changeover was going to make your analog reciever obsolete and you had no other means to recieve a TV signal (such as satellite or cable). Of course, it's probably unenforcable.
There is another problem though. I was a good little consumer, got my coupon, bought my digital converter box and tried to do the switch. Most of the channels don't get in on the digital box, only Public TV and the Spanish channel. To say it is very disappointing is an understatement, I was hoping to get improved reception, instead I find my selection to be much more limited.
I'm hoping that when the analog signal is turned off, I'll be able to get the digital signal in better, but I'm actually quite pessimistic about it.
For me the only downside is that I can't really use my computer and watch some silly nonsense on the TV while I'm doing whatever it is I'm doing. I was already watching more of the few shows that I actually am interested in on the Internet, than on the broadcast channels.
I can't afford cable/satellite right now (which means "my current priorities don't include cable/satellite in my list of expenses"), so I'm guessing I'll just learn to use my TV as a monitor for games and DVDs.
They've weakened the analog signal to the point where I get a lot of snow, currently (they mentioned on the station that they would be doing this in preparation for the switch), so I'm finding I put in a DVD of Road Runner or Ranma 1/2 and let it run while I'm messing with my computer. Better or worse than letting the millionth iteration or Seinfeld or the King of Queens run while I'm working? I don't know.
I know that seems counterintuitive, but the answer is ultimately fairly simple if you look at the politics behind the DTV switch. A while back, the US government (Clinton Era) decided to sell off the public airwaves to various companies. Of course, in order for these companies to take control of these airwaves and use them for cellphones and what-have-you the analog signal had to be cleared from the airwaves.
The only reason the government was able to do this was with a partially funded mandate, which was to force all analog signal consumers and all analog signal broadcasters to switch to a digital signal. The reason why that would work because in theory you could compress the same number of broadcast stations into the smaller remaining bandwith, provided that they were digitally encoded signals that would be decoded by a digital reciever.
So, the answer to your question is this, this isn't about DTV. This is about a problem that the government created of having sold the analog spectrum that is currently being used for analog TV broadcasts to companies that want to use something else. The government believes that a DTV switchover is the solution to this problem, so they are trying to get the majority of consumers and broadcasters to switch to DTV as soon as possible. That's why they are giving away coupons from the Commerce Department, and running ADs that say "you must switch to DTV."
I also believe that a lot of retailers were hoping that the confusion created in non-technical users regarding DTV was going to drive HD-TV sales, but that's a totally seperate issue.
Of course, the economy doesn't look quite the same now as it did when this switchover was originally mandated for 2009, and that's probably the real reason why there is talk of delaying the changeover.
This makes me think of the movie 28 Days Later. The animal rights activists who break into the lab are set up as naive bringers of disaster, but who thought it was a good idea to turn chimps into monsters in the first place?
I can just see the grant proposal interview now:
"So, can you describe your project proposal?"
"Well, we'll be infecting chimps with rage."
"What do you mean, infecting them with rage?"
"Well, the technical details are here and here" [Points to parts of some documents on the table]
"Oh, very good then, grant approved. You can start immediately. I'm off for a spot of tea, cheerio."
Good, old-fashioned, nightmare fuel.
Mmmmmmm..... garbage donut.... glllll.....
You know, I'm starting to hear echos of the movie Hot Fuzz here. All we need are people in cloaks and everyone talking about "the greater good."
Jrrr: Hear me out. There are many good reasons to eat: Hunger, boredom, wanting to be the world's fattest man. But not revenge. Are we no better than they? Besides, Leela's my friend.
Lrrr: (mumbling) Is this true, Earthling?
Leela: (mumbling) Yeah, it is.
[He takes her out of his mouth.]
Lrrr: Leela's garbled words have opened my eyes.
[The crowd cheers and Leela spits out and pokes Jrrr, who giggles. Waterfall Jr. holds the mic and strokes his hair.]
Waterfall Jr.: OK, that's a start, that's very Earth-friendly. Now everyone join hands. Join hands, please. I'd like to lead you all in some swaying. Come on, pay attention. [The audience is not impressed.] I said do it! Yeah...
Lrrr: Is he your friend too?
Jrrr: No.
[Lrrr eats Waterfall Jr. He pokes his head out of Lrrr's mouth.]
Waterfall Jr.: This is not happening.
[Lrrr swallows him and everyone cheers and applauds. Lrrr clutches his stomach.]
Lrrr: I think there was something funny in that hippie.
.
You claim to be frugal, and let's see. You drive a car that's a road hazard and will probably kill yourself and other people when it gives out suddenly, you mooch off of the gym's water bill by using their shower for a purpose other than is intended for it, and you buy designer junk, the Mac Book Pro, and think it's a "nice thing."
Oh, and if you are buying second hand clothes and you are making $78k then that means that you are either mentally ill, or else you are spending money on something not indicated in your comments.
(Perhaps your "bit nicer" house was purchased at a ridiculously overpriced level and you are worse than the people who live in a cheap rental and indulge in iPhones and pricier (but road worthy) cars? Did your ARM reset? Were you thinking that prices couldn't stop going up and you'd refinance before the piper came along, and find yourself stuck with a white elephant with an impossible monthly bill? Hmmm... or maybe you are spending the excess on drugs and hookers... hopefully lithium or some other anti-psychotic drugs, Mr. Collyer.)
That's nice, Lehman Brother's survived the American Civil War and it just closed recently.
You probably aren't saving enough. You need to think about whether you are going to the cheapest second hand place you can find for clothes. In fact, maybe you need to exclusively buy your clothes at garage sales, those are usually cheaper. Also, you are certainly wasting money keeping your house at 45 degrees, don't you think 35 would be wiser? (By some blankets at your next garage sale, or perhaps raid the neighborhood recycling bins for some warm, cozy newspaper.)
Seriously, if you are indeed hoping for a Depression, you really need to think about whether your past thriftyness will be enough. Are you stretching the soup you eat by cutting it with tapwater (from the gym)? When was the last time you got food out of a trash can or dumpster? A lot of that is perfectly edible.
Sure you are trying, but are you trying hard enough? There should be some little doubt in the back of your mind, a little voice that says, "A penny saved is a penny earned." Can you afford not to listen to it? Can you?
The sad thing about this culture war? It's going to finish off the United States. As people who produce nothing but human misery and debt servitude have become so important that even industrial capitalism (note, I'm not even talking about industrial labor here) is to be offered in a bonfire so that they'll never even feel slighly uncomfortable. As industrial capitalism dies in the United States, the United States becomes more and more irrelevant.
Finance Capitalism? What a joke? You want to see the ultimate apotheosis of finance capitalism? Bernie Madoff. Subprime Mortgages. The great black joke that's destroying this country.
They'll be a few more years where the U. S.'s bloated and ridiculous military is still a great threat, but as the U. S. falls behind industrially and technologically as both new technology and production of that technology is in the hands of non-Americans even that will recede. We won't have the newest tech, and we won't be able to build it, and other countries will be pushing us around...
Which wouldn't be so terrible until you realize what shitty governments our new overlords have. I mean, China running the world? The entire British/American enlightenment devotion to the Rights of Man hasn't really made a dent over there. Ask some Falun Gong practitioners, sometime.
I mean, normally bosses are bosses and it doesn't matter who signs my paycheck, but this is the PRC we're talking about. A country that regularly inflicts Hell on Earth on its own citizens because they might think there is a mystical element to some forms of exercise. If they'll do that to them, what will they do to us?
And why are we giving it up? Well, the same reason why people give food to a tapeworm, until they die. The parasite wraps itself around the guts and becomes difficult to dislodge. Only in this case, the bowels of America reside in Washington D. C.
Well maybe (snort) that hardcore socialist (chortle) Barack Obama (snicker) will.... Ha Ha Ha... I can't continue, I'm sorry, my eyes are tearing up.
It's just not fun to get into arguments with people who believe that the Second Coming of Karl Marx would hire Larry Summers to be one of his bankers.
The Right believes that if you aren't an aristocrat, you need no retirement plan other than a straight razor and a warm bath.
(Or guns, pills, drowning... whatever, the important thing is, "If they are going to die, they'd better do it, and decrease the surplus population.")
Of course, if you are an aristocrat, Heaven and Earth must be moved to make sure that you continue to live in opulent splendor. Hence, the huge bailout for the bankers.
So much makes sense when you understand this, society just clicks into place.
Here's a good phrase, "Morality is Marketing."
Corporations tend not to care about morality. Many of the companies that complain the loudest about immorality, have done evil things themselves in the past. Electronic Arts is a good example, as is Sony.
Now, I'm pretty sure that Microsoft has never done anything morally wrong, ever, but I could be wrong about that. I'm open to the possiblity. (Incidentally, I hope people's sarcasm detectors are working.)
Does that morally excuse Software Piracy? (Shrug) It's kind of irrelevant to me whether it does or not, I just know I consider it laughable when almost any corporation appeals to "morality."
So, corporation use morality as just another tool in their marketing toolkit. I'm sure 20th Century Fox complains about morality when someone "pirates" Jingle All the Way without any trace of shame. (From the article about them "pirating" the script for that movie, "They obviously thought nobody would have the clout to fight.")
DRM is a business strategy, anti-"piracy" lobbying is another, and commercials on DVDs saying "you wouldn't steal a car" or the hoary old, "don't copy that floppy" are another.
Now, here's the thing a fine argument against piracy is that if companies can't make money in the business of selling copies, they might change to a business model that we won't like, cut back on product or something else. Sometimes these are uttered in the same breath as appeals to morality, as if to conflate them as being the same thing. However, what they really are are appeals to self interest or at best to community interest.
Heck, recently corporations have started to use moralistic sounding language to attack used product. (The difference in the price of new and used product just proves that most things they are selling are at ridiculously inflated prices. As indeed does the prevalence of piracy.)
None of the above should be considered an endorsement of piracy. I don't pirate games myself, but it's not because of morality.
"But if there are unions, then plutocrats will have less opulent luxury. Since one day, my faith in free markets, low taxes, and zero regulation will be rewarded by me being raised to the ranks of the plutocrats I don't want my opulent luxury reduced. Therefore, I will continue to keep my nose to the grindstone and forget this silly union nonsense."
Look, if your from the UK you mostly won't understand how this works. The American working class, at least the anti-union ones posting here, have been propagandized since birth to think "Union Bad!"
On the other hand, it eventually penetrates through this fog that IT people aren't treated very well. So, the anti-union IT people have a dilemma, "I wasn't able to take my vacation this year, I have to work weekends, holidays and long hours everyday. Oh, and my boss is threatening to replace me with cheap overseas labor. Hmm... maybe if I was part of some organization of all the other IT workers, my life wouldn't be so miserable."
Amongst this group, some will fear offending their god, "But if there are unions, then plutocrats will have less opulent luxury. Since one day, my faith in free markets, low taxes, and zero regulation will be rewarded by me being raised to the ranks of the plutocrats I don't want my opulent luxury reduced. Therefore, I will continue to keep my nose to the grindstone and forget this silly union nonsense."
Another part of the group will think, "Maybe our holy plutocrats just don't know about how miserable they are making us. That's it, they actually like and care about us, but we have no way to approach them about the unintended misery they are causing. If we had an organization, we could let them know how crummy it makes us feel that they are depressing wages and forcing us to work insane hours. But... but... Union Bad! Well, maybe if we just don't call our organization a union it will be ok."
The third part of the group thinks, "You know, my parents have healthcare, a pension and the ability to enjoy their retirement and take cruises and things. Meanwhile my retirement plan consists of a straight razor and a warm bath. You know, my Dad was in a union, and when he had to come in on weekends or work holidays he got paid extra money. Maybe the holy plutocrats are actually evil parasitic scumbags, and... I know this is heresy... unions are actually good and a path to prosperity for the working class."
What does all of it have to do with the evil Lori Drew? (If it isn't offtopic to ask.)