I believe these policies do not keep problems from our doorstep, but rather invite such problems, particularly when combined with the neocon warmonger agenda.
If elimination of these programs is followed by an elimination of some or all of the associated taxes to fund or partially fund them, that leaves a tremendous amount of money in the economy that currently is taken from the economy by government. More money in the economy means more jobs.
The argument can be made that it is put back in the economy since after it is stolen from those who earn it, government gives it to those who did not, and who will spend it on various necessities and luxuries. Of course this is after government takes their large percentage of overhead off the top, which still results in a net loss. You still cannot ignore the problem with stealing money, as it is a flagrant violation of people's right to the fruit of their labor.No matter how noble some politician may think his cause is, it is still theft. A smaller federal government which respects natural rights would never have gotten into this fiscal situation and the economy as a whole would be far better off.
There is a simple solution here. Stop spending money. End all entitlement programs. That will surely piss off the socialists, but I don't care. It will stop theft from those who work to give tot hose who don't. A lot of tax revenue will be freed up to pay the debt, and those who live on welfare, unemployment, and other socialist programs will ahve to find something productive to do with their lives, which will most likely involve paying taxes, instead of looting from those who pay taxes.
Along similar lines, end all foreign aid. If Americans want to offer foreign aid they will do so of their own will as they often do in the form of large domations. The socialists will hate this, but I don't care. There is no justification to steal from one man and give that money to another, after government takes a little off the top of course.
Then end all of our unconstitutional wars, and pull troops out of that 150+ countries we have troops stationed in. This will piss off the neocons, but I don't care. They will no longer be able to wage unconstitutional wars and invade sovereign nations who have not aggressed against us. The savings will be enourmous.
As a further extension of ending wars, end the "war" on drugs. The neocons would hat this, but I don't care. Prohibition does not work, and only breeds crime and funds criminal organizations. Legalization, regulation, and taxation of recreational drugs in the same manner as the recreational drugs already legal in the States (alcohol, nicotine) will drop the "street price" substantially and pull the rug out from under the violent criminal organizations. Many of the costs of border security would disappear, as there would be no economic reason to smuggle drugs. In fact, some of these violent groups may make a shift towards legal and legitimate transport businesses since that would be the profitable ways to transport drugs. We would also have a large all volunteer army pulled in from 150+ countries with nothing to do (no one attacks the U.S., not since Japan in 1941). Those on active duty could serve as interrim boarder security during the transition, and then move on to responding with additional manpower and machinery for major domestic issues and natural disasters that are large enough that States cannot effectively deal with them on their own.
There are plenty more ways to save money, but I think these are some of the major points that will save a lot of money as simply and quickly as possible. It all boils down to respect of natural rights and free market principles.
This is just a continuation of CAFE, which killed the full size station wagon and replaced it with the SUV. Prior to CAFE (forced fuel mileage regulations, or pay heafty fines and taxes), people who needed large vehicles or the capability to tow light to moderate loads (small boats, campers, etc.) bought full size station wagons. Plenty of room, big safe vehicles, engine options from small blocks to big blocks, and to top it off they got mid-high teens for MPG in the 60s and up to mid 20s for MPG in the 80s when SUVs replaced them due to CAFE standards.
When manufacturers no longer made full size station wagons, people who bought them started buying SUVs, trucks that were utilitarian from the 60s through the early 80s but with the government forced demise of the station wagon were made into more comfortable and luxurious family vehicles as the 80s progressed. So instead of buying the 20-25 highway MPG station wagons, people bought 10-15 MPG trucks instead.
What we need here is less regulation, or preferably to eliminate it altogether. Let people buy what they value in a vehicle. Personally I do this by driving nothing newer than the 80s, as government regulations (fuel economy, emissions, and safety) have eliminated the types of vehicles that I find attractive and useful.
Exactly. Private airlines have no say in whether the rights of their customers are violated. This is not right. It's most certainly a fallacy to say "You consented to that search" when there is no other option for flying.
Or they could just swim in the river like normal people. People swim in the hudson all the time, and it is a busy river for recreational boating. Absolutely nothing wrong with that water. City folk and other yuppie snobs like those who can afford or would want to live in the city see anything but clear water as dirty. News flash: Most rivers are murky and do not have great clarity, especially tidal rivers that are dredged for big shipping traffic.
The hypothetical manager doesn't know the difference, and is presumably still employed. The hypothetical IT person used correct grammar and punctuation yet was fired.
For me college was a waste of time and money. I wasted 3 years going back to school attempting to finish a BS in IT. I already had a good job in IT when I started. Over 3 years tuition increased from $26k to $42k. As tough as that was I could swing that. It didn't help that for 3 quarters they cancelled classes I had registered for, putting me at part time enrollment, yet still billed me for full time. The final straw that made me drop out with only two quarters worth of classes left was that they charged me two quarters of tuition ($18k at the time) to go to work every day, as I did before and while going back to school and they did not allow me to take any classes during this time. They called this a "cooperative internship experience", though I had no contact with the school during this time. Unfortunately they automatically billed this against my loan and I had no recourse. I was told upon entry to the school (Drexel University in Philadelphia, PA), that the "cooperative internship experience" was mandatory, but you could either pay two quarters tuition during the internship and take classes like normal, or opt to not pay and not take classes, saving money to help pay the tuition bill. This was an outright lie.
Then they wanted to charge me a full years tuition ($42k) for the next two quarters for 7 classes to finish a degree. I was tapped out and didn't have any more money and couldn't take on any more loans as I already had around $100k in loans. I asked if I could take a year or two off to save the $42, or more realistically $50k+, that tuition would be. They said I could, but they would expire the credits I transferred when coming in. Those were credits from a 2 year college I took immediately after graduating high school a year early. So if I waited a year or two to finish, the cost would be over $100k for two years of tuition. I was already tapped out and taking another $100k of loans is not an option.
So here I am, working the same job. A good job, but a dead end from a pay or promotion standpoint without a degree. My boss dangles promotions over my head if I get a degree but the money simply isn't there to do it. So now I'm financially crippled as a result. I should have bought an investment property, or heck, even blowing all my money at the casinos would have been wiser than trying the college route. At least at the casinos I would have had some fun and couldn't lose more than I have.
The greater shame in all this was I didn't learn much, and the little that I did learn was mostly unrelated to IT or generally trivia type knowledge, not useful or practical knowledge. The classes were always brought down to the dumbest common denominator. I was on the dean's list with a 3.9 GPA, but not eligible for any scholarships or grants that I was able to find as I either made too much money, was not a minority, or not a woman. I quickly stopped caring about a good GPA and coasted along with a 3.4, as it gave more time to focus on work and bettering myself through learning on my own. Tests and projects were all a joke. Extremely basic level stuff for the little bit that was relevant. After seeing what goes on in a "reputable" university with "highly regarded" IT/IS/CompSci programs I would never hire anyone straight out of college with no experience.
I feel bad for many of my friends back at school graduating now who have a lot more debt than me, learned very little, and didn't work through school as I did. All through school I was working 40-50 hours a week at my job, and doing side work on the weekends. These kids had no motivation to learn a skill and get a job while in school. Now that they've graduated they all complain about scraping by with loan payments and such while working retail sales jobs. Meanwhile I get job offers of comparable or better jobs than where I'm at now with some regularity, but none are local so far and thanks to that student loan debt I can't afford to relocate. School has kept me trapped and stuck in a rut.
A college degree [in IT/IS/CS] truly is meaningless and is a waste of time and money. Those years can be spent working, and learning in your own time and growing in your career. All this can happen without racking up tens or hundreds of thousands in debt.
Why would I want to use this, on either end of the equation? I send email for things that are not time-critical, or that I would like to have a documented record of. In the event of a somewhat time critical issue I will opt for IM, or if genuinely time critical, a phone call. We have different systems in place to serve different purposes.
Also when I buy a car I am generally required to give lots of personal information
Strange, every time I've bought a car/bike/boat I've never had to give any information. All the seller knows about me is my first name, because I choose to give that information. Granted I know a fair amount about the seller as this information is on the title when he hands it over, but I maintain my privacy when buying.
I'll stick with my '60s vehicles to drive every day. Simple and reliable, which is more than I can say about fuel injection and computer controls. No black boxes, nothing for government to track or use against me. The kicker, MPG has not increased significantly since the early 60s when econoboxes were getting over 30 MPG. With an overdrive transmission and an engine built for MPG 40+ is not unreasonable.
Perhaps a better way yo simplify this would be a flat sales tax (perhaps 20%) on all items aside from a couple exemptions (namely food). This way everyone decides whether or not they want to pay tax, and how much they pay. If you're genuinely poor you won't be buying many new items, and thus will pay little or no taxes. The poor could always buy used items second hand in private transactions, avoiding the tax. Those who can afford new TVs, new cars, yachts, etc. can pay the taxes. Everyone pays what they can afford and are willing to pay, and there is no presumption that the government owns everything you produce and allows you to keep some of it.
Well, I don't know about $20k, but that is actually my savings goal which I should reach by this year. I have around $15k in savings now, and for several years now I've been nervous if my savings ever dipped below $10k. Out of high school my comfortable savings amount was $1000, but back then my job was even crappier than it is now.
I don't believe I'm the norm though. Most of my friends live paycheck to paycheck and on a good year might crest $100 in savings. Of course they're always buying new phones every couple months, have big flat screen TVs and cable packages with every channel, all drive new cars (on high interest long term loans of course), and all sorts of other things I find ridiculous given most of them make significantly less than I do. As soon as they get a dollar in their pocket they spend it, usually on things they don't really need.
The kicker is when I ask some people out for dinner, or to have some drinks, or whatever... They never have money to do any of that stuff so they don't go out... Not that I go out all that often. But the worst is when they do come out, but they get the cheapest thing on the menu, or just an appetizer and a water, then won't let me buy them a proper meal and a beer because "it would be taking advantage".
Then they'll whine about how they want to buy a house, but can't fathom saving enough to put 20% down. They think "If only someone would loan me that money without wanting anything down on it". It's insanity. I tell them to add up all the interest they've ever paid on car loans, credit cards, and any other frivolous purchases and they could probably put well over 20% down on whatever houses they were looking at. They get mad, because they know it's true.
I've seen this with regard to buying a house in people my age, mid 20s, all the way up to 40s and making six figures. When I have more savings than someone making several timeswhat I do, something is wrong... And I doubt it's something wrong with me. People don't understand the value of saving for emergencies, for large purchases, the savings in not paying interest. It must be a culture thing because in most people I know, except SOME (not all) of my 50+ year old friends, being broke and living paycheck to paycheck while have lots of fancy toys seems to be the norm.
If you had actually read the post you responded to, you would see his first sentence was: I was born and raised in a country that is firmly and decidedly "metric".
Or, decellerating from 50 to 20 in.363 seconds, technically less as the article implies the brake lights are not lit in hte photo. Perhaps significantly less as standard incandescent lights as use in the brake light fixtures of typical trucks take a (relatively) significant amount of time to fully illuminate, and a (relatively) significant amount of time for the fillament to cool and go completely dim.
A few years ago my truck caught on fire and the whole cab was burned out... All my CDs were in there, my digital camera and misc other valuables. Glad I at least had my CD collection ripped to MP3.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe these policies do not keep problems from our doorstep, but rather invite such problems, particularly when combined with the neocon warmonger agenda.
If elimination of these programs is followed by an elimination of some or all of the associated taxes to fund or partially fund them, that leaves a tremendous amount of money in the economy that currently is taken from the economy by government. More money in the economy means more jobs.
The argument can be made that it is put back in the economy since after it is stolen from those who earn it, government gives it to those who did not, and who will spend it on various necessities and luxuries. Of course this is after government takes their large percentage of overhead off the top, which still results in a net loss. You still cannot ignore the problem with stealing money, as it is a flagrant violation of people's right to the fruit of their labor.No matter how noble some politician may think his cause is, it is still theft. A smaller federal government which respects natural rights would never have gotten into this fiscal situation and the economy as a whole would be far better off.
There is a simple solution here. Stop spending money. End all entitlement programs. That will surely piss off the socialists, but I don't care. It will stop theft from those who work to give tot hose who don't. A lot of tax revenue will be freed up to pay the debt, and those who live on welfare, unemployment, and other socialist programs will ahve to find something productive to do with their lives, which will most likely involve paying taxes, instead of looting from those who pay taxes.
Along similar lines, end all foreign aid. If Americans want to offer foreign aid they will do so of their own will as they often do in the form of large domations. The socialists will hate this, but I don't care. There is no justification to steal from one man and give that money to another, after government takes a little off the top of course.
Then end all of our unconstitutional wars, and pull troops out of that 150+ countries we have troops stationed in. This will piss off the neocons, but I don't care. They will no longer be able to wage unconstitutional wars and invade sovereign nations who have not aggressed against us. The savings will be enourmous.
As a further extension of ending wars, end the "war" on drugs. The neocons would hat this, but I don't care. Prohibition does not work, and only breeds crime and funds criminal organizations. Legalization, regulation, and taxation of recreational drugs in the same manner as the recreational drugs already legal in the States (alcohol, nicotine) will drop the "street price" substantially and pull the rug out from under the violent criminal organizations. Many of the costs of border security would disappear, as there would be no economic reason to smuggle drugs. In fact, some of these violent groups may make a shift towards legal and legitimate transport businesses since that would be the profitable ways to transport drugs. We would also have a large all volunteer army pulled in from 150+ countries with nothing to do (no one attacks the U.S., not since Japan in 1941). Those on active duty could serve as interrim boarder security during the transition, and then move on to responding with additional manpower and machinery for major domestic issues and natural disasters that are large enough that States cannot effectively deal with them on their own.
There are plenty more ways to save money, but I think these are some of the major points that will save a lot of money as simply and quickly as possible. It all boils down to respect of natural rights and free market principles.
This is just a continuation of CAFE, which killed the full size station wagon and replaced it with the SUV. Prior to CAFE (forced fuel mileage regulations, or pay heafty fines and taxes), people who needed large vehicles or the capability to tow light to moderate loads (small boats, campers, etc.) bought full size station wagons. Plenty of room, big safe vehicles, engine options from small blocks to big blocks, and to top it off they got mid-high teens for MPG in the 60s and up to mid 20s for MPG in the 80s when SUVs replaced them due to CAFE standards.
When manufacturers no longer made full size station wagons, people who bought them started buying SUVs, trucks that were utilitarian from the 60s through the early 80s but with the government forced demise of the station wagon were made into more comfortable and luxurious family vehicles as the 80s progressed. So instead of buying the 20-25 highway MPG station wagons, people bought 10-15 MPG trucks instead.
What we need here is less regulation, or preferably to eliminate it altogether. Let people buy what they value in a vehicle. Personally I do this by driving nothing newer than the 80s, as government regulations (fuel economy, emissions, and safety) have eliminated the types of vehicles that I find attractive and useful.
I'll vote Libertarian.
Exactly. Private airlines have no say in whether the rights of their customers are violated. This is not right. It's most certainly a fallacy to say "You consented to that search" when there is no other option for flying.
Or they could just swim in the river like normal people. People swim in the hudson all the time, and it is a busy river for recreational boating. Absolutely nothing wrong with that water. City folk and other yuppie snobs like those who can afford or would want to live in the city see anything but clear water as dirty. News flash: Most rivers are murky and do not have great clarity, especially tidal rivers that are dredged for big shipping traffic.
The hypothetical manager doesn't know the difference, and is presumably still employed. The hypothetical IT person used correct grammar and punctuation yet was fired.
For me college was a waste of time and money. I wasted 3 years going back to school attempting to finish a BS in IT. I already had a good job in IT when I started. Over 3 years tuition increased from $26k to $42k. As tough as that was I could swing that. It didn't help that for 3 quarters they cancelled classes I had registered for, putting me at part time enrollment, yet still billed me for full time. The final straw that made me drop out with only two quarters worth of classes left was that they charged me two quarters of tuition ($18k at the time) to go to work every day, as I did before and while going back to school and they did not allow me to take any classes during this time. They called this a "cooperative internship experience", though I had no contact with the school during this time. Unfortunately they automatically billed this against my loan and I had no recourse. I was told upon entry to the school (Drexel University in Philadelphia, PA), that the "cooperative internship experience" was mandatory, but you could either pay two quarters tuition during the internship and take classes like normal, or opt to not pay and not take classes, saving money to help pay the tuition bill. This was an outright lie.
Then they wanted to charge me a full years tuition ($42k) for the next two quarters for 7 classes to finish a degree. I was tapped out and didn't have any more money and couldn't take on any more loans as I already had around $100k in loans. I asked if I could take a year or two off to save the $42, or more realistically $50k+, that tuition would be. They said I could, but they would expire the credits I transferred when coming in. Those were credits from a 2 year college I took immediately after graduating high school a year early. So if I waited a year or two to finish, the cost would be over $100k for two years of tuition. I was already tapped out and taking another $100k of loans is not an option.
So here I am, working the same job. A good job, but a dead end from a pay or promotion standpoint without a degree. My boss dangles promotions over my head if I get a degree but the money simply isn't there to do it. So now I'm financially crippled as a result. I should have bought an investment property, or heck, even blowing all my money at the casinos would have been wiser than trying the college route. At least at the casinos I would have had some fun and couldn't lose more than I have.
The greater shame in all this was I didn't learn much, and the little that I did learn was mostly unrelated to IT or generally trivia type knowledge, not useful or practical knowledge. The classes were always brought down to the dumbest common denominator. I was on the dean's list with a 3.9 GPA, but not eligible for any scholarships or grants that I was able to find as I either made too much money, was not a minority, or not a woman. I quickly stopped caring about a good GPA and coasted along with a 3.4, as it gave more time to focus on work and bettering myself through learning on my own. Tests and projects were all a joke. Extremely basic level stuff for the little bit that was relevant. After seeing what goes on in a "reputable" university with "highly regarded" IT/IS/CompSci programs I would never hire anyone straight out of college with no experience.
I feel bad for many of my friends back at school graduating now who have a lot more debt than me, learned very little, and didn't work through school as I did. All through school I was working 40-50 hours a week at my job, and doing side work on the weekends. These kids had no motivation to learn a skill and get a job while in school. Now that they've graduated they all complain about scraping by with loan payments and such while working retail sales jobs. Meanwhile I get job offers of comparable or better jobs than where I'm at now with some regularity, but none are local so far and thanks to that student loan debt I can't afford to relocate. School has kept me trapped and stuck in a rut.
A college degree [in IT/IS/CS] truly is meaningless and is a waste of time and money. Those years can be spent working, and learning in your own time and growing in your career. All this can happen without racking up tens or hundreds of thousands in debt.
Why would I want to use this, on either end of the equation? I send email for things that are not time-critical, or that I would like to have a documented record of. In the event of a somewhat time critical issue I will opt for IM, or if genuinely time critical, a phone call. We have different systems in place to serve different purposes.
Also when I buy a car I am generally required to give lots of personal information
Strange, every time I've bought a car/bike/boat I've never had to give any information. All the seller knows about me is my first name, because I choose to give that information. Granted I know a fair amount about the seller as this information is on the title when he hands it over, but I maintain my privacy when buying.
I'll stick with my '60s vehicles to drive every day. Simple and reliable, which is more than I can say about fuel injection and computer controls. No black boxes, nothing for government to track or use against me. The kicker, MPG has not increased significantly since the early 60s when econoboxes were getting over 30 MPG. With an overdrive transmission and an engine built for MPG 40+ is not unreasonable.
Perhaps a better way yo simplify this would be a flat sales tax (perhaps 20%) on all items aside from a couple exemptions (namely food). This way everyone decides whether or not they want to pay tax, and how much they pay. If you're genuinely poor you won't be buying many new items, and thus will pay little or no taxes. The poor could always buy used items second hand in private transactions, avoiding the tax. Those who can afford new TVs, new cars, yachts, etc. can pay the taxes. Everyone pays what they can afford and are willing to pay, and there is no presumption that the government owns everything you produce and allows you to keep some of it.
Well, I don't know about $20k, but that is actually my savings goal which I should reach by this year. I have around $15k in savings now, and for several years now I've been nervous if my savings ever dipped below $10k. Out of high school my comfortable savings amount was $1000, but back then my job was even crappier than it is now.
I don't believe I'm the norm though. Most of my friends live paycheck to paycheck and on a good year might crest $100 in savings. Of course they're always buying new phones every couple months, have big flat screen TVs and cable packages with every channel, all drive new cars (on high interest long term loans of course), and all sorts of other things I find ridiculous given most of them make significantly less than I do. As soon as they get a dollar in their pocket they spend it, usually on things they don't really need.
The kicker is when I ask some people out for dinner, or to have some drinks, or whatever... They never have money to do any of that stuff so they don't go out... Not that I go out all that often. But the worst is when they do come out, but they get the cheapest thing on the menu, or just an appetizer and a water, then won't let me buy them a proper meal and a beer because "it would be taking advantage".
Then they'll whine about how they want to buy a house, but can't fathom saving enough to put 20% down. They think "If only someone would loan me that money without wanting anything down on it". It's insanity. I tell them to add up all the interest they've ever paid on car loans, credit cards, and any other frivolous purchases and they could probably put well over 20% down on whatever houses they were looking at. They get mad, because they know it's true.
I've seen this with regard to buying a house in people my age, mid 20s, all the way up to 40s and making six figures. When I have more savings than someone making several timeswhat I do, something is wrong... And I doubt it's something wrong with me. People don't understand the value of saving for emergencies, for large purchases, the savings in not paying interest. It must be a culture thing because in most people I know, except SOME (not all) of my 50+ year old friends, being broke and living paycheck to paycheck while have lots of fancy toys seems to be the norm.
If you had actually read the post you responded to, you would see his first sentence was: I was born and raised in a country that is firmly and decidedly "metric".
Give me a 650+ mile range on the highway and it won't matter so much.
nt
Or, decellerating from 50 to 20 in .363 seconds, technically less as the article implies the brake lights are not lit in hte photo. Perhaps significantly less as standard incandescent lights as use in the brake light fixtures of typical trucks take a (relatively) significant amount of time to fully illuminate, and a (relatively) significant amount of time for the fillament to cool and go completely dim.
Insanity! The internet is useless, I'm giving up on slacking off and resorting to actually working.
Your sig ... so true it's saddening.
When I see these stops I turn off on a side street or make a u-turn. I will not willingly submit to an unconstitutional search. ... Papers Comrade?
Because it's been a long winter and I'm ready for warmer weather.
But as the actual moment of passing approaches, I want to be as conscious as possible.
I read this as "I don't want to die" ... Death is permanent unconsciousness. You can't have it both ways.
A few years ago my truck caught on fire and the whole cab was burned out... All my CDs were in there, my digital camera and misc other valuables. Glad I at least had my CD collection ripped to MP3.
This was not my experience in IT and a for profit school.