Modern Socialism is the power of the "state" to enforce "rational" decisions on some people, but excuse other irrational decisions with state funded bailouts. Modern Socialism is just as irrational as all the others, it just pretends it is rational.
I'm not excusing the Bailouts of the banks. In fact, if you asked me, I wouldn't have bailed out the banks with anything. I wouldn't have bailed out Wall Street. I would have let them figure out how to get themselves out of the mess they go themselves into. This recession would have been over by now had that happened. As it stands now, the people who made all the god awful decisions are still running things, which is why their solutions don't work.
Soylent Green fiasco is just an example of how Chicago Politics works, give money to people so they can give it back to your election campaign. It is how pork barrel politics of both the (R) and (D) work. This time it just was part of a failed effort to prop up "Green" energy.
Lastly, You're pointing to bad behavior to excuse other bad behavior is pretty pathetic. Aerogel was known as a pretty good insulator, and I hope the guy who figured out how to make it cheap makes a fortune. But then again, he'd just become a target for Obama's "rich need to pay their fair share" rant, while bailing out another failing company who can't make it in the real world.
So, what you're saying is that people can't keep their dicks in their pants. Gotcha
But people don't,
Doesn't mean they have to. People do all sorts of things that are bad for them, all the time. Smoking, Drinking too much, Drugs... Should we provide "safe smoking", "safe drinking" and "safe crack"?
What, you seriously think that if somebody who would commit rape hears the "no sex outside marriage" message they're going to obey it?
Are you saying we shouldn't change the rape culture in Africa with "Rape, but wear a condom" campaign? Your way sounds more ridiculous.
People who decide to rape already are going against mountains of morals and laws
It is cultural, hence why it is a problem. They don't have any "moral" qualms about it, and there is little or now "law" enforcement to protect the women. I suggest we send in Clinton and Gingrich in to save them, two guys who can't keep theirs in their pants.;)
I'm sorry you missed this point as well.."And in the case of Africa, where culturally it is quite permissible to gang rape women repeatedly, the "don't have sex outside of marriage" message is actually better than leaving the status quo, don't you think?"
I'm intrigued, explain how does that work?
I'm surprised that you don't view most porn as the objectification of women. Saddened too that you didn't know what I was implying.
All economic models make that very same mistake. The problem is that you cannot legislate rational choice, without taking away freedom. However, unlike all other economic models, Capitalism punishes the least efficient use of capital.
Take Solyent Green Scandal currently in the headlines, the company should have failed BEFORE Obama gave the loan guarantees. It was NOT a viable company before, it certainly proved it wasn't viable afterwards. The punishment of it all is that the Tax payers get left holding the bill.
If people did exactly what you're claiming Missionaries are saying, then AIDS would disappear in a generation or two. You're protestations simply show your prejudices against "religion". Please bear in mind the "have lots of sex" liberals, like yourself, don't do anything to stop AIDS from spreading. And in the case of Africa, where culturally it is quite permissible to gang rape women repeatedly, the "don't have sex outside of marriage" message is actually better than leaving the status quo, don't you think?
Yes, education is key, but so is wearing condoms if you're going to be promiscuous, keeping your dick in your pants if you're not going to wear one. But that last option offends people who want to fuck like dogs in heat.
What I find completely interesting, is that people like yourself have continue to promote women as sex objects, under the guise of "woman's rights".
Transaction Tax. Higher taxes on income generated in this method.
Remember, TAXES are regressive and slow down economies. You tax something you slow the velocity of money. This is something the LIberals will never admit. For all its ills, Capitalism seeks efficiency of capital.
Big Corporations is not where most of the wealth is. Nor is it where most of the Jobs come from. Nor is setting policies in such a way that target them going to fix whatever problem you think they have.
The problem for you is you make no distinction between HUGE MEGA CORP and Mom N Pop Corp. And so, the policies that liberals put in place to "stick it to the man" affects people who are definitely not "the man". And you will never admit it.
As for housing crisis, just ask Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and Barney Frank. I'm not saying the big corps are blameless, but so are the policies mandated by your friends, and UNTIL you can admit that Government Interference had partial blame in the matter, then we can't fix things.
And from what I can see, no amount of evil can be avoided when people excuse evil in the name of good intentions.
Try to boot to a partition greater than 2TB on Bios. Try using a mouse in BIOS (Hint, if you're using a mouse, you are not in BIOS)
Additionally, EFI doesn't have to do sanity checks on the HW every boot like BIOS, doesn't require reboot when changing RAM like BIOS. It is superior to BIOS in almost all ways because it has more features and can boot much faster.
The benefit is beyond the OS, it goes to whole system management. But the average Joe won't care about most of these things because they don't ever go to BIOS.
AAPL is currently selling at 16.3 PE ratio. Compare with Google 19.4
This is not the Ridiculousness that you think it is. Not terribly out of whack. Most stocks trade in the 10-20 PE ratio. Ratios above 20 tend to be hype (IPOs) or based on huge growth industries in their infancy. Stocks under 10 tend to be stable industries or declining ones (Exxon, Microsoft).
I say that a PE ratio of 16 is in the fair (not good, not bad) range for AAPL.
You missed my point. You have a left wing loon blaming Corporations and Government, but neglecting to notice the "government" is what they probably want (more or less). If this was Bush's economy, there would be no excuses, but this is Obama's so... we blame Bush. And it comes out in the GP poster's comments that they are sill in the this is Bush's Government.
And the great thing about Conspiracies, is that you don't actually have to prove them to keep believing. "That is what I want to believe, don't confuse me with the facts " happens on both sides of the aisles.
You have expressed what must be the standard pat answer for any criticism of Obama, which is "Bush was worse". One cannot excuse bad behavior by pointing to worse behavior. Which is why you completely missed my sarcasm, you're too busy defending Obama's indefensible record.
My point, is that the "Government" is the problem, not the guy (or gal) residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. The biggest problem we are facing is that both the (D) and (R) parties are pushing more Government when that is exactly the opposite of what we need.
That would mean that it was OBAMA's Government that did this. Wow, never would have thought that a bunch of left wing loons would make this case but, yeah, lets go with it!
CyanogenMod is OPEN SOURCE, so... it cannot die. Developers can come and go. And, if Nokia (or any other MFG) wanted they could "sponsor" the project, and professional development (like others do with Linux). If I was a Phone manufacturer, that is what I would be doing. The thing that is most sick about CyanogenMod is that a bunch of part time hobbyists are able to make better system than those whose core business IS making the stuff work.
1) Fishing Expedition 2) Proprietary Company Information (Trade Secret) 3) Non-Story 4) No Response Needed.
Not saying your paranoia is not warranted, just offering a completely legitimate response. If I were VZ, I wouldn't respond one way or another. I wouldn't even HINT what company policy is on something like this. I'd let the Lawyers battle it out in Court, that is what Courts are for.
Build a better Poker site, that doesn't rake as much and has better features and make your own rules on how you handle the cash. If you can't compete making a better product with better service for less money, then perhaps they aren't ripping you off.
We don't need more regulation, we need better business men.
You mean like Obama and his Cronies? Or, will they get tax credits for stealing 1/2 billion in the great Green Con? Or GE that didn't pay ANY taxes? Or..
If that was Bush, you'd be lighting the torches and sharpening the pitchforks.
We used to be FREE here in the US, but do gooders like you keep passing laws "to protect us from the boogie man" evil out there, be it Scary Muslims, or the KKK, or the evil Rich, or whatever. Typical Liberal laws are based on the assumption "people are stupid, we must protect them from their own stupidity"
Slashdot Mirror
Couldn't be worse at it than the last couple ;)
HHS is just like the others you mentioned. You just want ObamaCare, so to lets not let the facts get in the way of your politics, right?
Modern Socialism is the power of the "state" to enforce "rational" decisions on some people, but excuse other irrational decisions with state funded bailouts. Modern Socialism is just as irrational as all the others, it just pretends it is rational.
I'm not excusing the Bailouts of the banks. In fact, if you asked me, I wouldn't have bailed out the banks with anything. I wouldn't have bailed out Wall Street. I would have let them figure out how to get themselves out of the mess they go themselves into. This recession would have been over by now had that happened. As it stands now, the people who made all the god awful decisions are still running things, which is why their solutions don't work.
Soylent Green fiasco is just an example of how Chicago Politics works, give money to people so they can give it back to your election campaign. It is how pork barrel politics of both the (R) and (D) work. This time it just was part of a failed effort to prop up "Green" energy.
Lastly, You're pointing to bad behavior to excuse other bad behavior is pretty pathetic. Aerogel was known as a pretty good insulator, and I hope the guy who figured out how to make it cheap makes a fortune. But then again, he'd just become a target for Obama's "rich need to pay their fair share" rant, while bailing out another failing company who can't make it in the real world.
So, what you're saying is that people can't keep their dicks in their pants. Gotcha
Doesn't mean they have to. People do all sorts of things that are bad for them, all the time. Smoking, Drinking too much, Drugs ... Should we provide "safe smoking", "safe drinking" and "safe crack"?
Are you saying we shouldn't change the rape culture in Africa with "Rape, but wear a condom" campaign? Your way sounds more ridiculous.
It is cultural, hence why it is a problem. They don't have any "moral" qualms about it, and there is little or now "law" enforcement to protect the women. I suggest we send in Clinton and Gingrich in to save them, two guys who can't keep theirs in their pants. ;)
I'm sorry you missed this point as well .."And in the case of Africa, where culturally it is quite permissible to gang rape women repeatedly, the "don't have sex outside of marriage" message is actually better than leaving the status quo, don't you think?"
I'm surprised that you don't view most porn as the objectification of women. Saddened too that you didn't know what I was implying.
"human beings consistently make rational choices"
All economic models make that very same mistake. The problem is that you cannot legislate rational choice, without taking away freedom. However, unlike all other economic models, Capitalism punishes the least efficient use of capital.
Take Solyent Green Scandal currently in the headlines, the company should have failed BEFORE Obama gave the loan guarantees. It was NOT a viable company before, it certainly proved it wasn't viable afterwards. The punishment of it all is that the Tax payers get left holding the bill.
If people did exactly what you're claiming Missionaries are saying, then AIDS would disappear in a generation or two. You're protestations simply show your prejudices against "religion". Please bear in mind the "have lots of sex" liberals, like yourself, don't do anything to stop AIDS from spreading. And in the case of Africa, where culturally it is quite permissible to gang rape women repeatedly, the "don't have sex outside of marriage" message is actually better than leaving the status quo, don't you think?
Yes, education is key, but so is wearing condoms if you're going to be promiscuous, keeping your dick in your pants if you're not going to wear one. But that last option offends people who want to fuck like dogs in heat.
What I find completely interesting, is that people like yourself have continue to promote women as sex objects, under the guise of "woman's rights".
Transaction Tax. Higher taxes on income generated in this method.
Remember, TAXES are regressive and slow down economies. You tax something you slow the velocity of money. This is something the LIberals will never admit. For all its ills, Capitalism seeks efficiency of capital.
Of course, this news makes class warfare easier.
Seems silly at this point. They will have access to your Medical Records under ObamaCare.
I want to see manned exploration of our sun.
Big Corporations is not where most of the wealth is. Nor is it where most of the Jobs come from. Nor is setting policies in such a way that target them going to fix whatever problem you think they have.
The problem for you is you make no distinction between HUGE MEGA CORP and Mom N Pop Corp. And so, the policies that liberals put in place to "stick it to the man" affects people who are definitely not "the man". And you will never admit it.
As for housing crisis, just ask Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and Barney Frank. I'm not saying the big corps are blameless, but so are the policies mandated by your friends, and UNTIL you can admit that Government Interference had partial blame in the matter, then we can't fix things.
And from what I can see, no amount of evil can be avoided when people excuse evil in the name of good intentions.
Try to boot to a partition greater than 2TB on Bios.
Try using a mouse in BIOS (Hint, if you're using a mouse, you are not in BIOS)
Additionally, EFI doesn't have to do sanity checks on the HW every boot like BIOS, doesn't require reboot when changing RAM like BIOS. It is superior to BIOS in almost all ways because it has more features and can boot much faster.
The benefit is beyond the OS, it goes to whole system management. But the average Joe won't care about most of these things because they don't ever go to BIOS.
AAPL is currently selling at 16.3 PE ratio. Compare with Google 19.4
This is not the Ridiculousness that you think it is. Not terribly out of whack. Most stocks trade in the 10-20 PE ratio. Ratios above 20 tend to be hype (IPOs) or based on huge growth industries in their infancy. Stocks under 10 tend to be stable industries or declining ones (Exxon, Microsoft).
I say that a PE ratio of 16 is in the fair (not good, not bad) range for AAPL.
You missed my point. You have a left wing loon blaming Corporations and Government, but neglecting to notice the "government" is what they probably want (more or less). If this was Bush's economy, there would be no excuses, but this is Obama's so ... we blame Bush. And it comes out in the GP poster's comments that they are sill in the this is Bush's Government.
And the great thing about Conspiracies, is that you don't actually have to prove them to keep believing. "That is what I want to believe, don't confuse me with the facts " happens on both sides of the aisles.
Wooooosh.
You have expressed what must be the standard pat answer for any criticism of Obama, which is "Bush was worse". One cannot excuse bad behavior by pointing to worse behavior. Which is why you completely missed my sarcasm, you're too busy defending Obama's indefensible record.
My point, is that the "Government" is the problem, not the guy (or gal) residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. The biggest problem we are facing is that both the (D) and (R) parties are pushing more Government when that is exactly the opposite of what we need.
That would mean that it was OBAMA's Government that did this. Wow, never would have thought that a bunch of left wing loons would make this case but, yeah, lets go with it!
CyanogenMod is OPEN SOURCE, so ... it cannot die. Developers can come and go. And, if Nokia (or any other MFG) wanted they could "sponsor" the project, and professional development (like others do with Linux). If I was a Phone manufacturer, that is what I would be doing. The thing that is most sick about CyanogenMod is that a bunch of part time hobbyists are able to make better system than those whose core business IS making the stuff work.
You obviously have never been to San Fransisco
Not just any "Android" but CyanogenMod. It just rocks.
1) Fishing Expedition
2) Proprietary Company Information (Trade Secret)
3) Non-Story
4) No Response Needed.
Not saying your paranoia is not warranted, just offering a completely legitimate response. If I were VZ, I wouldn't respond one way or another. I wouldn't even HINT what company policy is on something like this. I'd let the Lawyers battle it out in Court, that is what Courts are for.
Wait till they re-write it in .Net ...
or Social Security
Build a better Poker site, that doesn't rake as much and has better features and make your own rules on how you handle the cash. If you can't compete making a better product with better service for less money, then perhaps they aren't ripping you off.
We don't need more regulation, we need better business men.
You mean like Obama and his Cronies? Or, will they get tax credits for stealing 1/2 billion in the great Green Con? Or GE that didn't pay ANY taxes? Or ..
If that was Bush, you'd be lighting the torches and sharpening the pitchforks.
First to ruin Skype???
TSA, DEA, FBI, CIA, NSA, IRS .....
We used to be FREE here in the US, but do gooders like you keep passing laws "to protect us from the boogie man" evil out there, be it Scary Muslims, or the KKK, or the evil Rich, or whatever. Typical Liberal laws are based on the assumption "people are stupid, we must protect them from their own stupidity"