Like what if the product doesn't sell well and I stop selling it after 6 months. I still have to keep a factory open for 6 and a half extra years. Yikes!
No, you have to keep a warehouse with repair parts in it. And if you didn't sell any product, you're not going to need to keep many repair parts on hand, either.
Cute joke, but in fact, no, they don't. Sticking a Q-Tip in your ear canal is a good way to puncture your eardrum; Q-Tip packaging contains a warning specifically telling you not to do that.
It doesn't work when ownership by itself leads to wealth. That was how feudal systems were structured and that only led to revolts, war and tyranny.
I think you need to look up the word "feudal" because you apparently have no idea what it means. A feudal system is one in which nobles are granted land by the those above them and have to render military service in return for holding that land. The whole point of the system was that it was supposed to get the central government a high-quality army without that central government having to spend actual cash, because when feudalism was created they didn't have any actual cash.
That is indeed a very good description of how the system worked and why it broke. So now we need to figure out how to fix it (government funding for journalism is absolutely not a good idea on how to fix it, alas).
Yes, but are they more wrong than having a free market where the emotions that's automatically get the most attention by humans (fear, envy) - and thus sell best - dominate ?
Yes, government control of the press is indisputably worse than what we have now. There's ample historical evidence for that. We have a real problem here, but the first step in solving it is to not make it worse. This would make it worse.
If people like journalism a lot they will pay for it. Start doing journalism that sells and that people will support.
Quite true. The point at which it all falls apart is assuming that well-researched investigative journalism is necessarily "journalism that sells". Journalism that agrees with what the audience already thinks regardless of the evidence is journalism that sells.
Therein lies the motivation to institute some level of public subsidy for journalism.
That means you let the government be the prime decider of what "information" is. Is that what you want? I'd think very carefully about the answer to that one if I were you.
Nope. Nothing that is publicly editable can be relied on for anything, because they are too easily manipulated by one person or a small group of persons determined that they will prevail regardless of the evidence.
I think it would be news to most that people like the Rockefellers were liberals.
Well, the Rockefellers were never socialists, to be sure. But "Rockefeller Republicans" is (or at least used to be) shorthand for the liberal wing of the Republican party.
Once you have incurred a debt, the person to whom you owe money can't refuse cash. But it's perfectly legal (absent laws like this) for a vendor to say, "I won't sell this to you if you're paying cash". There isn't a debt yet, and the seller is free to set his own terms of sale.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, the fewer custom parts you use, the fewer you have to stock. If you use all standard parts, you don't have to keep anything.
No, you have to keep a warehouse with repair parts in it. And if you didn't sell any product, you're not going to need to keep many repair parts on hand, either.
Cute joke, but in fact, no, they don't. Sticking a Q-Tip in your ear canal is a good way to puncture your eardrum; Q-Tip packaging contains a warning specifically telling you not to do that.
Your faith in upper management is truly touching.
And one restaurant.
Even with verified IDs, uncovering hidden conflicts of interest would take investigative powers that a private entity just isn't entitled to.
Yep, making up your own terms and claiming rights from the defunct Articles of Confederation is really gonna impress the judge...
That would be great if Wikipedia had any way to find out who was being paid to edit it. As far as I can see, they have no way to do that.
I think you need to look up the word "feudal" because you apparently have no idea what it means. A feudal system is one in which nobles are granted land by the those above them and have to render military service in return for holding that land. The whole point of the system was that it was supposed to get the central government a high-quality army without that central government having to spend actual cash, because when feudalism was created they didn't have any actual cash.
What she means, of course, is "it's easier to sell: 'tax a robot.' " "Don't tax you and don't tax me, tax that robot behind the tree."
That is indeed a very good description of how the system worked and why it broke. So now we need to figure out how to fix it (government funding for journalism is absolutely not a good idea on how to fix it, alas).
Yes, government control of the press is indisputably worse than what we have now. There's ample historical evidence for that. We have a real problem here, but the first step in solving it is to not make it worse. This would make it worse.
But not well suited at all to an endeavor you want to be completely free of government influence.
Quite true. The point at which it all falls apart is assuming that well-researched investigative journalism is necessarily "journalism that sells". Journalism that agrees with what the audience already thinks regardless of the evidence is journalism that sells.
That means you let the government be the prime decider of what "information" is. Is that what you want? I'd think very carefully about the answer to that one if I were you.
We can save independent journalism by making it depend on government funding! Uh, wait...
Nope. Nothing that is publicly editable can be relied on for anything, because they are too easily manipulated by one person or a small group of persons determined that they will prevail regardless of the evidence.
Well, the Rockefellers were never socialists, to be sure. But "Rockefeller Republicans" is (or at least used to be) shorthand for the liberal wing of the Republican party.
You want to present Urban Dictionary (or any crowd-written internet site) as an authoritative information source? Ahahahaha....
But ultimately, that's not the reason they work.
It'll be like a Yu-Gi-Oh fusion.
Sonic waves carry energy. Energy is mass. We've known this for about a century.
Uh, no. It's because there's no debt that he's stolen it.
You have a very odd concept about how transfer of ownership works.
Once you have incurred a debt, the person to whom you owe money can't refuse cash. But it's perfectly legal (absent laws like this) for a vendor to say, "I won't sell this to you if you're paying cash". There isn't a debt yet, and the seller is free to set his own terms of sale.