I'm well aware of the definitions of both racism and nationalism. I do not see them as significantly distinct. You're still drawing distinctions between persons due to factors of their birth (where and/or to whom). It was never the slave's fault that he was born a slave, nor is it the poor Rwandan's fault she was born in Rwanda. We have an ethical obligation to work towards economic equality, not to protect our own extravagant wealth through means that will eventually fail and might possibly severely cripple us(*). Congratulations on winning the birth lottery and winding up in a wealthy and stable country. Others weren't so lucky, and you can either view them as threats or as partners.
*Look at the age we're in - the distances between countries are rapidly becoming smaller. Do you really think protectionism can last? Perhaps 50 years ago, but certainly not now. As long as we protect US industries that cannot compete on their own, we are delaying the movement of those workers into areas where we can compete. That will put us behind when we're finally forced into completely free trade.
Economic inequality is simply a product of a free market. Supply follows demand and demand requires the ability and willingness to pay. Gates' comment about their being more money spent on baldness drugs than malaria drugs speaks to this point. There is no motivation in a free market to produce malaria drugs because the only people that get malaria are poor people and poor people can't pay you for your goods. So, the government pays for your malaria drugs and gives them to poor people. Then, people start screaming about the government's choices with regards to transfer payments.
In 1820, the gap between the richest and poorest countries was 4 to 1 (Jeffrey Sachs, 2005). In 2002, it had grown to 75 to 1 (Jimmy Carter, 2002).
As far as I'm concerned, he's a model for how other CEOs should run their companies. The stock market is too short sighted and has created unsustainable business practices focused only on the current quarter.
I agree that there's an appealing aspect to "Buy Local", but the reality is that it's economically inefficient. I think you'd be surprised by the aggregate effect of this on the economy if everyone were to do it. Surely you agree that specialization can improve efficiency, right? Why do you buy carrots from a local farmer when you could do the same in your own yard and not have to drive to his market?
You're from Vermont, have you read McKibben's book? I read it, and while I like certain aspects of it, I'm just not sure it's realistic.
What is wrong with wanting to improve the economic situation in the neighborhood/town/city/state/country where you live?
Why do you want to limit economic improvement to certain people?
Real GDP is not a measure of inflation as it is adjusted for prices. The GDP deflator can be used as a measure of inflation, but it marks the difference between nominal and real GDP and is a measure of the change in prices. So, no, when I said "real GDP per capita", that cannot be really read as a measure of inflation. So, the correlation between the financial statistic and reality is that adjusted for prices, the GDP has actually increased, which means that output increased.
Which then by definition is religious people teaching their religion to young children.
It's interesting that so many think that they can somehow separate out religion as distinct from other beliefs. Are not the atheists going to give their children a copy of a Richard Dawkins book? Are they going to tell them whether or not they believe intellectual property to be a valid form of property? Are they going to share their love of classic cars or airplanes? Beliefs about deities are part of who you are, no different from your food preferences.
We have been hearing for 50 years that opening our markets to the world would improve our standard of living, and induce the world to do the same, and neither has happened
We're miles better than before. It's inarguable. Pick any measure you want - real GDP per capita, etc - we are better off. My Google Fu is failing at the moment, but there are several economic studies that have shown the differences between countries that have free trade and those that don't. The group with free trade shows much higher growth over any period you look at than does the group without free trade. I wish I had a link at the moment, but there are peer reviewed journal articles with this data.
the world is more protectionist than ever
Please provide evidence to support this statement. The WTO is aware of 421 regional trade agreements, over 90% of which are free trade agreements. These include NAFTA, CAFTA, EU, EFTU, MERCOSUR, AFTA, COMESA, etc. On top of that, many countries have free trade agreements with countries outside of their regional area.
One could make the argument that until the USA does have some sort of nationalized medicine and protectionist policy, every manufacturing center in the USA will fail.
Protectionist policies are part of what has hurt the US automakers. They were protected for too long and they weren't forced to be competitive. If we're unable to make cars and be competitive, then we shouldn't do it - it's economically inefficient. Why pay more to do it ourselves than we could pay someone else to do it? That's just bad business. Protectionist policies are failures - protecting an industry causes higher prices and inferior quality. Competition improves quality and lowers prices.
Additionally, there is a strong ethical argument against protectionism. "Buy American" is essentially a racist statement. You're implying that the value of an American is higher than that of someone from another country by saying that it's better to protect industries in this country to protect the jobs. At some point, we've got to start calling out "Buy American" for the racist statement that it is.
How does it warp the minds of the young? Are you sure you're not referring to people doing the warping? I think the anti religious folks seem to forget that people want to control other people regardless of whether they use religion as a tool to do so. Your underlying issue is manipulative people, not religion. Same argument could be applied toward BitTorrent.
Since you've been deemed insightful by the moderators, please elaborate on your insight about supply and demand being poorly suited. In your reply, please also bear in mind the assumptions and constraints under which supply and demand are presented in the model and the fact that the model is later used to incorporate the relaxation of the assumptions and constraints originally presented.
It is neither illegal, or IMNSHO socially unacceptable. What have you got to hide?
The very nature of socially acceptable is that it takes into consideration the thoughts and concerns of others. Your singular opinion cannot determine what is socially acceptable to others.
The only thing you've pointed out is that most people are hypocrites, not that they would actually choose to have Street View were they forced to choose having it or having their house not publicly displayed.
I'm surprised by the relief from scratching as well. My dad lost part of a finger and finds that when he gets an itch that he perceives to be in the missing part, he cannot scratch it.
Just because a few people are screaming doesn't mean it should be reverted. The rest of us are happily being more productive with the improvement it brings. It was odd at first, but now it's indispensable.
If I could get one installed for $10,000, it would be a no brainer. My electric bill averages around $300/month. It's lower in the winter ($275) and peaks around $350 in the summer.
Huh? The stick is just used to hold the carrot out of the donkey's reach, so that the donkey will walk towards it. Since you're on the donkey's back, the carrot keeps moving away from the donkey and it will walk for as long as you hold the carrot in front of it. It doesn't involve hitting anyone with a stick.
The nice thing, though, was that we picked every POSSIBLE library that we could find and submitted them and their copyrights for their analysis/aproval. We had 4 developers spend an entire week doing that. At the client's expense.
So, you knowingly and deliberately inflated your billing to your client by doing unnecessary work due entirely to your own conceit? You owe your client a refund.
Sunk costs are not useful in a financial decision. In your analogy, you still need a car to drive, so the cheapest way to achieve that goal is to repair the tire. It has nothing to do with how much you spent on the car.
Use the library. If you read popular fiction, the library has just what you need.
Also, if you simply buy used books, you're better off than the Kindle pricing. On top of saving money up front, your books retain value and can be resold.
It's virtually impossible to argue that the Kindle economically advantageous for the consumer.
I work at a university. I looked at the Kindle as an inexpensive way for students to get most (or all)
their textbooks digitally. The $349 is nothing compared to the cash amounts students are bilked every year.
I keep seeing this come up as an opportunity for the Kindle. This is one of the places where I think the Kindle would be a huge failure. I buy textbooks used on the Internet (NOT from a bookstore) and sell them used on the Internet. I come close to breaking even with the exception of transaction fees (commission to half.com and shipping costs). I don't understand why I would be interested in paying $349 in order to pay $100/book for books I can't sell, and worse, might have some kind of time lock associated with them (these are already sold on some websites).
Slashdot Mirror
I'm well aware of the definitions of both racism and nationalism. I do not see them as significantly distinct. You're still drawing distinctions between persons due to factors of their birth (where and/or to whom). It was never the slave's fault that he was born a slave, nor is it the poor Rwandan's fault she was born in Rwanda. We have an ethical obligation to work towards economic equality, not to protect our own extravagant wealth through means that will eventually fail and might possibly severely cripple us(*). Congratulations on winning the birth lottery and winding up in a wealthy and stable country. Others weren't so lucky, and you can either view them as threats or as partners.
*Look at the age we're in - the distances between countries are rapidly becoming smaller. Do you really think protectionism can last? Perhaps 50 years ago, but certainly not now. As long as we protect US industries that cannot compete on their own, we are delaying the movement of those workers into areas where we can compete. That will put us behind when we're finally forced into completely free trade.
Economic inequality is simply a product of a free market. Supply follows demand and demand requires the ability and willingness to pay. Gates' comment about their being more money spent on baldness drugs than malaria drugs speaks to this point. There is no motivation in a free market to produce malaria drugs because the only people that get malaria are poor people and poor people can't pay you for your goods. So, the government pays for your malaria drugs and gives them to poor people. Then, people start screaming about the government's choices with regards to transfer payments.
In 1820, the gap between the richest and poorest countries was 4 to 1 (Jeffrey Sachs, 2005). In 2002, it had grown to 75 to 1 (Jimmy Carter, 2002).
As far as I'm concerned, he's a model for how other CEOs should run their companies. The stock market is too short sighted and has created unsustainable business practices focused only on the current quarter.
You're from Vermont, have you read McKibben's book? I read it, and while I like certain aspects of it, I'm just not sure it's realistic.
Why do you want to limit economic improvement to certain people?
Real GDP is not a measure of inflation as it is adjusted for prices. The GDP deflator can be used as a measure of inflation, but it marks the difference between nominal and real GDP and is a measure of the change in prices. So, no, when I said "real GDP per capita", that cannot be really read as a measure of inflation. So, the correlation between the financial statistic and reality is that adjusted for prices, the GDP has actually increased, which means that output increased.
It's interesting that so many think that they can somehow separate out religion as distinct from other beliefs. Are not the atheists going to give their children a copy of a Richard Dawkins book? Are they going to tell them whether or not they believe intellectual property to be a valid form of property? Are they going to share their love of classic cars or airplanes? Beliefs about deities are part of who you are, no different from your food preferences.
We're miles better than before. It's inarguable. Pick any measure you want - real GDP per capita, etc - we are better off. My Google Fu is failing at the moment, but there are several economic studies that have shown the differences between countries that have free trade and those that don't. The group with free trade shows much higher growth over any period you look at than does the group without free trade. I wish I had a link at the moment, but there are peer reviewed journal articles with this data.
Please provide evidence to support this statement. The WTO is aware of 421 regional trade agreements, over 90% of which are free trade agreements. These include NAFTA, CAFTA, EU, EFTU, MERCOSUR, AFTA, COMESA, etc. On top of that, many countries have free trade agreements with countries outside of their regional area.
Protectionist policies are part of what has hurt the US automakers. They were protected for too long and they weren't forced to be competitive. If we're unable to make cars and be competitive, then we shouldn't do it - it's economically inefficient. Why pay more to do it ourselves than we could pay someone else to do it? That's just bad business. Protectionist policies are failures - protecting an industry causes higher prices and inferior quality. Competition improves quality and lowers prices.
Additionally, there is a strong ethical argument against protectionism. "Buy American" is essentially a racist statement. You're implying that the value of an American is higher than that of someone from another country by saying that it's better to protect industries in this country to protect the jobs. At some point, we've got to start calling out "Buy American" for the racist statement that it is.
Costco is publicly traded and does not behave in this manner. It's part of why I shop there.
How does it warp the minds of the young? Are you sure you're not referring to people doing the warping? I think the anti religious folks seem to forget that people want to control other people regardless of whether they use religion as a tool to do so. Your underlying issue is manipulative people, not religion. Same argument could be applied toward BitTorrent.
For some reason, I initially thought they were referring to Team America World Police.
Since you've been deemed insightful by the moderators, please elaborate on your insight about supply and demand being poorly suited. In your reply, please also bear in mind the assumptions and constraints under which supply and demand are presented in the model and the fact that the model is later used to incorporate the relaxation of the assumptions and constraints originally presented.
The very nature of socially acceptable is that it takes into consideration the thoughts and concerns of others. Your singular opinion cannot determine what is socially acceptable to others.
The only thing you've pointed out is that most people are hypocrites, not that they would actually choose to have Street View were they forced to choose having it or having their house not publicly displayed.
I'm surprised by the relief from scratching as well. My dad lost part of a finger and finds that when he gets an itch that he perceives to be in the missing part, he cannot scratch it.
Just because a few people are screaming doesn't mean it should be reverted. The rest of us are happily being more productive with the improvement it brings. It was odd at first, but now it's indispensable.
If I could get one installed for $10,000, it would be a no brainer. My electric bill averages around $300/month. It's lower in the winter ($275) and peaks around $350 in the summer.
Huh? The stick is just used to hold the carrot out of the donkey's reach, so that the donkey will walk towards it. Since you're on the donkey's back, the carrot keeps moving away from the donkey and it will walk for as long as you hold the carrot in front of it. It doesn't involve hitting anyone with a stick.
I buy books because of the content, not the technological features.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disorderly_conduct
So, you knowingly and deliberately inflated your billing to your client by doing unnecessary work due entirely to your own conceit? You owe your client a refund.
The lack of an obvious solution doesn't mean a problem doesn't exist.
Sunk costs are not useful in a financial decision. In your analogy, you still need a car to drive, so the cheapest way to achieve that goal is to repair the tire. It has nothing to do with how much you spent on the car.
I've never made use of a textbook in class.
Use the library. If you read popular fiction, the library has just what you need. Also, if you simply buy used books, you're better off than the Kindle pricing. On top of saving money up front, your books retain value and can be resold. It's virtually impossible to argue that the Kindle economically advantageous for the consumer.
I keep seeing this come up as an opportunity for the Kindle. This is one of the places where I think the Kindle would be a huge failure. I buy textbooks used on the Internet (NOT from a bookstore) and sell them used on the Internet. I come close to breaking even with the exception of transaction fees (commission to half.com and shipping costs). I don't understand why I would be interested in paying $349 in order to pay $100/book for books I can't sell, and worse, might have some kind of time lock associated with them (these are already sold on some websites).