When another country does something that the USA doesn't like, the USA gets all up in arms about it and either invades the nation with the intent of "setting them free", or else they impose quite intense political and/or economical pressure on the nation to comply with their expectations.
1. It's not our fault the other countries are pussies.
2. TFA is editorialized to hell, but in short, not giving up a few names is not quite on the same scale as, say, creating a safe haven for a terrorist organization that attacks your country.
Ironically, you almost hit upon a perfect Score:5 post. You were corporate bashing (I assume, Microsoft and the other companies on Forbes' list), which is always worth a few points. However, you failed to mention a few evil Republicans (by name) that you hate, and you also failed to love, and I mean absolutely love, socialism, statism, and the outright slavery of everyone to the government.
Oh, but normally, a 7.9 is every 1,000 years. These days, however, since Jesus is about to return, it happens all of the time, as a "sign of the times."
Google operates fully within the tax law. It just so happens to be they paid very little in the US.
Maybe citizens should take note and demand that their tax rates be lowered accordingly. Why is it that corporations can expense away their office buildings but citizens can't expense away their homestead, save some penance of standard deductions. It's foolishness.
The solution might not be to hammer corporations, but to make our tax laws more competitive so that our shining star growth industry doesn't have such intense motivation to operate abroad so heavily. We have the second highest tax rate for corporations in the world, with Japan being slightly higher (and their economy has now had nearly 2 lost decades of growth).
It's not a popular position on Slashdot, but the truth is, you can't continue to bludgeon the same people you wish would hire all of your friends.
They pretend as if leftist, statist, anti-capitalist views aren't equally as blinding to their own ability to think as religion is to their adverse party.
Don't worry AC. You'll be moderated down to -1 just as soon as the slashdot crew here figures out you're not an "if only I could toss Obama's salad I would be such a happier" leftist, anti-capitalist, statist zombie.
Interesting how the students who went to school with that character described him as an "extreme leftist."
The notion that the fellow was a Ron Paul supporter was completely debunked mere minutes after Keith Olbermann and crew tried to tie him to it.
If I had mod points, I'd mod you up. This is the absolute fucking truth. I'm so fucking tired of the anti-capitalists on slashdot. It's the most annoying aspect about the site.
I suppose you just love the Obama cum load you get to swallow every time you go to it? Better watch out, I hear he likes to have his salad tossed. But having Obama asshole all over your face is probably right up your alley.
There is a revolving door in every administration.
Not every administration runs and is elected purely on the notion that it will "be different from all of those other administrations that you've hated for so long."
Obama: We are the ones that we've been waiting for.
My personal apologies for the ridiculous partisan groupthink on slashdot, which moderated your post down to -1. It's becoming so prevalent, it's almost unbearable to read comments any more.
You made my point beautifully. My point is that the same principle would/should apply to Comcast, rather than making the original practice illegal as a preventative measure.
WTF? I'm a Troll because I don't know what the big fuss is about? I guess because I don't immediately tow the/. party line on all issues, "rabble, rabble, rabble", I'm a Troll.
paid to block access to other cities in order to increase their own tourism/local business revenue
The United States has long ago enacted laws to prevent this sort of practice. Microsoft was nearly split up as a result of such in the 90s, if you recall. Intel was also reprimanded smartly because they paid a percentage of marketing fees for companies that would agree to exclusively use their products over a combination of Intel+AMD.
Monopolies, or near monopolies like Comcast using unfair advantage of their power to make content providers either pay them, force them out of business, or influence the content to favor them.
Doesn't this [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act] prevent that?
Assuming that the Justice Department does its job re: anti-competitive behavior, and the Justice Department does its job re: not allowing monopolistic, anti-competitive businesses to merge, I cannot imagine a world in which any Justice Department would allow an ISP to prevent a given provider to prohibit the traffic of another provider. That would be like ATT not allowing an MCI Worldcom telephone call, and there would be immediate outrage. Immediate.
It sounds like to me that if we were concerned that the Content Carriers would become Content Producers, and thus would favor their own Content over a competitor's Content, then we shouldn't allow mergers like Comcast / NBC.
To sum it up, the problem is the monopoly, not the hypothetical misuse of the monopoly.
Slashdot Mirror
It's what happens when you don't participate in group-think.
When another country does something that the USA doesn't like, the USA gets all up in arms about it and either invades the nation with the intent of "setting them free", or else they impose quite intense political and/or economical pressure on the nation to comply with their expectations.
1. It's not our fault the other countries are pussies. 2. TFA is editorialized to hell, but in short, not giving up a few names is not quite on the same scale as, say, creating a safe haven for a terrorist organization that attacks your country.
Ironically, you almost hit upon a perfect Score:5 post. You were corporate bashing (I assume, Microsoft and the other companies on Forbes' list), which is always worth a few points. However, you failed to mention a few evil Republicans (by name) that you hate, and you also failed to love, and I mean absolutely love, socialism, statism, and the outright slavery of everyone to the government.
In what way do secret spy satellites contribute to national security?
Someone please mark the above quoted comment as "you're a fucking Troll".
Oh, but normally, a 7.9 is every 1,000 years. These days, however, since Jesus is about to return, it happens all of the time, as a "sign of the times."
Google operates fully within the tax law. It just so happens to be they paid very little in the US. Maybe citizens should take note and demand that their tax rates be lowered accordingly. Why is it that corporations can expense away their office buildings but citizens can't expense away their homestead, save some penance of standard deductions. It's foolishness. The solution might not be to hammer corporations, but to make our tax laws more competitive so that our shining star growth industry doesn't have such intense motivation to operate abroad so heavily. We have the second highest tax rate for corporations in the world, with Japan being slightly higher (and their economy has now had nearly 2 lost decades of growth). It's not a popular position on Slashdot, but the truth is, you can't continue to bludgeon the same people you wish would hire all of your friends.
Because pumping oil out of the ground sucks really bad.
They pretend as if leftist, statist, anti-capitalist views aren't equally as blinding to their own ability to think as religion is to their adverse party.
Don't worry AC. You'll be moderated down to -1 just as soon as the slashdot crew here figures out you're not an "if only I could toss Obama's salad I would be such a happier" leftist, anti-capitalist, statist zombie.
Interesting how the students who went to school with that character described him as an "extreme leftist." The notion that the fellow was a Ron Paul supporter was completely debunked mere minutes after Keith Olbermann and crew tried to tie him to it.
If I had mod points, I'd mod you up. This is the absolute fucking truth. I'm so fucking tired of the anti-capitalists on slashdot. It's the most annoying aspect about the site.
Completely agree.
I suppose you just love the Obama cum load you get to swallow every time you go to it? Better watch out, I hear he likes to have his salad tossed. But having Obama asshole all over your face is probably right up your alley.
There is a revolving door in every administration.
Not every administration runs and is elected purely on the notion that it will "be different from all of those other administrations that you've hated for so long."
Obama: We are the ones that we've been waiting for.
Really???
Sure, he's creepy, but he isn't a tax cheat... or is he?
[citation needed]
My personal apologies for the ridiculous partisan groupthink on slashdot, which moderated your post down to -1. It's becoming so prevalent, it's almost unbearable to read comments any more.
Huffington Post
Experts Exchange
eHow
Dear God the last thing I want is a bureaucrat deciding which neighborhood gets the next broadband upgrade.
You made my point beautifully. My point is that the same principle would/should apply to Comcast, rather than making the original practice illegal as a preventative measure.
Mitt Romney was the 70th Governor of Massachussetts until January 4th, 2007.
Mike Huckabee was 44th Governor of Arkansas until January 8th, 2007.
Neither of these men hold a legislative or executive position.
WTF? I'm a Troll because I don't know what the big fuss is about? I guess because I don't immediately tow the /. party line on all issues, "rabble, rabble, rabble", I'm a Troll.
paid to block access to other cities in order to increase their own tourism/local business revenue
The United States has long ago enacted laws to prevent this sort of practice. Microsoft was nearly split up as a result of such in the 90s, if you recall. Intel was also reprimanded smartly because they paid a percentage of marketing fees for companies that would agree to exclusively use their products over a combination of Intel+AMD.
Monopolies, or near monopolies like Comcast using unfair advantage of their power to make content providers either pay them, force them out of business, or influence the content to favor them.
Doesn't this [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act] prevent that?
Assuming that the Justice Department does its job re: anti-competitive behavior, and the Justice Department does its job re: not allowing monopolistic, anti-competitive businesses to merge, I cannot imagine a world in which any Justice Department would allow an ISP to prevent a given provider to prohibit the traffic of another provider. That would be like ATT not allowing an MCI Worldcom telephone call, and there would be immediate outrage. Immediate.
It sounds like to me that if we were concerned that the Content Carriers would become Content Producers, and thus would favor their own Content over a competitor's Content, then we shouldn't allow mergers like Comcast / NBC.
To sum it up, the problem is the monopoly, not the hypothetical misuse of the monopoly.
I'm for your solution as well. I think having the government sponsored/created monopolies is the problem, anyway.
Neither of those gentleman actually hold a public office. Keep that in mind.