There are many problems and that certainly is one of them. Why we're funding people to have kids that they don't bother to raise is an important issue. BUT, there are also a lot of parents who have no choice but to send kids to horrible schools. Private education is way outside their budget. With AI tutors we can see "day cares" provide a quality education. The "day care" is there to deal with socialization and scheduling the AI provide one-on-one tutorship in all and every subject.
Thankfully the rise of on-line educational programs (Khan Academy, MIT) and tutoring programs are going to change the dynamic of the failed American education system within the next 20 years.
Population rates of growth have been plummeting all over the world. Europe, North America and Japan are at, or below, replacement rates (not counting immigration). India and South America have also seen a marked decline. Even Africa and the muslim world are seeing birth rates drop. If Africa and the Muslim world follow the same trend line as the rest of the world we will be at replacement rate at or about 2050. This does not mean that the population level will drop at that point as life spans continue to increase. Especially if Ray Kurzweil and Aubrey de Gray are even partly correct.
I don't know enough about GMO. I'm trying to learn more but I see anti-science hysteria all over the place. It sounds much like the arguments against electrifying houses as electricity was going to "leak" out of the unused sockets.
Too much of the argument is consumed by "big-bag-corporation" and un-realized scares such as used by the anti-smoking crowd (there's rat poison in cigarettes). In reality the "rat poison" argument comes from the fact that burning any organic compound releases trace amounts of arsenic. Since arsenic is used in rat poison then cigarettes have rat poison.
(By the way I'm not a smoker, think it's a dumb habit, and am not promoting it.)
I'm responding to your point about composted gmo foods start leeching into the water table. AFAIK a genetic trait does not leech anywhere. The gene that crop A has which makes it resistant to drought or X doesn't "leech" in the water supply.
I'm not a proponent of GMO. I'm just one more non-expert trying to sort this shit out.
David Koresh may have been a child molester but the government chose to try to arrest him in his compound instead of when he went to town. The government double-down on stupid when they created a seige; and doubled-down on stupid again when they attacked. The fault w lies with the Federal Government for unnecessarily creating a seige and attacking the compound. It wasn't necessary. It was an excessive force.
You obviously are just parroting some nonsense. By every yardstick R&D is steady or has grown; regarding science and engineering degrees- yes that is not a good sign. Our problem is not R&D budgets - it creeping dependency on state; the erosion of individual rights and the rise of imperial washington.
The amount of life lost in the Bombing of Pearl Harbor was less than 2500 and the US lost 410,000 service men answering that call - not to mention the death of a million+ North Italian, French, Dutch, and German civilians.(Why, by your logic, did we respond to the Pearl Harbor attack by going to Northern Africa?);
That court case was not FOX only. AFAIK all major broadcasting companies filed amicus briefs w Fox. The case of the matter is that mistakes/lies are hard to distinguish and that news companies could be ruined by lawsuits trying to defend itself in cases regarding what is a mistake; that which does not enough evidence; and a lie. Add to that the problem of defending yourself and maintaining anonymity of confidential sources... what a mess.
Wouldn't it make more sense to prosecute those that use guns in crimes than to punish gun manufacturers?. By the same token would you punish video game companies for creating violent games and influencing the behavior of "impressionable" teens and young adults?
To the person who moderated this post as "troll" Any particular reason why you so marked it that way? I directly answered the OPs post. Or, is it that your moderation is based on how you feel about the opinion stated?
Socialism is top-down government officials commanding individuals to obey the collective. Many socialists desire that people belong to the state.
Melissa Harris-Perry... professor at Tulane, has endorsed the concept of human ownership by the state... saying in a promo for MSNBC that "we have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents or kids belong to their families and recognize that kids belong to whole communities."
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/040913-651296-msnbc-host-says-children-belong-to-k
All activities that people, on their own, join and participate in is part of the free-market. Yes, that means food co-ops where everyone hates capitalism are part and parcel of the free-market.
I think you're correct re the sin taxes and the pizza example. Part of the "dramatic reaction" is anger at the government wanting to micro-manage behavior. There are two things about taxes - one is the ever more government control over your life via taking money from you and the other is the government's attempt to control your behavior via the taxes.
The social contract is "I promise not to kill you and take your stuff if you promise not to kill me and take mine." It's not "I will prevent you from smoking weed if you promise to prevent me from eating twinkees."
Wealthy? To move? I'm not destitute but I'm not rich. It doesn't cost that much to move. Last time I moved it cost 2 days worth of U-Haul ($60+tax), gas and mileage. I paid a guy $80 each day to help me and the total cost was under $400.
Taxes are not the ONLY reason to do anything, but it does influence behavior. The fact that a born-and-bred new yorker who loves living here is considering to move for tax purposes indicates how powerful taxes are in influencing behavior.
Memorization is useful. The schools are not requiring enough of it. I was an adjunct for a few years and too many students didn't know the basics. Whether it's martial arts, basketball, dance, history, music, computer science you need to be able to memorize, to have things down by rote. Punches, free throws, plies, scales are done again, and again, and again 1000s of times until it becomes second nature.
This is necessary and useful. For all the carping I hear about too much memorization - I see too little of it.
The people I'm with are pretty sophisticated about taxes and monetary policy. (For the most part they are far more knowledgeable than I am.) The person from Tx worked at Dell, is retired and quite well off. She hates Texas, especially the politics and luvs Brooklyn. She isn't moving here because the tax bite on her (investments + residuals) would be through the roof.
I, of course, tease her to death about her being progressive with other people's money but staying in Texas in order for her to keep her money. My wife and I were tempted to move to Westchester but didn't because of the crazy real estate tax. Right or wrong I prefer to stay in Brooklyn, pay more for an apartment than pay 24-36,000/year in property taxes in Westchester.
The decisions to not move (in both the examples above) were influenced by tax rates. As mentioned earlier, my wife and I have entertained options of moving to Florida, again for tax reasons.
These are a few examples of many more that I could give. Taxes influence behavior. When government raises taxes to too high a level people start spending more and more energy trying to avoid paying taxes.
I respectfully disagree. Half the water-cooler conversation I hear is about how to reduce taxes. Taxes influence behavior. I also don't think that government officials spending tax dollars are better are expanding growth than are you and I in making decisions (the market). I know people that live in Tx and hate it there but are not moving to NYC because of the increased tax burden. My wife and I are looking to move from NYC because of the tax burden.
Tax rates affect behavior.
Of course. Tax rates do not affect behavior. Raise tax rates to 100% and people will act exactly the same as if tax rates were 10%. Reagan sure was crazy in thinking that people would act differently with different tax rates.
You make an interesting points re the fair use and that one cannot legally sell copies. As with most problems digital I think there needs to be a digital solution. One purchases a copy (hereafter "the original") which comes with a digital signature and an impediment to replicating. I say impediment as there is no way (that I know of) to absolutely prevent copying. This impediment is a legal barrier. The act of circumventing the barrier is the criminal act.
The average person can buy a piece of music, an ebook, etc... and sell it or loan it to another as he would a vinyl record or paper book; that action remains the same as with the pre-digital world. The act of circumventing the legal barrier to copying and especially the act of removing/altering the digital signature from copies would be illegal and punishable by listening to the Barney theme song 16 hours a day for 20 years, or some otherwise deemed suitable punishment.
Re:Collateralized vs Non-Collateralized Loans
on
Let Them Eat Teslas
·
· Score: 1
I've been pushing for this for years. I haven't seen upstart.com, so thanks. I will take a look at this.
To me it's simple: the lender takes a very small percentage from your salary at the lower payscales and then the percentage increases somewhat as your pay rises until you've paid off the loan + agreed upon interest.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Forming a union to prevent competition is wrong - at this point you (the union member) are the aggressor. This issue (selling digital media) will go through the court system many, many times before becoming settled law. I, as with most here, think that reselling digital media is normal and acceptable behavior and no different than selling "used" books.
I cannot see the "license" argument winning the day. It didn't apply to intellectual property pre-digital age (books, music) and there isn't anything "new" about digital media except for the ability to easily make copies.
How about a hardware store printing parts? Parts for cars, hot water heaters, everything, can be printed locally. This will revolutionize things. Now, we're not there yet but 20 years ago nobody thought that soon a phone would fit in your pocket and would also be a TV, a computer, a portable "cassette" player, a photo album, a game boy...
3D printing is going to change manufacturing and distribution of parts.
Slashdot Mirror
There are many problems and that certainly is one of them. Why we're funding people to have kids that they don't bother to raise is an important issue. BUT, there are also a lot of parents who have no choice but to send kids to horrible schools. Private education is way outside their budget. With AI tutors we can see "day cares" provide a quality education. The "day care" is there to deal with socialization and scheduling the AI provide one-on-one tutorship in all and every subject.
Thankfully the rise of on-line educational programs (Khan Academy, MIT) and tutoring programs are going to change the dynamic of the failed American education system within the next 20 years.
Let's hope they will be good enough to kill the internet sales tax as well.
Population rates of growth have been plummeting all over the world. Europe, North America and Japan are at, or below, replacement rates (not counting immigration). India and South America have also seen a marked decline. Even Africa and the muslim world are seeing birth rates drop. If Africa and the Muslim world follow the same trend line as the rest of the world we will be at replacement rate at or about 2050. This does not mean that the population level will drop at that point as life spans continue to increase. Especially if Ray Kurzweil and Aubrey de Gray are even partly correct.
I don't know enough about GMO. I'm trying to learn more but I see anti-science hysteria all over the place. It sounds much like the arguments against electrifying houses as electricity was going to "leak" out of the unused sockets.
Too much of the argument is consumed by "big-bag-corporation" and un-realized scares such as used by the anti-smoking crowd (there's rat poison in cigarettes). In reality the "rat poison" argument comes from the fact that burning any organic compound releases trace amounts of arsenic. Since arsenic is used in rat poison then cigarettes have rat poison.
(By the way I'm not a smoker, think it's a dumb habit, and am not promoting it.)
I'm responding to your point about composted gmo foods start leeching into the water table. AFAIK a genetic trait does not leech anywhere. The gene that crop A has which makes it resistant to drought or X doesn't "leech" in the water supply.
I'm not a proponent of GMO. I'm just one more non-expert trying to sort this shit out.
David Koresh may have been a child molester but the government chose to try to arrest him in his compound instead of when he went to town. The government double-down on stupid when they created a seige; and doubled-down on stupid again when they attacked. The fault w lies with the Federal Government for unnecessarily creating a seige and attacking the compound. It wasn't necessary. It was an excessive force.
You obviously are just parroting some nonsense. By every yardstick R&D is steady or has grown; regarding science and engineering degrees- yes that is not a good sign. Our problem is not R&D budgets - it creeping dependency on state; the erosion of individual rights and the rise of imperial washington.
The amount of life lost in the Bombing of Pearl Harbor was less than 2500 and the US lost 410,000 service men answering that call - not to mention the death of a million+ North Italian, French, Dutch, and German civilians.(Why, by your logic, did we respond to the Pearl Harbor attack by going to Northern Africa?);
That court case was not FOX only. AFAIK all major broadcasting companies filed amicus briefs w Fox. The case of the matter is that mistakes/lies are hard to distinguish and that news companies could be ruined by lawsuits trying to defend itself in cases regarding what is a mistake; that which does not enough evidence; and a lie. Add to that the problem of defending yourself and maintaining anonymity of confidential sources ... what a mess.
over-generalize much?
There is no correlation between poverty / lack of jobs and drug use. There may be in drug dealing - but not drug use.
Wouldn't it make more sense to prosecute those that use guns in crimes than to punish gun manufacturers?. By the same token would you punish video game companies for creating violent games and influencing the behavior of "impressionable" teens and young adults?
To the person who moderated this post as "troll" Any particular reason why you so marked it that way? I directly answered the OPs post. Or, is it that your moderation is based on how you feel about the opinion stated?
not bad :-)
All activities that people, on their own, join and participate in is part of the free-market. Yes, that means food co-ops where everyone hates capitalism are part and parcel of the free-market.
I think you're correct re the sin taxes and the pizza example. Part of the "dramatic reaction" is anger at the government wanting to micro-manage behavior. There are two things about taxes - one is the ever more government control over your life via taking money from you and the other is the government's attempt to control your behavior via the taxes.
The social contract is "I promise not to kill you and take your stuff if you promise not to kill me and take mine." It's not "I will prevent you from smoking weed if you promise to prevent me from eating twinkees."
Wealthy? To move? I'm not destitute but I'm not rich. It doesn't cost that much to move. Last time I moved it cost 2 days worth of U-Haul ($60+tax), gas and mileage. I paid a guy $80 each day to help me and the total cost was under $400.
Taxes are not the ONLY reason to do anything, but it does influence behavior. The fact that a born-and-bred new yorker who loves living here is considering to move for tax purposes indicates how powerful taxes are in influencing behavior.
Memorization is useful. The schools are not requiring enough of it. I was an adjunct for a few years and too many students didn't know the basics. Whether it's martial arts, basketball, dance, history, music, computer science you need to be able to memorize, to have things down by rote. Punches, free throws, plies, scales are done again, and again, and again 1000s of times until it becomes second nature.
This is necessary and useful. For all the carping I hear about too much memorization - I see too little of it.
The people I'm with are pretty sophisticated about taxes and monetary policy. (For the most part they are far more knowledgeable than I am.) The person from Tx worked at Dell, is retired and quite well off. She hates Texas, especially the politics and luvs Brooklyn. She isn't moving here because the tax bite on her (investments + residuals) would be through the roof.
I, of course, tease her to death about her being progressive with other people's money but staying in Texas in order for her to keep her money. My wife and I were tempted to move to Westchester but didn't because of the crazy real estate tax. Right or wrong I prefer to stay in Brooklyn, pay more for an apartment than pay 24-36,000/year in property taxes in Westchester.
The decisions to not move (in both the examples above) were influenced by tax rates. As mentioned earlier, my wife and I have entertained options of moving to Florida, again for tax reasons.
These are a few examples of many more that I could give. Taxes influence behavior. When government raises taxes to too high a level people start spending more and more energy trying to avoid paying taxes.
I respectfully disagree. Half the water-cooler conversation I hear is about how to reduce taxes. Taxes influence behavior. I also don't think that government officials spending tax dollars are better are expanding growth than are you and I in making decisions (the market). I know people that live in Tx and hate it there but are not moving to NYC because of the increased tax burden. My wife and I are looking to move from NYC because of the tax burden.
Tax rates affect behavior.
Of course. Tax rates do not affect behavior. Raise tax rates to 100% and people will act exactly the same as if tax rates were 10%. Reagan sure was crazy in thinking that people would act differently with different tax rates.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=v4S5nM8BjwM#t=150s
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=v4S5nM8BjwM#t=295s
You make an interesting points re the fair use and that one cannot legally sell copies. As with most problems digital I think there needs to be a digital solution. One purchases a copy (hereafter "the original") which comes with a digital signature and an impediment to replicating. I say impediment as there is no way (that I know of) to absolutely prevent copying. This impediment is a legal barrier. The act of circumventing the barrier is the criminal act.
The average person can buy a piece of music, an ebook, etc... and sell it or loan it to another as he would a vinyl record or paper book; that action remains the same as with the pre-digital world. The act of circumventing the legal barrier to copying and especially the act of removing/altering the digital signature from copies would be illegal and punishable by listening to the Barney theme song 16 hours a day for 20 years, or some otherwise deemed suitable punishment.
I've been pushing for this for years. I haven't seen upstart.com, so thanks. I will take a look at this. To me it's simple: the lender takes a very small percentage from your salary at the lower payscales and then the percentage increases somewhat as your pay rises until you've paid off the loan + agreed upon interest.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Forming a union to prevent competition is wrong - at this point you (the union member) are the aggressor. This issue (selling digital media) will go through the court system many, many times before becoming settled law. I, as with most here, think that reselling digital media is normal and acceptable behavior and no different than selling "used" books.
I cannot see the "license" argument winning the day. It didn't apply to intellectual property pre-digital age (books, music) and there isn't anything "new" about digital media except for the ability to easily make copies.
How about a hardware store printing parts? Parts for cars, hot water heaters, everything, can be printed locally. This will revolutionize things. Now, we're not there yet but 20 years ago nobody thought that soon a phone would fit in your pocket and would also be a TV, a computer, a portable "cassette" player, a photo album, a game boy ...
3D printing is going to change manufacturing and distribution of parts.