There would be plenty of room in the summary to expand a few acronyms. It's not like this is an organic chemistry blog.
It's good journalistic practice to expand acronyms when first used no matter how familiar most of the readers may be with them.
I know what 95% of the acronyms are on/. without thinking about them, but when I see that 5% of those niche acronyms that some submitter thought everyone should know about, I find it to be a turn-off.
Slashdot should continue to encourage new and casual readers through being friendly to the non-hard-core geeks.
The government could remove some tax free growth protections from 401k plans, making you have to pay taxes as gains are realized within them. All that money out there just waiting to be taxed. Sooner or later, all those "rich people" will have to pay their "fair share". Class warfare knows no limits.
Well, I'd agree with you on removing corporate influence from the government. You seem politically redeemable, but you need to get rid of all the bias and hate. It seems more religious than fact-based. For example:
Where's your citation that anyone is really in control of the Tea Party. The Tea Party is more a set of ideas than an official party. The other day I Googled for it. There's no official site. No one is in control. It's people pissed off that the government is getting out of control from what I can tell. Where's your citation that shows where those in control of the Tea Party are bankers who received bailouts? The initial bailout was authored by Bush's administration in close coordination with the incoming Obama administration which should have all the blame for how it has been mismanaged over the last 21 months or so. Both those parties are screwed. Third party candidates and judicious voting for mavericks within the main parties are the only hope to turn things around. I don't think that nukes are called for quite yet.
Social Security is screwed thanks to bankers... wait, it's screwed thanks to the Government. The only investment for my future that is reasonably okay right now is my 401k. Government will be taking a huge chunk out of that when I retire, though. I'll be surprised if they don't start digging into it sooner.
"in recent years", corporations have just been doing what government has pointed them toward doing. Don't forget that the government created the entire market of worthless subprime mortgages. Businesses just went with it and traded them. Government planted a poison seed and it undermined everything. Yes, some Wall Street types went too far; but the first cause originated in D.C.
I'm not a huge fan of the Tea Party since their choice of people like Christine O'Donnell seems poor; but from what I know, the Tea Party's platform doesn't support bailouts. The Tea Party is all about individual liberty, including economic liberty. Everyone should be free to make their own decisions, succeed from the good ones, and learn from the bad ones. So what is that attack based on? Sounds like an unreasoned bias on your part.
Your mistake is in thinking that there's some fundamental battle between government and the rich/corporations. Let me clue you in... THEY'RE IN IT TOGETHER AGAINST US. The more money you want to send government's way, the more they grow the military industrial complex that lives off of it. The best you can do is to cut off the flow of money to the multi-headed beast.
They are part of a group of powerful billionaires that are against social security, minimum wage, corporate taxation, public education, labor unions. Their goals are to take over our government and abolish the Davis Bacon act, the EPA, OSHA, unemployment taxes, and lower taxes for the wealthy
Yeah, it's just like that... except in the part where you're talking about a junkie... and stealing... from a war veteran... oh, and the crack, that was sort of "out there" too.
Nevermind, your analogy was really really bad. Really.
The "free market will solve all problems" crowd was insisting that peak oil would never happen. But it did. The price of oil has tripled without an increase in supply.
You either write the people off - ignore the suffering - or you simply execute the bastards in charge. There is no other solution.
I think there's a lot of truth in what you're saying -- although you ignore the eventual capacity of those societies to reform themselves if we'd stop enabling the thugs by letting them have food to rule over their people with. Maybe by withholding the misspent aid for a generation or two, better forms of government would form out of the survivors.
That makes no sense. A sale is a sale is a sale. The stores should be thankful that the guy is moving their products. That allows them to buy more and keep their shelves stocked. If they don't like it, they should set their prices better.
If you want books that no one else wants to read, then those books are still there. This guy isn't snapping them up.
Firefly was canned because no one was watching it. Book stores close because no one buys their books. This guy is buying books... lots of them. A bookstore being low on inventory because of good sales is a good problem to have. You should try some sort of car analogy instead.:)
I just couldn't ever imagine hypocrisy like that from our government officials... from the protectors of our Constitutional rights. That would just be unpossible!
As Eminem said to our beloved leaders, "Fuck you with the freest of speech this Divided States of Embarrassment will allow me to have."
Vote against the establishment every chance you get. The only time you leave an incumbent in office is when they're a real trouble-maker for their peers like Kucinich, Ron Paul, or Nader. Lean towards politicians who follow through on decreasing the power of government since power begets corruption and the insidious military-industrial-corporate slime that covers everything around it.
The answer isn't no government. The answer is better government oversight and less voter apathy.
Having people specify what the government spends money on is a pretty good means of oversight. Having people write checks for their services would decrease apathy. It's painful, but awareness provoking.
I'm not proposing it as a cure-all, but like with health care, the further removed patients are from making financially-based decisions about their health care the less they pay attention to where their dollars are going and the less efficient the system is.
Some services (like road building and maintenance, for example) don't lend themselves well to an opt-in approach.
Toll booths are gold mines. They always go in as a "temporary measure" but then end up being in place forever because politicians see all that money and get greedy. They're a great example of pay as you go infrastructure. The one problem is that the revenues are subverted for other purposes besides the infrastructure excuse that created them. If you want to opt out by not using them then that's your right.
Look, I'm not saying that EVERYTHING should be voted upon by actually paying for it, but the pendulum could swing pretty far back in that direction before some libertarian utopia would come into being.
We could use some good citizen awareness, agreement, and participation in the spending of public money. Right now government is just a big opaque money vacuum that sucks in so many ways.
When they start to charge you one fee, they sure can start to charge you with a new one at any time for any reason.
What, you think that government doesn't do this ALL THE TIME? It's the slippery slope of taxation. At least in this case, the homeowner could not pay the fee but keep a water cistern on his property to battle his own fires. Or maybe he could have NOT started the garbage fire himself. He had options.
Once government decides to tax you for something, you have no choice but to pay for it. They are the ultimate brute force thugs who will come into your home, abduct you, and throw you into prison for not paying their fees that you have extraordinarily little control over.
I'd prefer the freedom to make my own mistakes and good decisions, thank you.
Doesn't work for some idiot who made a really poor chain of decisions including not paying promptly for his protection and burning garbage near his house?
Sounds like it worked well for society. Lots of people are checking that they made their fire payments in that county today.
1. You're explicitly paying for a service that's useful. When government takes your money in a lump sum, they tend to do all kinds of other crap with it. See the Social Security fund for a great example. 2. If you want fire protection you have to write a check. That's better than having it deducted from your taxes automatically. Once that happens, the amount creeps higher and higher without anyone noticing and without the government feeling like they need to reign in the price of the service.
Government a la carte would be a great way to increase the fiscal efficiency of our government.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree. The good part of being a lefty is the part that's big on personal liberty.
The guy should get at least two years just for being an outrageous hypocrite trying to limit the free speech of others.
There would be plenty of room in the summary to expand a few acronyms. It's not like this is an organic chemistry blog.
It's good journalistic practice to expand acronyms when first used no matter how familiar most of the readers may be with them.
I know what 95% of the acronyms are on /. without thinking about them, but when I see that 5% of those niche acronyms that some submitter thought everyone should know about, I find it to be a turn-off.
Slashdot should continue to encourage new and casual readers through being friendly to the non-hard-core geeks.
Since having teachers take attendance is just too damned hard.
The government could remove some tax free growth protections from 401k plans, making you have to pay taxes as gains are realized within them. All that money out there just waiting to be taxed. Sooner or later, all those "rich people" will have to pay their "fair share". Class warfare knows no limits.
Well, I'd agree with you on removing corporate influence from the government. You seem politically redeemable, but you need to get rid of all the bias and hate. It seems more religious than fact-based. For example:
Where's your citation that anyone is really in control of the Tea Party. The Tea Party is more a set of ideas than an official party. The other day I Googled for it. There's no official site. No one is in control. It's people pissed off that the government is getting out of control from what I can tell.
Where's your citation that shows where those in control of the Tea Party are bankers who received bailouts?
The initial bailout was authored by Bush's administration in close coordination with the incoming Obama administration which should have all the blame for how it has been mismanaged over the last 21 months or so. Both those parties are screwed. Third party candidates and judicious voting for mavericks within the main parties are the only hope to turn things around. I don't think that nukes are called for quite yet.
Social Security is screwed thanks to bankers... wait, it's screwed thanks to the Government. The only investment for my future that is reasonably okay right now is my 401k. Government will be taking a huge chunk out of that when I retire, though. I'll be surprised if they don't start digging into it sooner.
"in recent years", corporations have just been doing what government has pointed them toward doing. Don't forget that the government created the entire market of worthless subprime mortgages. Businesses just went with it and traded them. Government planted a poison seed and it undermined everything. Yes, some Wall Street types went too far; but the first cause originated in D.C.
I'm not a huge fan of the Tea Party since their choice of people like Christine O'Donnell seems poor; but from what I know, the Tea Party's platform doesn't support bailouts. The Tea Party is all about individual liberty, including economic liberty. Everyone should be free to make their own decisions, succeed from the good ones, and learn from the bad ones. So what is that attack based on? Sounds like an unreasoned bias on your part.
Your mistake is in thinking that there's some fundamental battle between government and the rich/corporations. Let me clue you in... THEY'RE IN IT TOGETHER AGAINST US. The more money you want to send government's way, the more they grow the military industrial complex that lives off of it. The best you can do is to cut off the flow of money to the multi-headed beast.
They are part of a group of powerful billionaires that are against social security, minimum wage, corporate taxation, public education, labor unions. Their goals are to take over our government and abolish the Davis Bacon act, the EPA, OSHA, unemployment taxes, and lower taxes for the wealthy
You say all of that like they're bad things...
Fox's being evil is an unfalsifiable hypothesis in some people's minds.
Bleah, soap bubbles filled with bad hippie breath is assault, dammit!
Yeah, it's just like that... except in the part where you're talking about a junkie... and stealing... from a war veteran... oh, and the crack, that was sort of "out there" too.
Nevermind, your analogy was really really bad. Really.
The virtual reality you'll be plugged into will have as much land, wilderness, forests, jungles, etc. as you care to visit.
Enjoy!
The "free market will solve all problems" crowd was insisting that peak oil would never happen. But it did. The price of oil has tripled without an increase in supply.
[citation needed]
You either write the people off - ignore the suffering - or you simply execute the bastards in charge. There is no other solution.
I think there's a lot of truth in what you're saying -- although you ignore the eventual capacity of those societies to reform themselves if we'd stop enabling the thugs by letting them have food to rule over their people with. Maybe by withholding the misspent aid for a generation or two, better forms of government would form out of the survivors.
Anyone not using Ted Danson for dire climate predictions is just doing it wrong.
That makes no sense. A sale is a sale is a sale. The stores should be thankful that the guy is moving their products. That allows them to buy more and keep their shelves stocked. If they don't like it, they should set their prices better.
If you want books that no one else wants to read, then those books are still there. This guy isn't snapping them up.
Firefly was canned because no one was watching it. Book stores close because no one buys their books. This guy is buying books... lots of them. A bookstore being low on inventory because of good sales is a good problem to have. You should try some sort of car analogy instead. :)
I came here just to see who would first mention "space elevator". Thanks.
I just couldn't ever imagine hypocrisy like that from our government officials... from the protectors of our Constitutional rights. That would just be unpossible!
As Eminem said to our beloved leaders, "Fuck you with the freest of speech this Divided States of Embarrassment will allow me to have."
Imagine further if you as a citizen had planted the device on the car of a US Senator. Imagine the trouble you'd be in.
This kind of invasive aggressive action against citizens who have done nothing (no court order) should not be tolerated.
The GPS would have allowed them to track it down too easily.
Maybe sending it through UPS to China or Iran would have been interesting.
But what can you do?
Vote against the establishment every chance you get. The only time you leave an incumbent in office is when they're a real trouble-maker for their peers like Kucinich, Ron Paul, or Nader. Lean towards politicians who follow through on decreasing the power of government since power begets corruption and the insidious military-industrial-corporate slime that covers everything around it.
The answer isn't no government. The answer is better government oversight and less voter apathy.
Having people specify what the government spends money on is a pretty good means of oversight. Having people write checks for their services would decrease apathy. It's painful, but awareness provoking.
I'm not proposing it as a cure-all, but like with health care, the further removed patients are from making financially-based decisions about their health care the less they pay attention to where their dollars are going and the less efficient the system is.
Some services (like road building and maintenance, for example) don't lend themselves well to an opt-in approach.
Toll booths are gold mines. They always go in as a "temporary measure" but then end up being in place forever because politicians see all that money and get greedy. They're a great example of pay as you go infrastructure. The one problem is that the revenues are subverted for other purposes besides the infrastructure excuse that created them. If you want to opt out by not using them then that's your right.
Look, I'm not saying that EVERYTHING should be voted upon by actually paying for it, but the pendulum could swing pretty far back in that direction before some libertarian utopia would come into being.
We could use some good citizen awareness, agreement, and participation in the spending of public money. Right now government is just a big opaque money vacuum that sucks in so many ways.
Every fire truck should have a credit card reader.
Case closed.
When they start to charge you one fee, they sure can start to charge you with a new one at any time for any reason.
What, you think that government doesn't do this ALL THE TIME? It's the slippery slope of taxation. At least in this case, the homeowner could not pay the fee but keep a water cistern on his property to battle his own fires. Or maybe he could have NOT started the garbage fire himself. He had options.
Once government decides to tax you for something, you have no choice but to pay for it. They are the ultimate brute force thugs who will come into your home, abduct you, and throw you into prison for not paying their fees that you have extraordinarily little control over.
I'd prefer the freedom to make my own mistakes and good decisions, thank you.
Doesn't work for some idiot who made a really poor chain of decisions including not paying promptly for his protection and burning garbage near his house?
Sounds like it worked well for society. Lots of people are checking that they made their fire payments in that county today.
I like this method for two reasons:
1. You're explicitly paying for a service that's useful. When government takes your money in a lump sum, they tend to do all kinds of other crap with it. See the Social Security fund for a great example.
2. If you want fire protection you have to write a check. That's better than having it deducted from your taxes automatically. Once that happens, the amount creeps higher and higher without anyone noticing and without the government feeling like they need to reign in the price of the service.
Government a la carte would be a great way to increase the fiscal efficiency of our government.