I am a Christian audio engineer and let me tell you, just visit any major Christian recording artist's discussion forum, and you'll find a lot of debate on the subject.
And yes, I am sure since they can show that ads devoted to promoting Google are in fact 'a loss' thus a benefit for their taxes at the end of the year;-)
I am the original poster and the summary or even the link is NOTHING like I submitted. I guess the/. editors take 'editorial liberty' to the extreme! No resemblence to the orignal at all.
Oh well, at least I got credit for it and good karma;-)
Libertarians are rarely elected for several reasons: - Very little money to campaign with - Libertarians tend to NOT promise handouts and entitlements (most people in the US vote selfishly) - The Republicrats and Demarubs are entrenched to the point of having a political and psychological duopoly.
But libertarianism does NOT equal anarchy. Anarchy means NO government, whereas libertarianism means very small and limited government. The essential idea is that one's rights end where another's begins.
No, the majority of the time, underage girls sleeping around can usually be attributed to bad parenting. But everyone has a choice and makes decisions. Once you hit puberty however, you are soley responsible for your own actions. And choosing NOT to sleep around is a personal choice in which you can decide if you want to accept the consequences of those actions.
Regarding education, you do realize that many government schools spend an equal or greater amount dollar-for-dollar per student as the average non-government schools do, right? The problem with American education is that the government is involved and screwing up the marketplace.
Actually believe it or not, it isn't the government's duty or responsibility to protect us. We are responsible for protecting ourselves. Imagine if the government was charged with protecting each and every person?!?! It would be logistically impossible first of all, and secondly the only way to even attempt it would be to turn the country into a police state. Government's duty is to secure natural rights, and establish justice.
Why do you think that 'the right to bear arms may not be infringed' was written into the Constitution?
YOU SAID: "Well, as far as I'm concerned, the entire IDEA of having a government is to have it regulate things in such a way that everyone gets at least approximately equal chances, minimum pay, access to healthcare, etc."
I hope you are not an American citizen. Government, at least in the US, is founded on the sole duty of securing natural rights which are given to us by God (or Nature) and cannot be denied. Everyone is equal under the law, but pay and healthcare etc are all private contracts between private parties. The government has no permission to intervene, but the people do have an unlimited right to contract.
If government schools were abolished most US citizens would have a great deal more disposable/discrestionary income, even the poor. Most lower class rent an apartment in which a fair portion of their paid rent goes to property taxes. Here in the US property taxes are what usually fund the government schools locally.
Also many poor students are trapped in poor or failing government schools. If government got OUT of the education business, then we could have schools which are forced to compete in order to keep their doors open. The schools which offer the best value would get more enrollment and offer more choice to the lower class. Right now the lower class have no choice, and most middle class can't afford to send their children to better schools while still being forced to pay property (and income) taxes to support government-schools.
And finally, the US Department of Education should absolutely be abolished. It's existance is illegal under the US Constitution. Plus it spends billions of dollars a year and educates no one.
People who are "too indifferent, fucked-up or poor to provide an education to their childrent" should not be parents in the first place. I am not advocating that the government decides who can and cant have kids (this isn't China), but I am saying that people should take personal responsibility. If they are poor, they shouldnt get pregnent. If they are not willing or able to put in the effort to raise their kids, then they should either not get pregnent or give them away for adoption.
It isn't the government's responsibility to raise one's kids.
I am an audio engineer, and the college I graduated from has a MFA program and they do this sort of thing all the time. Check it out: http://mtsu.edu/~record/
First off, in the US, a national government instituted heath care system would be unconstitutional. In other words, it's not allowed.
Secondly, government is the LEAST efficient way of doing anything with the exception of maybe defense.
Third, the high cost of health care is BECAUSE of excessive government regulation. It takes over 10 years and billions of dollars to bring a single drug to market due to the FDA (which by the way is also unconstitutional).
Fourth, we are NOT Europe, and damn proud of it!
So to recap - the free market will provide the best solution in most cases, and government is the cause, not the solution, to most problems.
Personally, if it were me, I would invest my wealth in technology. Technology and innovation usually pays back to society an order of magnitude, or more, over time. Look at the money invested by the likes of Edison and Westinghouse and Bell over the turn of the last century. Also look at the return dollar for dollar spent on things like the Apollo program.
The only humanitarian type of place I would spend my money however might be on meritorious/aptitude scholarships. I don't believe on giving anyone anything without some sort of effort/meet-me-part-way on their end, as that tends to enable poor choices and unproductive behavior. It's the old fish vs teach to fish quip.
In modern commercial aviation pilots do only usually fly for about 15 minutes or so (takeoff and landing), and the rest of the time they are doing visual checks, instrument checks, and nav checks.
As far as a telemetry network in which you describe, NASA is already working on this: http://sats.nasa.gov/
You'll pay for it one way or another. Granted that by being a laggard in the market you'll be paying for less of it than your fellow customers, but businesses exist to make a profit, and ALL costs are passed along to their customers.
The only solution is a free-market solution. Better filtering, blacklisting, etc etc. The free market will sovle the problem eventually because unless we turn the ENTIRE WORLD into a police state, there is really no way to stamp it out.
Suprise suprise - cable and telcos do NOT operate in the free market! They are almost always local government granted monopolies. In fact the free market does a very good job of regulating itself and most monopolies that exist in the free market are short lived. This sort of nonsense is a result of the free market, it's the result of an UNFREE market!
..those that travel for business. Those that like to take extended vacations. Those that are in the military and deployed to Iraq. I can think of millions of people who this service could be marketed to.
Close.... studies have been done, even some by NASA, and the best small "teams" are composed of 7 individuals. Even the Boy Scouts follow this in the way they structure their organization.
Slashdot Mirror
I am a Christian audio engineer and let me tell you, just visit any major Christian recording artist's discussion forum, and you'll find a lot of debate on the subject.
And yes, I am sure since they can show that ads devoted to promoting Google are in fact 'a loss' thus a benefit for their taxes at the end of the year ;-)
I am the original poster and the summary or even the link is NOTHING like I submitted. I guess the /. editors take 'editorial liberty' to the extreme! No resemblence to the orignal at all.
;-)
Oh well, at least I got credit for it and good karma
Libertarians are rarely elected for several reasons:
- Very little money to campaign with
- Libertarians tend to NOT promise handouts and entitlements (most people in the US vote selfishly)
- The Republicrats and Demarubs are entrenched to the point of having a political and psychological duopoly.
But libertarianism does NOT equal anarchy. Anarchy means NO government, whereas libertarianism means very small and limited government. The essential idea is that one's rights end where another's begins.
No, the majority of the time, underage girls sleeping around can usually be attributed to bad parenting. But everyone has a choice and makes decisions. Once you hit puberty however, you are soley responsible for your own actions. And choosing NOT to sleep around is a personal choice in which you can decide if you want to accept the consequences of those actions.
Regarding education, you do realize that many government schools spend an equal or greater amount dollar-for-dollar per student as the average non-government schools do, right? The problem with American education is that the government is involved and screwing up the marketplace.
Well in America, that's what we believe.
Actually believe it or not, it isn't the government's duty or responsibility to protect us. We are responsible for protecting ourselves. Imagine if the government was charged with protecting each and every person?!?! It would be logistically impossible first of all, and secondly the only way to even attempt it would be to turn the country into a police state. Government's duty is to secure natural rights, and establish justice.
Why do you think that 'the right to bear arms may not be infringed' was written into the Constitution?
YOU SAID:
"Well, as far as I'm concerned, the entire IDEA of having a government is to have it regulate things in such a way that everyone gets at least approximately equal chances, minimum pay, access to healthcare, etc."
I hope you are not an American citizen. Government, at least in the US, is founded on the sole duty of securing natural rights which are given to us by God (or Nature) and cannot be denied. Everyone is equal under the law, but pay and healthcare etc are all private contracts between private parties. The government has no permission to intervene, but the people do have an unlimited right to contract.
Government in general has a responsibility to protect and secure people's rights. Nothing more, nothing less.
If government schools were abolished most US citizens would have a great deal more disposable/discrestionary income, even the poor. Most lower class rent an apartment in which a fair portion of their paid rent goes to property taxes. Here in the US property taxes are what usually fund the government schools locally.
Also many poor students are trapped in poor or failing government schools. If government got OUT of the education business, then we could have schools which are forced to compete in order to keep their doors open. The schools which offer the best value would get more enrollment and offer more choice to the lower class. Right now the lower class have no choice, and most middle class can't afford to send their children to better schools while still being forced to pay property (and income) taxes to support government-schools.
And finally, the US Department of Education should absolutely be abolished. It's existance is illegal under the US Constitution. Plus it spends billions of dollars a year and educates no one.
People who are "too indifferent, fucked-up or poor to provide an education to their childrent" should not be parents in the first place. I am not advocating that the government decides who can and cant have kids (this isn't China), but I am saying that people should take personal responsibility. If they are poor, they shouldnt get pregnent. If they are not willing or able to put in the effort to raise their kids, then they should either not get pregnent or give them away for adoption.
It isn't the government's responsibility to raise one's kids.
I am an audio engineer, and the college I graduated from has a MFA program and they do this sort of thing all the time. Check it out:
http://mtsu.edu/~record/
"Cincinnasty...You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious"
First off, in the US, a national government instituted heath care system would be unconstitutional. In other words, it's not allowed.
Secondly, government is the LEAST efficient way of doing anything with the exception of maybe defense.
Third, the high cost of health care is BECAUSE of excessive government regulation. It takes over 10 years and billions of dollars to bring a single drug to market due to the FDA (which by the way is also unconstitutional).
Fourth, we are NOT Europe, and damn proud of it!
So to recap - the free market will provide the best solution in most cases, and government is the cause, not the solution, to most problems.
Personally, if it were me, I would invest my wealth in technology. Technology and innovation usually pays back to society an order of magnitude, or more, over time. Look at the money invested by the likes of Edison and Westinghouse and Bell over the turn of the last century. Also look at the return dollar for dollar spent on things like the Apollo program.
The only humanitarian type of place I would spend my money however might be on meritorious/aptitude scholarships. I don't believe on giving anyone anything without some sort of effort/meet-me-part-way on their end, as that tends to enable poor choices and unproductive behavior. It's the old fish vs teach to fish quip.
I've been trying to figure out how to get into one of those clam-shells for years.... And I am not talking about the plastic kind!
These are the best pics of legos 'in action' I've ever seen:
http://drew.corrupt.net/bp/series1.html
Freakin hilarious - seriously, who has the time to set these up and take these pics?!
In modern commercial aviation pilots do only usually fly for about 15 minutes or so (takeoff and landing), and the rest of the time they are doing visual checks, instrument checks, and nav checks.
As far as a telemetry network in which you describe, NASA is already working on this:
http://sats.nasa.gov/
You'll pay for it one way or another. Granted that by being a laggard in the market you'll be paying for less of it than your fellow customers, but businesses exist to make a profit, and ALL costs are passed along to their customers.
"An Inconsistent Truth"
Legislation doesn't work in this case!
The only solution is a free-market solution. Better filtering, blacklisting, etc etc. The free market will sovle the problem eventually because unless we turn the ENTIRE WORLD into a police state, there is really no way to stamp it out.
Suprise suprise - cable and telcos do NOT operate in the free market! They are almost always local government granted monopolies. In fact the free market does a very good job of regulating itself and most monopolies that exist in the free market are short lived. This sort of nonsense is a result of the free market, it's the result of an UNFREE market!
..those that travel for business. Those that like to take extended vacations. Those that are in the military and deployed to Iraq. I can think of millions of people who this service could be marketed to.
... is because it isn't cool to make fun of nerds anymore!
To quote Billy Madison: "if peeing in your pants is cool, then I'm Miles Davis"
Close.... studies have been done, even some by NASA, and the best small "teams" are composed of 7 individuals. Even the Boy Scouts follow this in the way they structure their organization.