Well, to play the devil's advocate, terrorism in India is a much more realistic threat than terrorism in the US is (a democracy surrounded by Pakistan, an Islamic dictatorship and China, an aggressive communist state).
Not that that gives the government the right to do what they are trying to do, but just that do not attribute to malice what can be attributed to idiocy, or desperation.
Just last week, there were several bomb blasts that killed over 80 people and injured hundreds more.
I don't necessarily think they are trying to fight modern technology, as much as try to prevent the bad guys from using it to their benefit. I do not necessarily agree with the way they are going about it, but I can certainly see where they are coming from.
Unlike the US where the state seems to use one incident as the bugaboo for massive invasion of privacy, countries like India and Israel face terrorism on a daily basis, and for them, this is a real, hard problem that needs to be addressed.
This is also a debate that has been going on for a long time, and it is too early to make a call.
I had a Dell Inspiron, and the brand new one had its keys pop off. So, I called and complained to Dell and in about 3 days, I had a new keyboard with instructions on replacing it.
Now, Dell isn't exactly great quality (speaking of which, the older Dells that I've owned, the Latitude in particular, are much more robust). However, my customer service experience has simply been great.
Now, I love IBM notebooks (even Lenova-made ones aren't too bad) because of the quality of manufacture. That said, I have found Dell's customer service (as an individual customer) to be quite good.
If you're wearing a tie that costs enough to warrant criminal damage, you're an asshole.
Eh? Some of us have to wear formal clothes for business (and to be fair, enjoy them even).
So yes, I do own several ties that are quite expensive by my standard (maybe not criminally so, but expensive nevertheless). The same goes for shoes, cuff links, jackets, suits and the like.
Not everyone dresses up (or enjoys dressing in) casual clothes.
Re:No, it is the age of the farmer and miner
on
The Rise of Geekdom
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Where did I ever say "Dumb frat guys"? If anything, I don't think that geeks (or geekdom) is any special.
I wasn't particularly talking about oil, but in terms of fortune in general. Oil, tech and manufacturing company execs have background in those industries. News at 11.
That, however, does not necessarily translate across all industries. Secondly, a background in engineering means nothing. My undergrad was in EE. I'm a management consultant working on completely unrelated stuff. Your point?
Re:No, it is the age of the farmer and miner
on
The Rise of Geekdom
·
· Score: 1
Neither.
The PE guys and the sales and marketing guys are the ones making a fortune.
When was the last time you heard of a person with a tech background leading a non-technology company?
Operations, sales or marketing folks have always been on top of the food chain. Of course, finance and legal geeks make money in their own way, but look at CEOs of most companies and you'll see what I mean.
They've created a new definition of what it means to be cool, a definition that leaves out the talents of the jocks, the M.B.A.-types and the less educated...There are now millions of educated-class types guided by geek manners and status rules.
Except for the fact that a lot of geeks today end up going to B-school anyway and are geeks who understand business.
As I see it, geekdom has matured, where a lot of people realize the value of someone who can understand and speak to technology, business, management and finance.
Secondly, being a geek does not necessarily mean that you don't enjoy sports, or be an "MBA type". I'm a geek with an engineering background who loves technology. I build gadgets from MAKE, love my Lego Mindstorms, write code for fun and enjoy keeping up on technology.
However, I'm definitely a "suit type" (considering that I am a management consultant), and would definitely love to go to B-school at some point. I also enjoy playing sports, staying fit and working out.
Yes, geekdom has arrived - but it has arrived the same way finance geeks were accepted as being "cool" a few generations ago.
Exactly. There are so many things that you could do.
Me, I'd grab the latest issue of MAKE and build cool stuff. Or maybe something with my Lego Mindstorms. Leave work early and go climbing everyday. Spend more time with the woman. Go for dance lessons.
Seriously, time is at such a premium that if I had nothing to do, I'd probably just sit there and enjoy the fact that I have nothing to do.
There are some things where throwing technology is fun. A lot of fun. And there are other things where people should just learn to understand the root cause and fix the issue at heart. A new fancy alarm isn't going to magically make you punctual. Learning to be punctual is going to make you punctual.
Likewise, using technology isn't going to make finding things better. If anything, it encourages bad habits (i.e. not being organized) and makes it harder down the line when you may not always have the said technology at your disposal. You wanting to find things and being organized about it is going to make finding things better. Technology or not.
I'm all for using technology in new and innovative ways. But that doesn't necessarily mean that when I see bad habits, I don't call them out as such. You can use technology to solve the symptoms, but the cause will still remain (and if anything, get worse over time).
He's free to do as he pleases. However, I'd still say that being well organized is a great trait to have, and one that will definitely show through in just about everything else that you do in life.
Has anyone have any suggestions for this amateur 'Google Home'?
How about being more organized? A place for everything and everything in its place has worked pretty darn well for me.
Teach it to your family, and maybe they'll also understand the value of ensuring that things stay organized and can be easily found. Beats the hell out of throwing technology at a problem, don't you think?
The day I can install Ubuntu (or any flavor of Linux), without having to worry about spending half a week configuring it, or the day I can send a client a presentation, spreadsheet or document without sacrificing features (and without having to explain) will be the day I think it is ready for desktop.
Today, Open Office is simply not there. For example, Calc is great for regular, day-to-day uses, but try opening a spreadsheet with data running into several megs or more of data, and try performing complex operations. It's so slow that it's terrible. And writing complex macros? No sir.
I mean, try using Powerpoint 2007 and compare it with Impress - trying to get something done is extremely non-intuitive (if it supports it at all) and there is no fine grained control. I would shudder to think about presenting something made in Impress to a client. It's a joke.
The realistic scenario is that if I send a doc from OO.org to a client, sometimes s/he has problems opening it, and sometimes when they send me documents, OO.org has problems opening them.
And then, there are other applications that aren't available for Linux. Everything from iTunes to Lego Mindstorms SDK is available only on Windows. Hell, even Google doesn't make its applications available on Linux. I mean, to me it is a question of convenience. Until such time that I can get these applications without having to jump through hoops, Linux is still not ready for the desktop.
See, right now electricity is not any less expensive. If anything, when you factor in the inconvenience, it works out to be much cheaper to just use gas. I'd certainly love to drive a hybrid, but not necessarily an electric car (well, unless it's the Tesla, but hey I could get an Elise for cheaper).
Secondly, folks pay a lot more for gas in Europe than they do in the US. Agreed, some of it is higher taxes, but even factoring that in, it is still a lot lower in the US. So, while the price of gas may be quite high, it is still a lot lower than in a lot of places in the developed world.
Nice hyperbole. Let's see - if the price of gas goes up, inflation goes up. As a result, cost of living goes up, and so does everything. At which point, either compensations will match the cost of living, or we'll all be living on the street. So, yeah.
That said, I doubt you can have a hybrid or battery driven airplane - not without sufficient advancement in lightweight battery tech anyway. You'd probably add enough weight to offset the gains of using a battery.
Besides, it needs to be economical. I'm not about to start using a battery operated car until such time that my electric bills and convenience equal that of gas. Until then, dead dinos it is.
At my previous company, we were part of an R&D lab, so most folks had PhDs or graduate degrees in one form or another.
Anyway, every once in a while people would leave physics equations in the comments section of checked in code or documents. Once late at night, I was working on an architecture document that needed some major changes. So, I left a comment along the lines of, "Architecture changes complete. $change 1. $change 2. $change 3 etc. Also did $foobar, $foobar, $foobar. Also discovered warp drive. Space too little."
Anyway, the VP was a theoretical physicist who basically updated the document just to have a funny quip on Minkowski space in there etc. The whole thread continued between folks forever.
I mean, work was good but these comments made the work interesting, and adds character to the folks working on stuff.
Reservations are based for people belonging to the "lower castes" to supposedly make up for discriminations in the past. As a result, if you are born into one of the "upper castes", it becomes harder for you to compete for a limited number of positions (educational institutions, government jobs etc).
Worse yet, this reservation is not based on financial status, so while you may be a poor Brahmin, you will still be treated as an upper caste and fight the quota. On the other hand, you could be a rich Dalit and yet breeze through the quota system. For instance, in some states, as much as 70% of all college admissions are exclusively for lower caste people, while only 30% of seats are available for the upper castes -- immaterial of percentages. This is made worse by the fact that immaterial of how educated or how financially well off you are, a lower caste person can score lesser than an upper caste person and yet get through the system (I am not even making this up -- a regular pass percentage may be 45% for everyone else, while 35% for a lower caste person, immaterial of their status, giving an unfair advantage).
If anything, it is a system where the upper caste is being systematically disadvantaged.
If you are born to the lower caste families, you will never achieve in Indian society, regardless of how much skill and effort.
Now, perhaps discrimination did happen a long, long time ago - these days, while communities are more particular about preserving their culture and beliefs, there is no particular discrimination per se. It may happen in some lone village by some lone group of idiots, but hey, that happens just about everywhere.
If anything, the governmental policy is almost geared to be a "revenge" against the upper caste for their supposed actions in the past. A very enlightened act by a government whose citizens are supposedly created equal.
Which is why I laugh every time someone says that India is a democracy that will one day challenge the US, the west etc. It is making good progress, no doubt, but internally, that country is a mess. And it is made worse by illiteracy, corruption, greed and mean-mindedness of communities who cannot think past their prejudices.
Worse yet, the politicians are seeking to impose this system of quota and affirmative action to the private sector, as well. If anything, the Indian politicians have perfected the subtle science and exact art of racial and ethnic discrimination.
The upper castes of yesteryears are at the receiving end today, and they are being made to pay for faults of their ancestors.
Yes, but they also have a lot of bureaucracy and a system that is not necessarily geared to encourage the brightest.
Secondly, the best and the brightest do not stay behind and come to the US or go to other western countries instead, often because of an educational system that is so heavily biased through reservations (similar to affirmative action).
Finally, those that do stay behind are better off in the private sector, rather than the extremely corrupt public sector where bribes and nepotism are the order of the day. Or perhaps academia.
So, no, doing well in the IT sector has been a function of being in the right place at the right time (and speaking the right language and having a currency that is a fraction of the US dollar). This is not to say that there isn't technology talent in India -- but rather that like the rest of the world, there is good, bad and ugly. Only, given that there are a billion people, lots of people in each category.
Eh? I like how you make conclusions based on my statements and accuse me of being crazy.
I think that things should happen the way I want them to with the money that I pay for taxes.
Now, if I am disproportionately taxed, then I can certainly demand that my needs are met. If someone making less than me is taxed less than I am (and I am speaking percentages, not actual sums of money), then why shouldn't I have additional privileges for the fact that the government effectively exploits my earnings?
Your grocery store analogy is flawed simply because neither one of you is under any obligation. But in my case, money changes hands. I pay taxes. Money. Earnings. All of which I earned the hard way. So, I demand services in return, which is the purpose of a government. Hey, the government is being run like a business. So, as a paying customer, I am demanding service. Now if you were a vegetarian who was paying the grocer a monthly sum without choice, and if the grocer kept stocking only meat, you have every right to demand that s/he stock vegetables. Refusing to stock vegetables because the majority eat meat is a lousy excuse.
Most people don't climb mountains and feel that there should be a premium charged to those who want services in relation to their hobby of climbing high peaks. Deal with it or move to Nepal.
And most people don't pay as much in taxes as I do. So, you're saying that I could be taxed for services that I don't use, but I shouldn't demand any additional services even when I'm being taxed heavily?
Just so you know, exploitation of the minority can take many forms. And because it doesn't fit into some predetermined profile that you have in mind does not mean that it's not exploitation when it happens. Attitudes like yours are in all entirety responsible.
Capitalism my ass. The US is about as capitalist as China.
Why should I as a tax payer, have to foot the bill for some idiot who went on a hike and got lost... or who skied off somewhere and got buried in an avalanche he started?
Because that person, like you, pays taxes. And maybe they do not use all the facilities that they pay taxes for, and would rather that their taxes go towards such things as S&R.
It's far out, I know, but some of us actually would rather have good S&R than loads of other things that our taxes go toward.
If you are taxing me to pay for services, and if you are billing me for those services, what the hell?
And I get taxed a lot - a helluva lot. To give you an example, in my line of work, bonuses are common. My this year's bonus was taxed at over 50%. On top of the insanely high taxes that I pay on my salary and other perks. Now, I put in crazy hours (80-100 hour weeks) and I *earned* that money, not to have the state take it away. But whatever.
Here's the kicker, though. I spend maybe 1 or 2 days a week in my state, and I spend the rest of the time traveling.
And the one hobby that I really enjoy is mountaineering and rock climbing. Now, if I got lost or whatever, I still have to pay out of my pocket for the services rendered.
Now why is that? I pay more in taxes than most people. I hardly ever use the services that's provided. And those services that I *really* want aren't free. So why the fuck are you taxing me goddammit? And folks want even more taxes. How about taxing people based on what they need, rather than screwing over those of us who bleed our earnings to the state? I swear, the tax system in the US is a piece of crap. And the way benefits are handled? Not even proportional.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, to play the devil's advocate, terrorism in India is a much more realistic threat than terrorism in the US is (a democracy surrounded by Pakistan, an Islamic dictatorship and China, an aggressive communist state).
Not that that gives the government the right to do what they are trying to do, but just that do not attribute to malice what can be attributed to idiocy, or desperation.
Just last week, there were several bomb blasts that killed over 80 people and injured hundreds more.
I don't necessarily think they are trying to fight modern technology, as much as try to prevent the bad guys from using it to their benefit. I do not necessarily agree with the way they are going about it, but I can certainly see where they are coming from.
Unlike the US where the state seems to use one incident as the bugaboo for massive invasion of privacy, countries like India and Israel face terrorism on a daily basis, and for them, this is a real, hard problem that needs to be addressed.
This is also a debate that has been going on for a long time, and it is too early to make a call.
Democracy is bad enough in itself - if it got any purer, the mediocrity will be a little too overpowering.
You mean, like the Ballmer peak?
My experience was the exact opposite.
I had a Dell Inspiron, and the brand new one had its keys pop off. So, I called and complained to Dell and in about 3 days, I had a new keyboard with instructions on replacing it.
Now, Dell isn't exactly great quality (speaking of which, the older Dells that I've owned, the Latitude in particular, are much more robust). However, my customer service experience has simply been great.
Now, I love IBM notebooks (even Lenova-made ones aren't too bad) because of the quality of manufacture. That said, I have found Dell's customer service (as an individual customer) to be quite good.
So yes, I do own several ties that are quite expensive by my standard (maybe not criminally so, but expensive nevertheless). The same goes for shoes, cuff links, jackets, suits and the like.
Not everyone dresses up (or enjoys dressing in) casual clothes.
Where did I ever say "Dumb frat guys"? If anything, I don't think that geeks (or geekdom) is any special.
I wasn't particularly talking about oil, but in terms of fortune in general. Oil, tech and manufacturing company execs have background in those industries. News at 11.
That, however, does not necessarily translate across all industries. Secondly, a background in engineering means nothing. My undergrad was in EE. I'm a management consultant working on completely unrelated stuff. Your point?
Neither.
The PE guys and the sales and marketing guys are the ones making a fortune.
When was the last time you heard of a person with a tech background leading a non-technology company?
Operations, sales or marketing folks have always been on top of the food chain. Of course, finance and legal geeks make money in their own way, but look at CEOs of most companies and you'll see what I mean.
As I see it, geekdom has matured, where a lot of people realize the value of someone who can understand and speak to technology, business, management and finance.
Secondly, being a geek does not necessarily mean that you don't enjoy sports, or be an "MBA type". I'm a geek with an engineering background who loves technology. I build gadgets from MAKE, love my Lego Mindstorms, write code for fun and enjoy keeping up on technology.
However, I'm definitely a "suit type" (considering that I am a management consultant), and would definitely love to go to B-school at some point. I also enjoy playing sports, staying fit and working out.
Yes, geekdom has arrived - but it has arrived the same way finance geeks were accepted as being "cool" a few generations ago.
Exactly. There are so many things that you could do.
Me, I'd grab the latest issue of MAKE and build cool stuff. Or maybe something with my Lego Mindstorms. Leave work early and go climbing everyday. Spend more time with the woman. Go for dance lessons.
Seriously, time is at such a premium that if I had nothing to do, I'd probably just sit there and enjoy the fact that I have nothing to do.
There are some things where throwing technology is fun. A lot of fun. And there are other things where people should just learn to understand the root cause and fix the issue at heart. A new fancy alarm isn't going to magically make you punctual. Learning to be punctual is going to make you punctual.
Likewise, using technology isn't going to make finding things better. If anything, it encourages bad habits (i.e. not being organized) and makes it harder down the line when you may not always have the said technology at your disposal. You wanting to find things and being organized about it is going to make finding things better. Technology or not.
I'm all for using technology in new and innovative ways. But that doesn't necessarily mean that when I see bad habits, I don't call them out as such. You can use technology to solve the symptoms, but the cause will still remain (and if anything, get worse over time).
He's free to do as he pleases. However, I'd still say that being well organized is a great trait to have, and one that will definitely show through in just about everything else that you do in life.
Teach it to your family, and maybe they'll also understand the value of ensuring that things stay organized and can be easily found. Beats the hell out of throwing technology at a problem, don't you think?
The day I can install Ubuntu (or any flavor of Linux), without having to worry about spending half a week configuring it, or the day I can send a client a presentation, spreadsheet or document without sacrificing features (and without having to explain) will be the day I think it is ready for desktop.
Today, Open Office is simply not there. For example, Calc is great for regular, day-to-day uses, but try opening a spreadsheet with data running into several megs or more of data, and try performing complex operations. It's so slow that it's terrible. And writing complex macros? No sir.
I mean, try using Powerpoint 2007 and compare it with Impress - trying to get something done is extremely non-intuitive (if it supports it at all) and there is no fine grained control. I would shudder to think about presenting something made in Impress to a client. It's a joke.
The realistic scenario is that if I send a doc from OO.org to a client, sometimes s/he has problems opening it, and sometimes when they send me documents, OO.org has problems opening them.
And then, there are other applications that aren't available for Linux. Everything from iTunes to Lego Mindstorms SDK is available only on Windows. Hell, even Google doesn't make its applications available on Linux. I mean, to me it is a question of convenience. Until such time that I can get these applications without having to jump through hoops, Linux is still not ready for the desktop.
Interestingly enough, I find a Backslash article on the front page right about now.
Maybe the editors *do* read our comments, after all! =)
Craigslist, eBay, garage sales etc.
Eh?
See, right now electricity is not any less expensive. If anything, when you factor in the inconvenience, it works out to be much cheaper to just use gas. I'd certainly love to drive a hybrid, but not necessarily an electric car (well, unless it's the Tesla, but hey I could get an Elise for cheaper).
Secondly, folks pay a lot more for gas in Europe than they do in the US. Agreed, some of it is higher taxes, but even factoring that in, it is still a lot lower in the US. So, while the price of gas may be quite high, it is still a lot lower than in a lot of places in the developed world.
Thirdly, I think that the current speculation on gas prices is a bubble. I'm not alone in that assessment.
>At what point would you forgo food to buy gas?
Nice hyperbole. Let's see - if the price of gas goes up, inflation goes up. As a result, cost of living goes up, and so does everything. At which point, either compensations will match the cost of living, or we'll all be living on the street. So, yeah.
Good one! :)
That said, I doubt you can have a hybrid or battery driven airplane - not without sufficient advancement in lightweight battery tech anyway. You'd probably add enough weight to offset the gains of using a battery.
Besides, it needs to be economical. I'm not about to start using a battery operated car until such time that my electric bills and convenience equal that of gas. Until then, dead dinos it is.
Tell me about it!
I travel 4 days a week, and hell, all I need is my Blackberry, laptop and my noise cancelling headphones, and I am a happy camper.
And besides, I could be anywhere - airport, restaurant or home, so who cares if I'm sipping a beer? Can't beat the lifestyle.
And when I'm home, tracks and a tee and a beer. w00t!
At my previous company, we were part of an R&D lab, so most folks had PhDs or graduate degrees in one form or another.
Anyway, every once in a while people would leave physics equations in the comments section of checked in code or documents. Once late at night, I was working on an architecture document that needed some major changes. So, I left a comment along the lines of, "Architecture changes complete. $change 1. $change 2. $change 3 etc. Also did $foobar, $foobar, $foobar. Also discovered warp drive. Space too little."
Anyway, the VP was a theoretical physicist who basically updated the document just to have a funny quip on Minkowski space in there etc. The whole thread continued between folks forever.
I mean, work was good but these comments made the work interesting, and adds character to the folks working on stuff.
Reservations are based for people belonging to the "lower castes" to supposedly make up for discriminations in the past. As a result, if you are born into one of the "upper castes", it becomes harder for you to compete for a limited number of positions (educational institutions, government jobs etc).
Worse yet, this reservation is not based on financial status, so while you may be a poor Brahmin, you will still be treated as an upper caste and fight the quota. On the other hand, you could be a rich Dalit and yet breeze through the quota system. For instance, in some states, as much as 70% of all college admissions are exclusively for lower caste people, while only 30% of seats are available for the upper castes -- immaterial of percentages. This is made worse by the fact that immaterial of how educated or how financially well off you are, a lower caste person can score lesser than an upper caste person and yet get through the system (I am not even making this up -- a regular pass percentage may be 45% for everyone else, while 35% for a lower caste person, immaterial of their status, giving an unfair advantage).
If anything, it is a system where the upper caste is being systematically disadvantaged. It is surprising how many people seem to believe this -- if anything, today it is the exact opposite.
Now, perhaps discrimination did happen a long, long time ago - these days, while communities are more particular about preserving their culture and beliefs, there is no particular discrimination per se. It may happen in some lone village by some lone group of idiots, but hey, that happens just about everywhere.
If anything, the governmental policy is almost geared to be a "revenge" against the upper caste for their supposed actions in the past. A very enlightened act by a government whose citizens are supposedly created equal.
Which is why I laugh every time someone says that India is a democracy that will one day challenge the US, the west etc. It is making good progress, no doubt, but internally, that country is a mess. And it is made worse by illiteracy, corruption, greed and mean-mindedness of communities who cannot think past their prejudices.
Worse yet, the politicians are seeking to impose this system of quota and affirmative action to the private sector, as well. If anything, the Indian politicians have perfected the subtle science and exact art of racial and ethnic discrimination.
The upper castes of yesteryears are at the receiving end today, and they are being made to pay for faults of their ancestors.
Yes, but they also have a lot of bureaucracy and a system that is not necessarily geared to encourage the brightest.
Secondly, the best and the brightest do not stay behind and come to the US or go to other western countries instead, often because of an educational system that is so heavily biased through reservations (similar to affirmative action).
Finally, those that do stay behind are better off in the private sector, rather than the extremely corrupt public sector where bribes and nepotism are the order of the day. Or perhaps academia.
So, no, doing well in the IT sector has been a function of being in the right place at the right time (and speaking the right language and having a currency that is a fraction of the US dollar). This is not to say that there isn't technology talent in India -- but rather that like the rest of the world, there is good, bad and ugly. Only, given that there are a billion people, lots of people in each category.
I think that things should happen the way I want them to with the money that I pay for taxes.
Now, if I am disproportionately taxed, then I can certainly demand that my needs are met. If someone making less than me is taxed less than I am (and I am speaking percentages, not actual sums of money), then why shouldn't I have additional privileges for the fact that the government effectively exploits my earnings?
Your grocery store analogy is flawed simply because neither one of you is under any obligation. But in my case, money changes hands. I pay taxes. Money. Earnings. All of which I earned the hard way. So, I demand services in return, which is the purpose of a government. Hey, the government is being run like a business. So, as a paying customer, I am demanding service. Now if you were a vegetarian who was paying the grocer a monthly sum without choice, and if the grocer kept stocking only meat, you have every right to demand that s/he stock vegetables. Refusing to stock vegetables because the majority eat meat is a lousy excuse. And most people don't pay as much in taxes as I do. So, you're saying that I could be taxed for services that I don't use, but I shouldn't demand any additional services even when I'm being taxed heavily?
Just so you know, exploitation of the minority can take many forms. And because it doesn't fit into some predetermined profile that you have in mind does not mean that it's not exploitation when it happens. Attitudes like yours are in all entirety responsible.
Capitalism my ass. The US is about as capitalist as China.
You've been reading way too much Douglas Adams. :)
It's far out, I know, but some of us actually would rather have good S&R than loads of other things that our taxes go toward.
Don't tax me then.
If you are taxing me to pay for services, and if you are billing me for those services, what the hell?
And I get taxed a lot - a helluva lot. To give you an example, in my line of work, bonuses are common. My this year's bonus was taxed at over 50%. On top of the insanely high taxes that I pay on my salary and other perks. Now, I put in crazy hours (80-100 hour weeks) and I *earned* that money, not to have the state take it away. But whatever.
Here's the kicker, though. I spend maybe 1 or 2 days a week in my state, and I spend the rest of the time traveling.
And the one hobby that I really enjoy is mountaineering and rock climbing. Now, if I got lost or whatever, I still have to pay out of my pocket for the services rendered.
Now why is that? I pay more in taxes than most people. I hardly ever use the services that's provided. And those services that I *really* want aren't free. So why the fuck are you taxing me goddammit? And folks want even more taxes. How about taxing people based on what they need, rather than screwing over those of us who bleed our earnings to the state? I swear, the tax system in the US is a piece of crap. And the way benefits are handled? Not even proportional.
It also helps if you have a solid business case, of course (and if you're presentable).