A true observation, but it might not correlate the way you imply.
If you were a Republican, could you see yourself thinking, "Oh, I can openly post my pro-Republican views without fear of getting modded down on slashdot!"
Or, "Nobody would key my car for having a Palin bumper sticker!"
Btw, getting labeled as a Republican is very bad for business in the SW development business. It's bit me hard twice.
Apologies for contributing to the overuse of the word "correlate".
Wow. Thanks for the time to put together that response. Although I largely disagree with you, I learned a couple interesting things.
You are certainly right about the government expanding. This is a trend that I see pretty much across the board for all nations for the last several hundred years. Even where Europeans are decrying austerity measures (i.e. decreased spending) none of their governments are spending any less on any year than the previous year. In other words: they are expanding also!
But while governments expand, economic growth has declined. The greatest periods of economic growth (e.g. in the US) were during periods where the country had far less regulation than it has today. Regulation (such as breaking up standard oil into smaller corporations that *increased* profits for stakeholders) has not had the macro effect on the economy or the immediate effect it has been historically intended to address. If you look at France as a nation state with high taxes/regulation, note that it hasn't had a new company enter it's top grossing companies/corporations in the last 30 years. That means that if you risk your neck on providing something people want so badly they will pay money for it... you will fail in France. And so no one tries, innovation stagnates, and the economy struggles to stay where it is.
While on the subject of Time Warner: the internet has flourished after being set up and relinquished by the government/military. Net neutrality may be a government-imposed improvement, but at this point it looks like a big high five for Game of Throne pirates (maybe I read the \. comments too much if that's my perception). The fire department is often seen as a sweet-spot where a little government spending can significant returns on small investments... but now this premise is being undermined by Democrats who consider "doing more with less" as a whistle for a "race to the bottom". We could cherry pick examples for some time, but if I had to choose between a private sector resource like the internet vs. a public sector resource like fire protection I would choose internet. My privately funded home-owners insurance will build me a new house. The fire department will not build me a new house.
Your sentiment about no one really caring about scaling down the size of the government is largely true, and some of it is tied to political/voter aversion: see Barry Goldwater. But there is also a voter appetite for it: see US 2014 elections, Raegan administration, etc. Another obstacle is small-government politicians changing their opinion when they get into office. This goes clear back to Jefferson who campaigned on a nation of small farmers but doubled the size of the country without going through Congress. And now we have a president who is writing immigration policy without Congress either after saying he didn't have the authority to do so.
Anyway, thanks for lending your perspective. Your examples / data points are food for thought.
If you have a seed people are going to want (more than say RoundUpReady or whatever is patented, etc) you're going to have to do some genetic modifications either through breeding or more direct/exotic methods.
But as soon as it starts working or having value the FDA will start asking for records about what you started with, unusual behavior, how much revenue you are making, what your prayers are like, and which political organizations you are affiliated with. Their buddies in the EPA, IRS will soon see you as their punching bag or, worse yet, their pocket book.
The US economy is transitioning from a semi-centralized, semi-free market approach to more of a guild approach where producers are disallowed from reducing prices or finding new improvements.
We might be 2 or 3 wave elections away from seeing any changes here.
But higher profile content is more likely to hit the filters (politically correct, liability, defamation, ideology, etc) even if the market value is higher for readers.
Slashdot Mirror
Doesn't this suggest things fall apart?
If so, is the court system going to censor this due to the establishment clause?
Because I heard somewhere criticism of evolution is basically forcing someone into religion.
I don't think you realize how much your posture is damaging your cause.
... people stop listening.
When people see "the experts" insisting, pushing, fighting, and demonizing that they understand what ordinary people don't
The articles are peer reviewed so dissenting voices are kept out. See climategate.
The hockey stick graph has been thoroughly discredited.
Global temperatures have been dropping more than they've been increasing.
Yeah ... per capita / GDP is not a good benchmark.
A true observation, but it might not correlate the way you imply.
If you were a Republican, could you see yourself thinking, "Oh, I can openly post my pro-Republican views without fear of getting modded down on slashdot!"
Or, "Nobody would key my car for having a Palin bumper sticker!"
Btw, getting labeled as a Republican is very bad for business in the SW development business. It's bit me hard twice.
Apologies for contributing to the overuse of the word "correlate".
Does anyone else see the template here?
...
GOP nominee [insert name here] is the stupidest person who has ever represented the party.
Even Maureen Dowd's Republican brother won't vote for him.
9 out of 10 psychologists think [insert name here] has mental health issues -just by looking at his grammar!
And these same psychologists made this determination before they even finished their breakfasts!
Consequential publications (such as Rolling Stone magazine) have taken the unprecedented step of endorsing the Democrat!
Nothing new under the sun, folks
I'm glad the opposition thinks of the GOP as a sick joke after it has overtaken Congress.
Please continue to write them off.
Wow. Thanks for the time to put together that response. Although I largely disagree with you, I learned a couple interesting things.
... you will fail in France. And so no one tries, innovation stagnates, and the economy struggles to stay where it is.
... but now this premise is being undermined by Democrats who consider "doing more with less" as a whistle for a "race to the bottom". We could cherry pick examples for some time, but if I had to choose between a private sector resource like the internet vs. a public sector resource like fire protection I would choose internet. My privately funded home-owners insurance will build me a new house. The fire department will not build me a new house.
You are certainly right about the government expanding. This is a trend that I see pretty much across the board for all nations for the last several hundred years. Even where Europeans are decrying austerity measures (i.e. decreased spending) none of their governments are spending any less on any year than the previous year. In other words: they are expanding also!
But while governments expand, economic growth has declined. The greatest periods of economic growth (e.g. in the US) were during periods where the country had far less regulation than it has today. Regulation (such as breaking up standard oil into smaller corporations that *increased* profits for stakeholders) has not had the macro effect on the economy or the immediate effect it has been historically intended to address. If you look at France as a nation state with high taxes/regulation, note that it hasn't had a new company enter it's top grossing companies/corporations in the last 30 years. That means that if you risk your neck on providing something people want so badly they will pay money for it
While on the subject of Time Warner: the internet has flourished after being set up and relinquished by the government/military. Net neutrality may be a government-imposed improvement, but at this point it looks like a big high five for Game of Throne pirates (maybe I read the \. comments too much if that's my perception). The fire department is often seen as a sweet-spot where a little government spending can significant returns on small investments
Your sentiment about no one really caring about scaling down the size of the government is largely true, and some of it is tied to political/voter aversion: see Barry Goldwater. But there is also a voter appetite for it: see US 2014 elections, Raegan administration, etc. Another obstacle is small-government politicians changing their opinion when they get into office. This goes clear back to Jefferson who campaigned on a nation of small farmers but doubled the size of the country without going through Congress. And now we have a president who is writing immigration policy without Congress either after saying he didn't have the authority to do so.
Anyway, thanks for lending your perspective. Your examples / data points are food for thought.
As Wittgenstein (a very liberal guy) noted: reality is a personal construct.
The happy man lives in a different universe than the unhappy man. Etc.
Harry Reid wants you to know only a straight majority matters now.
... As he hands over the majority leader status.
Considering that only 42% or so of Americans believe global warming is real, I'm not sure why Cruz is getting labeled a "skeptic".
Or do the opinions of ordinary people count for nothing?
The double standard is that if I were a windows washer I wouldn't have to compete against foreign labor.
But since I'm a web engineer I have to compete against foreignors because of government rules.
Is this post equating talking with God as schezophrenia or does the guy really have schizophrenia?
Trying to steer clear of pre-masticated/cynical news.
I can say "no" to Time Warner.
I can't say "no" to the IRS.
The more entities propose space programs, the further anyone gets from getting anywhere ... including the moon.
If you have a seed people are going to want (more than say RoundUpReady or whatever is patented, etc) you're going to have to do some genetic modifications either through breeding or more direct/exotic methods.
But as soon as it starts working or having value the FDA will start asking for records about what you started with, unusual behavior, how much revenue you are making, what your prayers are like, and which political organizations you are affiliated with. Their buddies in the EPA, IRS will soon see you as their punching bag or, worse yet, their pocket book.
The US economy is transitioning from a semi-centralized, semi-free market approach to more of a guild approach where producers are disallowed from reducing prices or finding new improvements.
We might be 2 or 3 wave elections away from seeing any changes here.
How do you find out who "that guy" is?
You just don't understand the subject / object distinction.
They produced a budget. It just wasn't one that Harry and Barack agreed with.
The media can make anyone seem competent.
A lot of journalist praised Obama because of the way he appeared on the cover of magazines.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/30/...
Sure that would be better.
But higher profile content is more likely to hit the filters (politically correct, liability, defamation, ideology, etc) even if the market value is higher for readers.
Remember how the EPA decided to "crucify" certain entities so everyone would fall in line?
In other words make a big display of someone's pain to scare people into submission.
And what is the qualitative difference between that and terrorism?
It's post like this that show how valuable it can be to have a comments section attached to a story.
Thanks !
When did the IRS ever flag democrats for audit for being democrats as an explicit policy?
When did the IRS ever grant carte blanche tax-emempt status to republican groups?
What? If you put $10k in your bank account, the bank doesn't take it. The IRS does.
There's a difference.