Just considering the personal information that could be stored on those machines and possibly accessed by someone with the intent of ID theft. It should have been a month for each machine compromised.
There has to be a little responsibility placed on the people that decide to expand their families without taking into consideration the financial impact. When I was single, young, and without a house, I happily lived on less than 30k per year. I didn't really want for anything, well except for an Italian sports car.
If I paid cash for my healthcare last year, it would be less than $1000($840 is the actual number). Who lost?? At what age does your argument have bearing?
Damn good response! I agree with everything until you get to 4.1. The change from *1 is a personal preference. The bump to *2 is definitely personal preference(and subject to political diatribe). The step to *3 is absolutely a decision that is made by more than *1. Maybe they should worry about dealing with *2. You go to *4.1 without placing responsibility on the people who caused it to bump from *1 (or *2).
I have to say it again... Thank you for providing an intelligent response to my comment!
Plugging the other factors in, you get 22600 for the socialist example, and 22400 for the capitalist example.
Even if your math were correct, these tax figures are not. In any case, please check your work next time. There are advantages and disadvantages to both systems, and if the USA system were less poorly/greedily administered the numbers could be notably better for its citizens, at almost any income level.
Sorry for offending you with my math, I agree that I should check it next time. Please elaborate on your other factors that adjust the numbers in your favor. Based on just the tax numbers that you continued to use there is still a $4.8k savings.
I did use Logo. Maybe my problem is that I was never exposed to the procedural capabilities because my teacher took the easy route and did the bare minimum.
What do you define as rich? 150k? what about the guy that makes 149k?
If you're talking about how much someone earns, they're almost certainly not rich. The problem with capitalism is in the name: it's all about the amount of capital that you control. In a capitalist society, you can gain income from two sources: from performing valuable work and from simply controlling capital. Worse, the income that you can gain from performing work is largely capped (there's only a finite amount of work you can do), whereas the income from controlling capital can grow as fast as you accumulate capital and after a certain point becomes self-sustaining (i.e. your income from capital exceeds your expenditure, so you continue to accumulate wealth without doing any work).
I have no problem with rewarding people for doing useful things, or even not-so-useful popular things. The problem is rewarding people simply because they are already wealthy.
What is the problem with someone manipulating their capital to continue to grow wealth??? I would think that everyone should aspire to do that. Maybe I am wrong and people should just expect the shit sammich they get from birth.
yes, but they take home less than 1/3 their normal salary as the average tax rate is 31%. Lets put this in perspective;
1. (your view)
a. $40000 income
b. 31% tax rate (-13.3k)
c. Healthcare charge (Your number) -5.0k
d. Take home $21700 2. (A more conservative approach)
a. $40000 income
b. 19% tax rate (-$2.2k)
c. Healthcare charge (Your Number) -10k
d. Take home $27800
In the end there is $6100 in savings to do it yourself. Yes I understand that we have to support those who can't support themselves, but holy carp... I can do better myself
Capitalism can definitely cause wounds but there are greater problems to these countries then just that. No matter the economic model, assholes will always be assholes.
Capitalism causes wounds? What wounds? Describe your personal experience with the wounds caused by "capitalism"
Not say, a proven scientific theory with decades of incredibly complex research to back it up as a model of how wealth flows and is generated.
A theory on how wealth flows - interesting. It's an interesting theory - wealth flows up - the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. The rich fuck the poor and middle class to get richer. The rich got rich by lieing and cheating. Hard work? Everyone works hard! To get rich you have to fuck thy neighbor - up the ass.
Is Capitalism evil? Yes. Is it the worst system on Earth? No.
It's the best economic system we bald apes have. Which is fucking pathetic. After all these centuries, Capitalism is the best we can come up with?
We humans are stupid.
What do you define as rich? 150k? what about the guy that makes 149k? Capitalism is not evil by itself. It needs people to beg for its products and demand its products before it becomes evil. How do you get rich by fscking thy neighbor? what is the process? how did it get to the point where they were fscked?
Not everyone works hard. There are a lot of people that are happy getting by. The problem you describe with capitalism is simple... People hate it because they have to work to acquire wealth. Give me one bad thing about capitalism without going into some political rant. Pick a point, lets discuss.
Please re-read my post. I said that I support the use of LOGO up to 6th grade. I think that the mental process required to step through a specific procedure is met well by the application. I think it sucks because personally I would have preferred pascal quite a bit earlier. LOGO forces a step by step approach to everything without a consideration for code reuse. I do think that there needs to be an early exposure to thinking that way.
What amount of money you spend on education?? The education budget is cut every year, to make room for more war and keep the tax breaks for the rich. And the higher education is just vastly overpriced.
If you think that War is what the money is spent on, you are confused. Tax breaks for the rich? What do you consider rich? what is middle class?.... Anyway, I do agree that higher education is vastly overpriced. What do you suggest we do about it? Lets start by cutting the professors salaries. I am sure that is where the majority of tuition goes?
Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the USA is waaay down on the list of how much education you actually get and on the price/performance ratio.
Now I feel like I should say something good about US education, and how you can easily turn it around since you have the abilities... But I honestly can't think how... I just hope it gets better for you guys. I really do.
I bet it is at the bottom or close. You say that we have the abilities, but offer no options as to how to turn this around. Normally I would be offended and say that you are just trolling, but deep down I agree with you. We do have the ability, everyone does. There is just nobody driving the car at the moment.
We did... Well at least in Maryland. We worked with Pascal from 8th grade on if we wanted. I did four years of the high school level computer science and spent two of them tutoring other students.
While I agree with the idea you present, I have to say that there is nothing wrong with teaching someone to address a problem step by step. The need to learn how to handle the turtle, before they can understand how to handle exceptions.
Really what they need is work with something like LOGO through 4th grade, basic through 6th, Pascal to 8th, and c++ until they graduate. It should be mandatory for all. Worst case scenario is you have a guy in his garage building a machine that builds a rake to give to the machine he programmed to clean up leaves. It could be worse.
No matter what, LOGO sucks but it is better than having every high school student wishing he wrote Angry Birds (Wheres the TM), while flipping burgers. It cant hurt!
I don't think it is interesting that he says he believes in global warming. He is saying exactly what I hope most people believe. It is getting warmer, and while we cannot quantify the impact of humans we MUST make efforts to ensure that we not only look at the environmental impact, but that we also consider the economic impacts of our actions.
I see three sides to this argument. We have 1. We are entirely responsible for the climate, and we are causing this planet to turn into a fiery inferno. 2. What is Global Warming? Are you serious? Get real. 3. Lets not take any chances, and do everything within reason to ensure that we don't cause #1.
Which ones are extreme?
The political response to each would be 1. We must convert to renewable energy today, to hell with the consequences. 2. Who cares. 3. Lets fund research into effects of global warming and attempt to become as efficient as possible.
I saw a lot of #3 from Romney, and a touch of #1 from Obama. This leaves me torn, as I feel that we should be moving aggressively to improve our efficiency but I also understand that blindly throwing money at a problem without understanding it is ludicrous.
I have seen a lot of back and forth on the merits of each argument and I still cannot find a solution. The reason for this is us.
It comes down to one simple thing that you can see everyday in the real world and on internet discussions. We have lost the ability to tolerate any opinion that is not like ours. Instead of engaging in a rational debate, we make offhanded comments or find the first internet source that sides with us and abandon discussion. We decide that one issue is so important to us that we will vote for the first candidate that shares that view. That is why we ended up with a two party system. Each side grabbed the issues they thought that they could bundle into an attractive package for the typical voter. Both of them are wrong because they each believe that it is their responsibility to manipulate every aspect of our lives.
If people spent more time talking about why they feel the way they do and less time trying to convince the other that they are an idiot for not agreeing with them, we would definitely be in a better place. The OWS group and the Tea Party people are both correct. That middle ground is what we failed to achieve because we refused to listen.
Mod me Flambait, Troll, Off-Topic, or whatever. Do as you please, but give me the courtesy of explaining your position. Why don't we grow as a civilization instead of climb over each other.
But with advances in modern science and my high level income, it's not crazy to think I can live to be 245, maybe 300. Heck, I just read in the newspaper that they put a pig heart in some guy from Russia. Do you know what that means?
How many people would just sign the waiver to give their kids whatever they want. Why should the seller be held liable. They were not marketing their product to children.
Slashdot Mirror
Just considering the personal information that could be stored on those machines and possibly accessed by someone with the intent of ID theft. It should have been a month for each machine compromised.
There has to be a little responsibility placed on the people that decide to expand their families without taking into consideration the financial impact. When I was single, young, and without a house, I happily lived on less than 30k per year. I didn't really want for anything, well except for an Italian sports car.
Why is listening to unencrypted WiFi any different than overhearing someone shout in public?
If I paid cash for my healthcare last year, it would be less than $1000($840 is the actual number). Who lost?? At what age does your argument have bearing?
Damn good response! I agree with everything until you get to 4.1. The change from *1 is a personal preference. The bump to *2 is definitely personal preference(and subject to political diatribe). The step to *3 is absolutely a decision that is made by more than *1. Maybe they should worry about dealing with *2. You go to *4.1 without placing responsibility on the people who caused it to bump from *1 (or *2).
I have to say it again... Thank you for providing an intelligent response to my comment!
Thanks for not even replying to my question.
yes, the math was screwed, sorry it was late and I was tired. Make a point please.
Math fail.
40000*.31=12400
40000*.19=7600
Plugging the other factors in, you get 22600 for the socialist example, and 22400 for the capitalist example.
Even if your math were correct, these tax figures are not. In any case, please check your work next time. There are advantages and disadvantages to both systems, and if the USA system were less poorly/greedily administered the numbers could be notably better for its citizens, at almost any income level.
Sorry for offending you with my math, I agree that I should check it next time. Please elaborate on your other factors that adjust the numbers in your favor. Based on just the tax numbers that you continued to use there is still a $4.8k savings.
Please site an example!!!
I did use Logo. Maybe my problem is that I was never exposed to the procedural capabilities because my teacher took the easy route and did the bare minimum.
What do you define as rich? 150k? what about the guy that makes 149k?
If you're talking about how much someone earns, they're almost certainly not rich. The problem with capitalism is in the name: it's all about the amount of capital that you control. In a capitalist society, you can gain income from two sources: from performing valuable work and from simply controlling capital. Worse, the income that you can gain from performing work is largely capped (there's only a finite amount of work you can do), whereas the income from controlling capital can grow as fast as you accumulate capital and after a certain point becomes self-sustaining (i.e. your income from capital exceeds your expenditure, so you continue to accumulate wealth without doing any work).
I have no problem with rewarding people for doing useful things, or even not-so-useful popular things. The problem is rewarding people simply because they are already wealthy.
What is the problem with someone manipulating their capital to continue to grow wealth??? I would think that everyone should aspire to do that. Maybe I am wrong and people should just expect the shit sammich they get from birth.
Where is the break that defines your minority?
yes, but they take home less than 1/3 their normal salary as the average tax rate is 31%. Lets put this in perspective;
1. (your view)
a. $40000 income
b. 31% tax rate (-13.3k)
c. Healthcare charge (Your number) -5.0k
d. Take home $21700
2. (A more conservative approach)
a. $40000 income
b. 19% tax rate (-$2.2k)
c. Healthcare charge (Your Number) -10k
d. Take home $27800
In the end there is $6100 in savings to do it yourself. Yes I understand that we have to support those who can't support themselves, but holy carp... I can do better myself
anyway, excluding the AC. I have one Question and I beg a simple, one line response. Who are the payees in the healthcare systems you describe?
Holy CARP! Nobody said it wad bad... Geebus!
Capitalism can definitely cause wounds but there are greater problems to these countries then just that. No matter the economic model, assholes will always be assholes.
Capitalism causes wounds? What wounds? Describe your personal experience with the wounds caused by "capitalism"
Not say, a proven scientific theory with decades of incredibly complex research to back it up as a model of how wealth flows and is generated.
A theory on how wealth flows - interesting. It's an interesting theory - wealth flows up - the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. The rich fuck the poor and middle class to get richer. The rich got rich by lieing and cheating. Hard work? Everyone works hard! To get rich you have to fuck thy neighbor - up the ass.
Is Capitalism evil? Yes. Is it the worst system on Earth? No.
It's the best economic system we bald apes have. Which is fucking pathetic. After all these centuries, Capitalism is the best we can come up with?
We humans are stupid.
What do you define as rich? 150k? what about the guy that makes 149k? Capitalism is not evil by itself. It needs people to beg for its products and demand its products before it becomes evil. How do you get rich by fscking thy neighbor? what is the process? how did it get to the point where they were fscked?
Not everyone works hard. There are a lot of people that are happy getting by. The problem you describe with capitalism is simple... People hate it because they have to work to acquire wealth. Give me one bad thing about capitalism without going into some political rant. Pick a point, lets discuss.
Please re-read my post. I said that I support the use of LOGO up to 6th grade. I think that the mental process required to step through a specific procedure is met well by the application. I think it sucks because personally I would have preferred pascal quite a bit earlier. LOGO forces a step by step approach to everything without a consideration for code reuse. I do think that there needs to be an early exposure to thinking that way.
Charity is the only product of government(when you get it)
What amount of money you spend on education??
The education budget is cut every year, to make room for more war and keep the tax breaks for the rich.
And the higher education is just vastly overpriced.
If you think that War is what the money is spent on, you are confused. Tax breaks for the rich? What do you consider rich? what is middle class?.... Anyway, I do agree that higher education is vastly overpriced. What do you suggest we do about it? Lets start by cutting the professors salaries. I am sure that is where the majority of tuition goes?
Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the USA is waaay down on the list of how much education you actually get and on the price/performance ratio.
Now I feel like I should say something good about US education, and how you can easily turn it around since you have the abilities... But I honestly can't think how... I just hope it gets better for you guys. I really do.
I bet it is at the bottom or close. You say that we have the abilities, but offer no options as to how to turn this around. Normally I would be offended and say that you are just trolling, but deep down I agree with you. We do have the ability, everyone does. There is just nobody driving the car at the moment.
We did... Well at least in Maryland. We worked with Pascal from 8th grade on if we wanted. I did four years of the high school level computer science and spent two of them tutoring other students.
While I agree with the idea you present, I have to say that there is nothing wrong with teaching someone to address a problem step by step. The need to learn how to handle the turtle, before they can understand how to handle exceptions.
Really what they need is work with something like LOGO through 4th grade, basic through 6th, Pascal to 8th, and c++ until they graduate. It should be mandatory for all. Worst case scenario is you have a guy in his garage building a machine that builds a rake to give to the machine he programmed to clean up leaves. It could be worse.
No matter what, LOGO sucks but it is better than having every high school student wishing he wrote Angry Birds (Wheres the TM), while flipping burgers. It cant hurt!
I don't think it is interesting that he says he believes in global warming. He is saying exactly what I hope most people believe. It is getting warmer, and while we cannot quantify the impact of humans we MUST make efforts to ensure that we not only look at the environmental impact, but that we also consider the economic impacts of our actions.
I see three sides to this argument. We have
1. We are entirely responsible for the climate, and we are causing this planet to turn into a fiery inferno.
2. What is Global Warming? Are you serious? Get real.
3. Lets not take any chances, and do everything within reason to ensure that we don't cause #1.
Which ones are extreme?
The political response to each would be
1. We must convert to renewable energy today, to hell with the consequences.
2. Who cares.
3. Lets fund research into effects of global warming and attempt to become as efficient as possible.
I saw a lot of #3 from Romney, and a touch of #1 from Obama. This leaves me torn, as I feel that we should be moving aggressively to improve our efficiency but I also understand that blindly throwing money at a problem without understanding it is ludicrous.
I have seen a lot of back and forth on the merits of each argument and I still cannot find a solution. The reason for this is us.
It comes down to one simple thing that you can see everyday in the real world and on internet discussions. We have lost the ability to tolerate any opinion that is not like ours. Instead of engaging in a rational debate, we make offhanded comments or find the first internet source that sides with us and abandon discussion. We decide that one issue is so important to us that we will vote for the first candidate that shares that view. That is why we ended up with a two party system. Each side grabbed the issues they thought that they could bundle into an attractive package for the typical voter. Both of them are wrong because they each believe that it is their responsibility to manipulate every aspect of our lives.
If people spent more time talking about why they feel the way they do and less time trying to convince the other that they are an idiot for not agreeing with them, we would definitely be in a better place. The OWS group and the Tea Party people are both correct. That middle ground is what we failed to achieve because we refused to listen.
Mod me Flambait, Troll, Off-Topic, or whatever. Do as you please, but give me the courtesy of explaining your position. Why don't we grow as a civilization instead of climb over each other.
But with advances in modern science and my high level income, it's not crazy to think I can live to be 245, maybe 300. Heck, I just read in the newspaper that they put a pig heart in some guy from Russia. Do you know what that means?
How many people would just sign the waiver to give their kids whatever they want. Why should the seller be held liable. They were not marketing their product to children.