I assume you are joking? They are investigating criminal activities (rather ineffectively, apparently, but still investigating), so of course they are not going to state every action they take publicly.
Please go try and buy an Amazon eBook in the iOS Kindle App. Oh, you can't? That's my point. Apple has removed any chance Amazon can make money through the app. I'm talking useful to the company, which means revenue producing. Duh.
In the end, yes, it is competing with Apple that is the problem. Basically any business with a margin = 30% (which is almost any content business like music, movies, books, etc) can't have a useful app on iOS.
Apple knows very well that this prevents any other pay video or music service from effectively competing (in terms of new transactions) on their devices. Will be interesting to see how much more dominant Apple gets in the smartphone/tablet space, because if they take too much of the market they will be running up against some clear anti-trust issues...
Not only, that, he managed to take a relatively fun and trivially simple thing (pouring a beer from a tap) and turn it into an absurdly complex and yet totally ineffective process (not only was it all foam, but he had to turn on the tap ANYWAY).
That's an idiotic statement. Social mobility may be at a low post WWII, but that's about it. Part of remembering history is understanding that it repeats itself. I'm sure there was a tool in 1933 who sounded just like you.
Maybe you could ask your local government body if they'd waive your property taxes in exchange for an agreement that if your home was ever on fire, or your property invaded, robbed, etc, that they would ignore it completely and let you fend for yourself.
Though I do agree at least property taxes based on an arbitrary valuation often with little correlation to real value are an imperfect way to pay for these critical services... shouldn't cost twice as much for fire and police service just because your house is in a certain neighborhood of a city...
A big ball of flame dissipating from 1000' is a lot better than a big ball of flame exploding on the ground, or IN a building. If the planes crashing into the World Trade Towers had exploded (and therefore released most of the fuel that caused the superstructure to melt) even 100' before they reached the buildings they'd still be standing today.
It entirely depends on the context (country/cultural conventions, type of restaurant, quality of service, etc). Anyway, it's a false analogy, and anyone could just as easily come up with other false analogies to support the position.
Is it morally ok to count cards in your head when playing blackjack in a casino, or bluff your opponent when playing poker? Or even, is it morally ok for the employees of a corporation pay more taxes (and thus reduce income) than necessary when the primary goal of a corporation is to maximize return for it's shareholders? Go ahead and debate these, but it's irrelevant because they aren't what we are talking about.
The context for income tax payment is that the government has enacted literally thousands of laws explaining how you should calculate your taxes, and really left it up to the taxpayer to figure out how to sort though that giant pile of crap to pay exactly what is legally required. No more, no less, and I don't see how morality enters into it.
Short term capital gains (stocks held less than one year) are taxed at normal income tax rates. Long term capital gains are dependent upon a business being viable, and are truly an investment. The distinction is valid.
No it's not valid, since - short or long - it STILL has little to do with a company's net income. Short term even LESS so than long. The rate is irrelevant to the point. And capital gains don't require a stock to go up in the first place, as in a short sale. That can still be long term if you already held the shares you shorted and used them to cover after 12 months.
There is the further factor that the government is continually making the dollar worth less. $1 spent on something in 1970 might sell for $10 now. You'd owe taxes on the $9 capital gain, even when the actual value of the item (and the dollars exchanged) was the same or less.
Inflation is equally irrelevant to the OP (did you read it? It claimed that individual capital gains from stock sold was already taxed as corporate income, which is patently incorrect). Besides, understanding inflation is a part of investing, if you didn't cover it in your gains you didn't invest well...
Bullshit. The government is still determined by the voters, all that's necessary is to somehow motivate enough people to kick out the incumbents who are such a big part of the machine.
The tea party actually did a surprisingly good job of this in the last election. If only they weren't mostly a bunch of reactionary, undereducated crackpots.
That's the standard deduction. It's woefully inadequate unless you live in a tiny shared rental or your parents' basement and eat Taco Bell every day (which, actually, might be more than a few on/.) but that's the idea.
At least it makes sense that it's the same for everyone - you are welcome to live at more than the level of a semi-homeless person, but don't expect a tax break for it (until you are wealthy enough to live off of your capital gains, at least - then expect huge breaks).
If you want, you can waive your mortgage interest deduction or pay your full tax rate on your capital gains. But why would you do that when you don't have to and no one else is?
It's absolutely morally OK to do anything in your legal power to minimize your taxes. Just as it should be a moral imperative for lawmakers to stop caving to the corporate lobbyists and FIX those loopholes. If it's legal, it's not cheating (which should be self evident from the word CHEATING). So change the rules!
Apple hasn't paid dividends on any of their massive profits so far (though that is changing in the future). Even when they will, it will be a TINY fraction of their net income.
And capital gains taxes on investments has little to do with the profit of a company. Plenty of companies don't make a profit and their stock still goes up (since stock price reflects expected value, not current value). And you can make money selling a stock short when it goes down, which has even less to do with the company's profits (or at best is inversely proportional). In the end it's little more than gambling, and should be taxed as such (ie. normal income rates).
A loving parent is not going to coddle their child which is why we are not given all of the answers and why we are not always protected from all dangers.
Please find one decent parent who, having the capability to prevent their children's death, would not do so in a heartbeat. Anything less is practically negligent child abuse.
Idon't see it replacing the experience and uniqueness of every restaurant that is out there.
Of course not, you fucking twit (as long as we're being cordial!).
But if you think the sum of Panera + Boulanger + Aqui + Chipotle is more "variety" than a single *good* restaurant, you probably live off of fast food and consider "variety" not as "variety of cuisine" (ie. unique restaurants of different specialties and cultures) but as how many combinations of cold cuts you can put on bread.
"I want all games to be completely open ended, unscripted, nearly unlimited in scope, with perfect physics, and human-level intelligence to all NPCs; everything you done to simplify any of those is a cliche."
Pretty sure it's not hard to start a restaurant that beats a bunch of mega-chain sandwich shops and burrito joints. And seriously, you consider the above options "variety"? You need to seriously expand your lunch selection.
Jeez, even the Google cafeteria has 10x the "variety" of those places, and Apple passed Google in absurd cash flow a while ago...
What does that even mean? If God is omnipotent, why does he need the glory? And why does he seems to need everyone to love him? If this dude is real, he has one serious inferiority complex.
Don't worry, finding an in depth article about astrobiology on *Network World* is even less likely than finding extraterrestrials on Mars.
Even better is that the submitter *works* for Network World - either he doesn't understand his own site's paywall, or it's one of the worst slashvertisements in a while...
Yep. It's pretty clear the electoral system needs to be tossed in favor of a real democratic system if there are ever to be more than 2 relevant parties in the US. Hell, even with a 2 party system the electoral college became obsolete once the vote was opened up to all citizens (rather than just wealthy male landowners) and votes could be tallied in minutes rather than months...
Slashdot Mirror
I assume you are joking? They are investigating criminal activities (rather ineffectively, apparently, but still investigating), so of course they are not going to state every action they take publicly.
Please go try and buy an Amazon eBook in the iOS Kindle App. Oh, you can't? That's my point. Apple has removed any chance Amazon can make money through the app. I'm talking useful to the company, which means revenue producing. Duh.
In the end, yes, it is competing with Apple that is the problem. Basically any business with a margin = 30% (which is almost any content business like music, movies, books, etc) can't have a useful app on iOS.
Apple knows very well that this prevents any other pay video or music service from effectively competing (in terms of new transactions) on their devices. Will be interesting to see how much more dominant Apple gets in the smartphone/tablet space, because if they take too much of the market they will be running up against some clear anti-trust issues...
Not only, that, he managed to take a relatively fun and trivially simple thing (pouring a beer from a tap) and turn it into an absurdly complex and yet totally ineffective process (not only was it all foam, but he had to turn on the tap ANYWAY).
social mobility in the US is at an all time low
That's an idiotic statement. Social mobility may be at a low post WWII, but that's about it. Part of remembering history is understanding that it repeats itself. I'm sure there was a tool in 1933 who sounded just like you.
Not when the target is a building and the one big piece is basically one giant bomb.
Maybe you could ask your local government body if they'd waive your property taxes in exchange for an agreement that if your home was ever on fire, or your property invaded, robbed, etc, that they would ignore it completely and let you fend for yourself.
Though I do agree at least property taxes based on an arbitrary valuation often with little correlation to real value are an imperfect way to pay for these critical services... shouldn't cost twice as much for fire and police service just because your house is in a certain neighborhood of a city...
A big ball of flame dissipating from 1000' is a lot better than a big ball of flame exploding on the ground, or IN a building. If the planes crashing into the World Trade Towers had exploded (and therefore released most of the fuel that caused the superstructure to melt) even 100' before they reached the buildings they'd still be standing today.
It entirely depends on the context (country/cultural conventions, type of restaurant, quality of service, etc). Anyway, it's a false analogy, and anyone could just as easily come up with other false analogies to support the position.
Is it morally ok to count cards in your head when playing blackjack in a casino, or bluff your opponent when playing poker? Or even, is it morally ok for the employees of a corporation pay more taxes (and thus reduce income) than necessary when the primary goal of a corporation is to maximize return for it's shareholders? Go ahead and debate these, but it's irrelevant because they aren't what we are talking about.
The context for income tax payment is that the government has enacted literally thousands of laws explaining how you should calculate your taxes, and really left it up to the taxpayer to figure out how to sort though that giant pile of crap to pay exactly what is legally required. No more, no less, and I don't see how morality enters into it.
Short term capital gains (stocks held less than one year) are taxed at normal income tax rates. Long term capital gains are dependent upon a business being viable, and are truly an investment. The distinction is valid.
No it's not valid, since - short or long - it STILL has little to do with a company's net income. Short term even LESS so than long. The rate is irrelevant to the point. And capital gains don't require a stock to go up in the first place, as in a short sale. That can still be long term if you already held the shares you shorted and used them to cover after 12 months.
There is the further factor that the government is continually making the dollar worth less. $1 spent on something in 1970 might sell for $10 now. You'd owe taxes on the $9 capital gain, even when the actual value of the item (and the dollars exchanged) was the same or less.
Inflation is equally irrelevant to the OP (did you read it? It claimed that individual capital gains from stock sold was already taxed as corporate income, which is patently incorrect). Besides, understanding inflation is a part of investing, if you didn't cover it in your gains you didn't invest well...
Bullshit. The government is still determined by the voters, all that's necessary is to somehow motivate enough people to kick out the incumbents who are such a big part of the machine.
The tea party actually did a surprisingly good job of this in the last election. If only they weren't mostly a bunch of reactionary, undereducated crackpots.
That's the standard deduction. It's woefully inadequate unless you live in a tiny shared rental or your parents' basement and eat Taco Bell every day (which, actually, might be more than a few on /.) but that's the idea.
At least it makes sense that it's the same for everyone - you are welcome to live at more than the level of a semi-homeless person, but don't expect a tax break for it (until you are wealthy enough to live off of your capital gains, at least - then expect huge breaks).
Not really. It's your income minus expenses (deductions) which is your *net income* ie. profit.
If you want, you can waive your mortgage interest deduction or pay your full tax rate on your capital gains. But why would you do that when you don't have to and no one else is?
It's absolutely morally OK to do anything in your legal power to minimize your taxes. Just as it should be a moral imperative for lawmakers to stop caving to the corporate lobbyists and FIX those loopholes. If it's legal, it's not cheating (which should be self evident from the word CHEATING). So change the rules!
Apple hasn't paid dividends on any of their massive profits so far (though that is changing in the future). Even when they will, it will be a TINY fraction of their net income.
And capital gains taxes on investments has little to do with the profit of a company. Plenty of companies don't make a profit and their stock still goes up (since stock price reflects expected value, not current value). And you can make money selling a stock short when it goes down, which has even less to do with the company's profits (or at best is inversely proportional). In the end it's little more than gambling, and should be taxed as such (ie. normal income rates).
A loving parent is not going to coddle their child which is why we are not given all of the answers and why we are not always protected from all dangers.
Please find one decent parent who, having the capability to prevent their children's death, would not do so in a heartbeat. Anything less is practically negligent child abuse.
Idon't see it replacing the experience and uniqueness of every restaurant that is out there.
Of course not, you fucking twit (as long as we're being cordial!).
But if you think the sum of Panera + Boulanger + Aqui + Chipotle is more "variety" than a single *good* restaurant, you probably live off of fast food and consider "variety" not as "variety of cuisine" (ie. unique restaurants of different specialties and cultures) but as how many combinations of cold cuts you can put on bread.
"I want all games to be completely open ended, unscripted, nearly unlimited in scope, with perfect physics, and human-level intelligence to all NPCs; everything you done to simplify any of those is a cliche."
Pretty sure it's not hard to start a restaurant that beats a bunch of mega-chain sandwich shops and burrito joints. And seriously, you consider the above options "variety"? You need to seriously expand your lunch selection.
Jeez, even the Google cafeteria has 10x the "variety" of those places, and Apple passed Google in absurd cash flow a while ago...
Given that the universe is made for God's glory
What does that even mean? If God is omnipotent, why does he need the glory? And why does he seems to need everyone to love him? If this dude is real, he has one serious inferiority complex.
Don't worry, finding an in depth article about astrobiology on *Network World* is even less likely than finding extraterrestrials on Mars.
Even better is that the submitter *works* for Network World - either he doesn't understand his own site's paywall, or it's one of the worst slashvertisements in a while...
Aren't they usually a liquid at body temperature? Going to make for some really squishy lambs...
If you have Google+ there is no limit to images and short videos stored. Not sure if you have to upload them via Google+ though?
Any career is a dead end... eventually...
Yep. It's pretty clear the electoral system needs to be tossed in favor of a real democratic system if there are ever to be more than 2 relevant parties in the US. Hell, even with a 2 party system the electoral college became obsolete once the vote was opened up to all citizens (rather than just wealthy male landowners) and votes could be tallied in minutes rather than months...