Anyone else have some regrets about going to college? Maybe the bullies and dropouts outsmarted the rest of us. My teachers always told us that college is practically the sole path to success. I bought into it for better or worse.
I am a college student in Florida. I feel both optimistic and pessimistic simulataneously. I am studying Electrical Engineering, and hope to make 45-50k upon graduation. Good money, no doubt about it. But had I spent the last 3 years getting experience in real estate, I could be making 45 by now, and who knows what in the next few years! Meaning I have to make up 60k in lost potetial to make sure my engineering career is "worth it". Not to mention the stress engineering students have to go through (25 hours a week of studying, about 80 a week when lots of tests come). Plus, I don't get the satisfaction of working for myself or the benefits of private practice (such as tax writeoffs)
Unfortunately, I will never be rich if my sole source of income is as an EE. Unfortunately, if I decide to get into a more entrepreneurial occupation after graduation (which is what my parents want me to do) I have lost 4 years of my life. All that is not including the debt I'll rack up while getting this degree!
Moreover after graduation, I will likely be salaried meaning you get no overtime and whats more, less time to pursue money making ventures (fixing up houses, becoming a landlord, starting a side business etc)
Fortunately, I am still young. Fortunately, I live in a country of opportunity where I can still build wealth and use my degree as a jump start. Fortunately, I have more of a guarantee making a good salary in an ee occupation than going it alone.
Who would think that being optimistic and pessimistic at the same time was even possible!
Spoiler space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Okay, you know how the kid announces to all of zion that the war is over? I think a better ending would have been for him to go there but have everyone dead...except for 23 people; 16 women and 7 men. That way it would be clear that humanity will be enslaved forever, because this Neo made a different choice than his predecessors and they still ended up with the same result. It also would bring more power to the statement by the Merovingian that choice is an illusion between people with power and people without it. It would have been extremely dark and definitive but still would have left people scratching their heads. Fwiw I enjoyed the movie:) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . spoiler ended
Spoiler space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Okay, you know how the kid announces to all of zion that the war is over? I think a better ending would have been for him to go there but have everyone dead...except for 23 people; 16 women and 7 men. That way it would be clear that humanity will be enslaved forever, because this Neo made a different choice than his predecessors and they still ended up with the same result. The Merovingian said that choice is an illusion between people with power and people without it. It would have been extremely dark and definitive but still would have left people scratching their heads. Fwiw I enjoyed the movie:) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . spoiler ended
Is that option always available though? I tried it a few times on some distro (although it could have been AIX) and I remember hitting tab with no luck (great feature though!)
Sweden and Norway watches, by and large, the same programming as Americans. I am not sure about Germany (though did see Friends there). China? The average person isn't educated at all (don't forget, it is a big ass country, it isn't just hong kong and beijing it is mostly rural!)
Reagan passed his first tax cut in 1982, so why are we talking about 1980? Income tax revenues fell.8% in 1983 and rose 8.5% in 1984. The second tax cut took effect in 1986 and that year income tax revenues rose 5.3 %, compared to 9.2% the year before and 13.3% the year after.
Why are we talking about 88-90? I just got that data by itself.
Historically, tax revenues have gone up an average of 11% in the years from 1969 to 1997, so we need to judge the Reagan years versus history The truth is, when Reagan cut taxes, revenues were less than they should have been. There is no refuting this basic and simple fact.
Are you sure that it is 11% per year or 11% over those 38 years? Can you find proof that revenues were less during Reagan's administration?
Judging the Reagan tax cut years (1982 - 1989) by history, we find that revenues increased about 7% a year, 4% less than the historical avaerage. So there was no tidal wave of money from these tax cuts. There was less money in the till than there should have been.
Since everything I have heard is to the contrary, I need to see some facts. However, I will be glad to admit that I am wrong provided I can get some strong proof:)
I resent that. If I am wrong, then you can say "That is inaccurate" or "That is wrong". You imply that I know the truth and continued to say something that is untrue.
Revenue went down after both Reagan tax cuts. It's amazing that idealogues will tell this lie over and over again and people will believe it, when it's trivial to go to the IRS web site and check for yourself.
A little bit of googling gives me this:
>Under Reagan, marginal tax rates were cut from
>a top of 70% to 28%. Revenues (from all taxes)
>to the U.S. Treasury nearly doubled. >According.to the Budget of the U.S. >Government, FY 1997, Office of >Management.and.Budget. Revenues increased >from roughly $500 billion in 1980 to $1.1 >trillion in 1990.
I couldn't find that stats on irs.gov, but I am busy right now
Reagan tried "trickle down" economics. It didn't work. And I expect him to help create jobs by stablizing the economy, rather than by spending billions of dollars looking for weapons of mass destruction.
Actually it did work. Reagan said that if you cut taxes across the board (which includes tax cuts for wealthy people) you would increase revenue. The next year, revenue almost doubled. With the new found money the government went on a spending binge and the "extra money" dried up.
It definitely works as long as you are to the right of the laffer curve peak:)
Devils Advocate: Of course there is nothing stopping you from putting linux on the xbox. Microsoft is just clamping down when you connect to their servers.
Devils Advocate: How do you know you haven't been compensated for that stipulation? Maybe it would cost 500 per unit if they allowed you to run whatever the hell you want on it.
But when a large segment of the public is going to be comparing $12.98 with the $0.00 filesharing price, I have to wonder if it will have any effect at all.
I wonder what the artists think of this? This price reduction has to impact their bottom line...
Economics does not exist in a bubble! Isn't it possible that the reduced price will sell more cds? With the new sales, it actually generates more revenue? If you sold CDs for a million dollars, do you think you would get more money or less than 16?
That is why tax cuts often stimulate government revenue
This is simply not true. Corporations and the very rich, followed closely by people near the poverty line, pay a tiny slice of the tax paid in this country. The majority of taxes are paid by the "middle" class, the 35-75k range.
Umm...no, that is simply not true. The rich pay disproportionately more (which while intellectually unfair, as a matter of practicality must be done)
The problem is that it would make you gleefully happy to think that there are people swimming in money paying next to nothing in taxes and still getting big tax breaks. However, the tax cuts only help if you pay a lot in taxes making that tired hackneyed argument fall apart.
The problem is that we need, NEED, to encourage young people to invest. Too bad that economics in high school (or at least in mine) won't even get over what valuation techniques to use...
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone else have some regrets about going to college? Maybe the bullies and dropouts outsmarted the rest of us. My teachers always told us that college is practically the sole path to success. I bought into it for better or worse.
I am a college student in Florida. I feel both optimistic and pessimistic simulataneously. I am studying Electrical Engineering, and hope to make 45-50k upon graduation. Good money, no doubt about it. But had I spent the last 3 years getting experience in real estate, I could be making 45 by now, and who knows what in the next few years! Meaning I have to make up 60k in lost potetial to make sure my engineering career is "worth it". Not to mention the stress engineering students have to go through (25 hours a week of studying, about 80 a week when lots of tests come). Plus, I don't get the satisfaction of working for myself or the benefits of private practice (such as tax writeoffs)
Unfortunately, I will never be rich if my sole source of income is as an EE. Unfortunately, if I decide to get into a more entrepreneurial occupation after graduation (which is what my parents want me to do) I have lost 4 years of my life. All that is not including the debt I'll rack up while getting this degree!
Moreover after graduation, I will likely be salaried meaning you get no overtime and whats more, less time to pursue money making ventures (fixing up houses, becoming a landlord, starting a side business etc)
Fortunately, I am still young. Fortunately, I live in a country of opportunity where I can still build wealth and use my degree as a jump start. Fortunately, I have more of a guarantee making a good salary in an ee occupation than going it alone.
Who would think that being optimistic and pessimistic at the same time was even possible!
--Joey
Starbucks and Panera Bread are going to announce a similar venture next week.
--Joey
Spoiler space
. :)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Okay, you know how the kid announces to all of zion that the war is over? I think a better ending would have been for him to go there but have everyone dead...except for 23 people; 16 women and 7 men. That way it would be clear that humanity will be enslaved forever, because this Neo made a different choice than his predecessors and they still ended up with the same result. It also would bring more power to the statement by the Merovingian that choice is an illusion between people with power and people without it. It would have been extremely dark and definitive but still would have left people scratching their heads. Fwiw I enjoyed the movie
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
spoiler ended
Spoiler space
. :)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Okay, you know how the kid announces to all of zion that the war is over? I think a better ending would have been for him to go there but have everyone dead...except for 23 people; 16 women and 7 men. That way it would be clear that humanity will be enslaved forever, because this Neo made a different choice than his predecessors and they still ended up with the same result. The Merovingian said that choice is an illusion between people with power and people without it. It would have been extremely dark and definitive but still would have left people scratching their heads. Fwiw I enjoyed the movie
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
spoiler ended
Wow that was alot better than the previous RIAA model of
1. Bully 12 year girls
2. ????
3. Profit!!!
my working guess was "2. short own stock while bad publicity stacks up"
--Joey
But what if you are a leprachaun?
Is that option always available though? I tried it a few times on some distro (although it could have been AIX) and I remember hitting tab with no luck (great feature though!)
--Joey
Sweden and Norway watches, by and large, the same programming as Americans. I am not sure about Germany (though did see Friends there). China? The average person isn't educated at all (don't forget, it is a big ass country, it isn't just hong kong and beijing it is mostly rural!)
--Joey
Reagan passed his first tax cut in 1982, so why are we talking about 1980? Income tax revenues fell .8% in 1983 and rose 8.5% in 1984. The second tax cut took effect in 1986 and that year income tax revenues rose 5.3 %, compared to 9.2% the year before and 13.3% the year after.
:)
Why are we talking about 88-90? I just got that data by itself.
Historically, tax revenues have gone up an average of 11% in the years from 1969 to 1997, so we need to judge the Reagan years versus history The truth is, when Reagan cut taxes, revenues were less than they should have been. There is no refuting this basic and simple fact.
Are you sure that it is 11% per year or 11% over those 38 years? Can you find proof that revenues were less during Reagan's administration?
Judging the Reagan tax cut years (1982 - 1989) by history, we find that revenues increased about 7% a year, 4% less than the historical avaerage. So there was no tidal wave of money from these tax cuts. There was less money in the till than there should have been.
Since everything I have heard is to the contrary, I need to see some facts. However, I will be glad to admit that I am wrong provided I can get some strong proof
--Joey
This is a lie.
.to the Budget of the U.S. .and .Budget. Revenues increased
I resent that. If I am wrong, then you can say "That is inaccurate" or "That is wrong". You imply that I know the truth and continued to say something that is untrue.
Revenue went down after both Reagan tax cuts. It's amazing that idealogues will tell this lie over and over again and people will believe it, when it's trivial to go to the IRS web site and check for yourself.
A little bit of googling gives me this:
>Under Reagan, marginal tax rates were cut from
>a top of 70% to 28%. Revenues (from all taxes)
>to the U.S. Treasury nearly doubled.
>According
>Government, FY 1997, Office of
>Management
>from roughly $500 billion in 1980 to $1.1
>trillion in 1990.
I couldn't find that stats on irs.gov, but I am busy right now
Reagan tried "trickle down" economics. It didn't work. And I expect him to help create jobs by stablizing the economy, rather than by spending billions of dollars looking for weapons of mass destruction.
:)
Actually it did work. Reagan said that if you cut taxes across the board (which includes tax cuts for wealthy people) you would increase revenue. The next year, revenue almost doubled. With the new found money the government went on a spending binge and the "extra money" dried up.
It definitely works as long as you are to the right of the laffer curve peak
--Joey
Worthless to other sites maybe...
--Joey
UHDV is so clear its sickening!
What the hell were they watching anyway?
--Joey
But you miss the beer commericials!
Great Taste
Less Filling
GREAT TASTE!!!
LESS FILLING!!!
and the breasts go bouncing, b-eautiful
Seriously, skipping commercials is not always great!
--Joe
Trust me you don't want to know anything about the way food is prepared in restaurants!
--Joey
Redundant? That was a joke!
Jesus H Christ III
--Joey
Devils Advocate: Of course there is nothing stopping you from putting linux on the xbox. Microsoft is just clamping down when you connect to their servers.
--Joey
Devils Advocate: How do you know you haven't been compensated for that stipulation? Maybe it would cost 500 per unit if they allowed you to run whatever the hell you want on it.
--Joey
FNU? GNU/Linux advocates are really just gun nuts!
And that's the end of that chapter!
--Joey
Anthem - Less than Jake
Save My Soul - Big Bad Voodoo Daddy
Jackknife to a Swan - Mighty Mighty Bosstones
And those are just the CDs I have purchased in the last year!
--Joey
I didn't rtfa but...
1. Will the screen savers have ads?
2. How intrusive will the ads be? Eg will there be popups
3. Will the ads be relevent to providing linux solutions
4. Is Mandrake still committed to the Open/Free Software business model?
Thanks,
Joey
It is actually "MOO"
Yeah, it's like a cow's opinion. It just doesn't matter. It's moo.
But when a large segment of the public is going to be comparing $12.98 with the $0.00 filesharing price, I have to wonder if it will have any effect at all.
I wonder what the artists think of this? This price reduction has to impact their bottom line...
Economics does not exist in a bubble! Isn't it possible that the reduced price will sell more cds? With the new sales, it actually generates more revenue? If you sold CDs for a million dollars, do you think you would get more money or less than 16?
That is why tax cuts often stimulate government revenue
--Joey
This is simply not true. Corporations and the very rich, followed closely by people near the poverty line, pay a tiny slice of the tax paid in this country. The majority of taxes are paid by the "middle" class, the 35-75k range.
Umm...no, that is simply not true. The rich pay disproportionately more (which while intellectually unfair, as a matter of practicality must be done)
The problem is that it would make you gleefully happy to think that there are people swimming in money paying next to nothing in taxes and still getting big tax breaks. However, the tax cuts only help if you pay a lot in taxes making that tired hackneyed argument fall apart.
The problem is that we need, NEED, to encourage young people to invest. Too bad that economics in high school (or at least in mine) won't even get over what valuation techniques to use...
http://www.taxfoundation.org/prtopincome.html
--Joey
Hehe "whilst"
You brits are alright
--Joey