Abolishing the IRS would be scary? I mean, I suppose some people might become restive on April 15th, with all that free time on their hands, but how could ANYBODY think that abolishing the IRS would be a bad thing? I mean, apart from IRS employees, who would have to find a productive job.
The problem with the war on drugs is that it is absolutely, positively, and in every way destructive. It accomplishes nothing good. When you put a drug dealer in jail, you've only created a job opening. -russ
It takes time for socialism to ruin a country, just as it takes time for capitalism to create wealth. Look at the Soviet Union. It took them 70 years to impoverish a country that started off fairly poor anyway.
Absolute counts are worthless numbers. The fact that they interest you means that your understanding of economics is shallow at best. -russ
More homeless people? There are more people in the US, so OF COURSE there are more homeless people. Did you mean per capita? If so, you should, ahem, be less illiterate. Anyway, dude, homeless in Finland is, half the year, freezing to death. -russ
Sigh. You're confusing cause and effect. People tolerate labor laws because businesses have had to bid up the cost of labor over time. Back in the 1880s, those same labor laws would simply have created unemployment.
Your level of ignorance, your failure to understand how wealth is created, how people come to prosper is simply shocking. You must have been educated in a government school.
As an example of how foolish you are being, consider what happens if everybody's wealth is doubled. Let's say that I'm poor and have a net worth of $10K. Let's say that you're rich and have a net worth of $10M. The gap between us rich and poor is $9.99M. Now let's say that BOTH of us (somehow; details don't matter for this example) double our wealth. We're both better off by two, we both have twice as much money to spend. And yet the gap between rich and poor has SKYROCKETED! It's doubled to $19.98M. Do you now understand how this is not a bad thing, but instead a good thing? Do you understand how you have been misled in your understanding of economics? I don't have the time to go through all your misconceptions, but please understand that self-interested people have lied to you, and that you should reconsider everything you have been taught. Yeah, it's that bad. -russ
To the extent that countries have a socialist component, they are poorer. The more socialism, the more poverty. And I'm not talking about poor rich people, I'm talking about poor poor people. In America, you can own a house, a car, a microwave, and two televisions, and YOU ARE CONSIDERED TO BE POOR. -russ
The trouble is that socialism doesn't work in theory, and it's proven to not work in practice. Not to mention the social justice aspect of USING VIOLENCE to COERCE resources from one party to the benefit of another. I understand that many people have no problem using violence. I happen to think that it's wrong, and pollutes any end sought. -russ
But qmail is a lot more not not open source than Microsoft is not not open source. djb has written a lot of code that he's put into the public domain. You have to pick your friends carefully (just don't pick your friends nose carefully!). -russ
Okay, okay, of course Jef Poskanzer should be nominated. He's written all sorts of cool software (including pbmplus, which I've used about every other day for the last twenty years or whatever), and has some really neato hacks on his web page, including ACME Mapper, which I also use every day. -russ
Interestingly, he used to praise the Soviet Union. I guess it was too embarrassing once socialism was proven to be a crock, so more recent editions don't have that. -russ
The trouble with this idea is that when you allow protectionism, you give companies another way to compete -- by controlling the protectionism in their favor. So instead of concentrating on creating good products at a good price, competition forces them to compete to control the government. This is a perverse incentive, and generates results EXACTLY the opposite of what you want from protectionism. -russ
Unfortunately, there are a lot of cranks with ivy league degrees in economics. However, there is a gem of science in all the pseudo-science. You have to look for it. -russ
split incentives of capitalism may result in general losses in economic value.
That's an interesting theory, but it ends up predicting that the most capitalist countries end up being the poorest countries, and the socialist countries end up being the richest. Since that's exactly the opposite of what happens, I have to conclude that your theory is not just wrong, it's completely backwards.
The economy is regulated not because of anything bad about capitalism, but instead because people don't understand that free markets work best. Intellectual error is the problem here, and only education will fix it. -russ
No, you don't understand. The companies benefit from the outsourcing *at first*. Those that do it make more money. Then other companies do it. Then some of them pass on the savings to consumers ***and they make more money***. The other companies can either allow that company to take business away from them, or they can also pass on the savings to consumers.
Do you see how this works? Initially every improvement results in extra profits. In time, those profits get competed away in a free market. That's why free markets are so wonderful. The force entrepreneurs to keep creating new improvements, and they keep the profits earned by capital down to a minimum. -russ
"Wealth spread out"? Dude, the amount of wealth in the world is approximately proportional to the number of smart, clear-thinking people. As more people become smarter, we all get wealthier.
The whole fixed-pie thinking about wealth is just completely wrong. -russ
Still does! Every McDonald's cash register uses a packet driver to talk to the server. Too bad I don't get a commission off every hamburger sale. Lemme see, a tenth of a penny, $00.001 times billions and billions sold, works out to, gee, a cool million. As if. -russ
Uhhhhhh, if I want to get my opinion out to people, I have to present it in the same forums in which advertising appears. That takes money. Restrictions on political speech are the most unconstitutional restrictions. -russ
Telling only half the truth is a lie. It's quite possible to go through Bush's public statements and find every slip of his tongue, publicize them, and then claim that he's an idiot. He's not an idiot. He's just inarticulate. -russ
Slashdot Mirror
Abolishing the IRS would be scary? I mean, I suppose some people might become restive on April 15th, with all that free time on their hands, but how could ANYBODY think that abolishing the IRS would be a bad thing? I mean, apart from IRS employees, who would have to find a productive job.
The problem with the war on drugs is that it is absolutely, positively, and in every way destructive. It accomplishes nothing good. When you put a drug dealer in jail, you've only created a job opening.
-russ
To give people a fighting chance. I mean, we allow jobs and capital to immigrate and emigrate freely. Why not people?
-russ
The market likes stability. The Fed creates instability. The market would be happier without the fed.
-russ
It takes time for socialism to ruin a country, just as it takes time for capitalism to create wealth. Look at the Soviet Union. It took them 70 years to impoverish a country that started off fairly poor anyway.
Absolute counts are worthless numbers. The fact that they interest you means that your understanding of economics is shallow at best.
-russ
More homeless people? There are more people in the US, so OF COURSE there are more homeless people. Did you mean per capita? If so, you should, ahem, be less illiterate. Anyway, dude, homeless in Finland is, half the year, freezing to death.
-russ
Sigh. You're confusing cause and effect. People tolerate labor laws because businesses have had to bid up the cost of labor over time. Back in the 1880s, those same labor laws would simply have created unemployment.
Your level of ignorance, your failure to understand how wealth is created, how people come to prosper is simply shocking. You must have been educated in a government school.
As an example of how foolish you are being, consider what happens if everybody's wealth is doubled. Let's say that I'm poor and have a net worth of $10K. Let's say that you're rich and have a net worth of $10M. The gap between us rich and poor is $9.99M. Now let's say that BOTH of us (somehow; details don't matter for this example) double our wealth. We're both better off by two, we both have twice as much money to spend. And yet the gap between rich and poor has SKYROCKETED! It's doubled to $19.98M. Do you now understand how this is not a bad thing, but instead a good thing? Do you understand how you have been misled in your understanding of economics? I don't have the time to go through all your misconceptions, but please understand that self-interested people have lied to you, and that you should reconsider everything you have been taught. Yeah, it's that bad.
-russ
To the extent that countries have a socialist component, they are poorer. The more socialism, the more poverty. And I'm not talking about poor rich people, I'm talking about poor poor people. In America, you can own a house, a car, a microwave, and two televisions, and YOU ARE CONSIDERED TO BE POOR.
-russ
The trouble is that socialism doesn't work in theory, and it's proven to not work in practice. Not to mention the social justice aspect of USING VIOLENCE to COERCE resources from one party to the benefit of another. I understand that many people have no problem using violence. I happen to think that it's wrong, and pollutes any end sought.
-russ
Why didn't the industrial revolution happen during the Roman era? Coal was readily available in Europe then.
-russ
But qmail is a lot more not not open source than Microsoft is not not open source. djb has written a lot of code that he's put into the public domain. You have to pick your friends carefully (just don't pick your friends nose carefully!).
-russ
Okay, okay, of course Jef Poskanzer should be nominated. He's written all sorts of cool software (including pbmplus, which I've used about every other day for the last twenty years or whatever), and has some really neato hacks on his web page, including ACME Mapper, which I also use every day.
-russ
Interestingly, he used to praise the Soviet Union. I guess it was too embarrassing once socialism was proven to be a crock, so more recent editions don't have that.
-russ
Socialism is wonderful in theory. Too bad it sucks so bad in reality.
-russ
The trouble with this idea is that when you allow protectionism, you give companies another way to compete -- by controlling the protectionism in their favor. So instead of concentrating on creating good products at a good price, competition forces them to compete to control the government. This is a perverse incentive, and generates results EXACTLY the opposite of what you want from protectionism.
-russ
Unfortunately, there are a lot of cranks with ivy league degrees in economics. However, there is a gem of science in all the pseudo-science. You have to look for it.
-russ
split incentives of capitalism may result in general losses in economic value.
That's an interesting theory, but it ends up predicting that the most capitalist countries end up being the poorest countries, and the socialist countries end up being the richest. Since that's exactly the opposite of what happens, I have to conclude that your theory is not just wrong, it's completely backwards.
The economy is regulated not because of anything bad about capitalism, but instead because people don't understand that free markets work best. Intellectual error is the problem here, and only education will fix it.
-russ
No, you don't understand. The companies benefit from the outsourcing *at first*. Those that do it make more money. Then other companies do it. Then some of them pass on the savings to consumers ***and they make more money***. The other companies can either allow that company to take business away from them, or they can also pass on the savings to consumers.
Do you see how this works? Initially every improvement results in extra profits. In time, those profits get competed away in a free market. That's why free markets are so wonderful. The force entrepreneurs to keep creating new improvements, and they keep the profits earned by capital down to a minimum.
-russ
"Wealth spread out"? Dude, the amount of wealth in the world is approximately proportional to the number of smart, clear-thinking people. As more people become smarter, we all get wealthier.
The whole fixed-pie thinking about wealth is just completely wrong.
-russ
Still does! Every McDonald's cash register uses a packet driver to talk to the server. Too bad I don't get a commission off every hamburger sale. Lemme see, a tenth of a penny, $00.001 times billions and billions sold, works out to, gee, a cool million. As if.
-russ
I hesitated for about two seconds before nominating myself. I mean, if I don't believe in myself, who else would, or should?
-russ
Excellent karma IS a license to troll
Asshole.
-russ
Uhhhhhh, if I want to get my opinion out to people, I have to present it in the same forums in which advertising appears. That takes money. Restrictions on political speech are the most unconstitutional restrictions.
-russ
Telling only half the truth is a lie. It's quite possible to go through Bush's public statements and find every slip of his tongue, publicize them, and then claim that he's an idiot. He's not an idiot. He's just inarticulate.
-russ
Sounds like you want DomainKeys. Sendmail has support for DomainKeys as well, as does qmail.
-russ
Increased teacher pay and decreased class size has had no effect on test scores.
-russ