On the other hand advertising costs money which is reflected in the price of every thing you buy. It's a lose-lose for the consumer who not only has to sit through advertising but has to pay more for the underarm deoderant too.
You forgot to mention one alternative. Collect money for quality programming without ads. Kind of what HBO does huh?
"Now, that simply is not true, as anyone who takes any time to look around can see."
I live out west where I can go see what they have done to their lands. So yes please go see for yourself which lands you'd rather spend time gazing at or hiking in.
"It's the government land that's in terrible shape."
This is an absolute bullshit claim which of course you can not back up. To say that glacier national park is in terrible shape (especially compared to plum creek land in the same state) is just a out and out lie. Once again go check it out for yourself.
"And this new claim of yours contradicts what you said earlier when you agreed that 95% of pollution takes place on government land."
You said that not me. My position is that the private ranch and forests are all depleted of their natural resources. This point is indisputable. The ranchers in the west are absolutely dependent on public lands to graze on. Their land is ruined and unsuitable for rasing cattle anymore. Same with the timber companies. They have all overcut their lands and now are raiding the public forests for profits.
BTW the nature Conservancy is a non profit organization. It tries to rescue a miniscule percentage of the earth that is being raped by the corporations of the world. I hope to god you have the intelligence to distunguish what they are doing from what golden sunshine (what an orwellian name for a mining company!) are doing. Perhaps you really think that there is absolutely no difference between the Nature Conservancy and exxon who knows.
The timber companies have nottaken good care of their lands. They have cut all the trees off and now need more trees. Of course the only trees left are on govt land (because the govt actually took care of those lands instead of turning all the trees into profit). So after depleting theri own lands now they want to deplete the public lands.
You must have a different meaning of what "taking care of the land" is. It's not to cut down all the trees and sell them and then sell the land to developers so they can subdivide it and build suburbia. Govt is the only entitiy that has to try and balance all the uses for the land, timber, recreation, wildlife. Private companies only care about profits.
The same with ranching. Ranchers have no more grazing lands. Their cows have stripped all the grass, trampled all the river beds and covered their acres with shit. Having ruined their lands now they are screaming bloody murder to ruin the public lands too.
I agree with your last statement. We can not allow these companies to ruin our public lands like they have ruined their own. We must not let them log, mine, graze, or drain the water from the land that belongs to all Americans. Let them practice sustainable agriculture and forestry or go bankrupt.
"All I can say is have fun at the supermarket. Almost every good you buy was hauled via truck and the extra gas costs are being passed on in higher prices."
Fine I really don't mind that much. I realize that some people will hike up their prices but most will not. Look at the midwest or the west where gasoline is significantly higher then on the east cost. They are not paying more for food or toilet paper. Most companies will absorb the cost no big deal.
As for ANWAR it's just an apple in the fruit basket that Bush is giving to his masters. Mark Richie got a pardon for his bribes but the oil companies are going to get billions in profits from their bribes. Bush is definately going to treat his bribees much better then Clinton did. Amongst the other goodies in this basket.
1) Relaxed air quality rules so that they can burn more coal and burn it cheaper because they won't have to clean the exhaust.
2) Drilling on all public lands and offshore preserves. Literally they have been handed the keys to public lands. When this kind of thing happens in the third world we point and say corruption but Bush has sunk to the level of Argentina and Equador it's disgusting.
3) Tax subsidies to upgrade refineries because the oil companies just don't make enough money to fix their own damned plants (all business are communists when it comes to suckling on uncle sams teat).
4) Expanded Eminent Domain powers to seize private land for power lines.
The people who bribed Bush got a much better deal then the people who bribed clinton. Too bad Dan Burton does not have the integrity to call hearings into this chicanery. Even I could make a case for quid-pro-quo on this crap.
Dan Burton, Larry Claymen they are oddly silent when a member of their own party accepts bribes and gives away national lands.
None of the above can be cured by drilling for more oil.
If you have no water drilling for oil won't help.
If you have bad power plants drilling for oil won't help.
If you have bad infrastructure drilling for oil won't help.
"The government allows them to pollute without repercussions, so pollute they do."
Man that's convoluted. The government does not allow them it's illegal. The corporations pollute because the govt does not have the resources to police it's property properly. Besides to suggest that the govt is evil and the polluters are good because the govt is unable to stop them from poisoning the land and water is just sick!. The sick fucks who put profits above public health are the real sickos in this equation.
" Natural resources--even ones held by mills, logging companies, etc.--tend to be in much better condition than government-owned properties"
Well this is a flat out lie. If you don't believe me watch how much the logging companies will scream when you suggest an end to logging on govt lands. They are already screaming bloody murder because the wood yield from federal lands is going down. The typical cyle for lumber company land is to cut most fo the trees down and then subdivide and sell the land. As long as they can cut taxpayer subsidized timber from the the federal lands they don't have to practice sustainable forestry. Go look into what plum creek is doing with their lands.
All companies are capitalists when they are making money and communists when they are losing it. The privately held timber lands have already been pretty much logged out. The timber companies are now desparate for trees from public lands.
Same with ranchers and grazing. Most ranchers use federal land for grazing their cattle. They pay way below market rates and scream bloody murder if anybody suggests otherwise.
If the ranchers and the loggers took care of their own land they would not need public lands would they?
At $2.00 the gasolie is pretty cheap. I have a small car and I fill it once a month for about $20.00. The gas prices can double or triple and it would not affect me all that much and it would still cost less then starbucks coffee which I buy by the bucket. It cost more to get a gallon of water then a gallon of gasoline.
As for Anwar there is maybe a couple of months worth of oil up there not that much. It's a nice present to oil companies from bush for the bribes but it is not a long term solution to the so called gas crunch even if they find natural gas. You would save more gas then they will ever pull out of anwar if you simply got one or two miles per gallon better mileage out of the SUVs.
The humans that wrote the program all ate, drank and breathed natural resources. The software was most likely packaged, burned on to CDs, delivered via trucks, stocked on shelves inside stores all of which require immense amount of natural resources to build and sustain.
Software is the closest to a "low impact" product you can find because it requires so little to make but it still takes computers, buildings, heat, electricity, air, water, food, transportation etc to make it happen. Even delivery via the internet requires natural resources.
First of all it's impossible to grow trees at the same rate that they are being cut down. There are simply too many humans on this planet who need wood and fiber for too many things. Maybe one day we will use alternatives here in the US but for most of the world they are running out of trees in a hurry.
Also you point out how the economic structures we have set up only concentrate on the short term gains and completely ignore the long term consequences of the worldwide economy. Of course nobody is willing to pay for a tree or the woods, oc course trees, animals, oceans etc are worth more dead then alive. Nobody wants to leave the fish in the sea it's worth much more in a sushi bar!. This kind of thinking unfortunately is spelling doom for the salmon, bluefin tuna, squid, dolphins and much more alarmingly the algea and the plankton.
By taking natural resources and turning them into money you are setting yourself up for long term catastrophy. Once the plankton die we are not too far behind.
I am not familiar with the incidents you mentioned per se I would appreciate some links. In particular I would like to see if the people were jailed for criminal acts commited as an individual or criminal acts commited in the name of the corporation.
Maybe if you set fire to your factory to try and collect insurance you get charged criminally for arson but that has nothing to do with the fact that you are a CEO of a corporation.
Even if you are right even you have to admit that these are extremely rare.
" Do you want to convict somebody just because it's not perfect?"
First of all I only want criminal charges brought against the people who are actually responsible for death and mayhem. Secondly we do convict people because they are not perfect. Somebody can lead a perfectly fine life and one day commit murder then we jail them. We don't say well he is not perfect, this was just an abberation if he is found guilty he goes to jail.
As for value jet I find it hilarious that a corporation can be found guilty of a crime. What are you going to do jail a corporation. Of course not you are going to fine them and then they will write off that fine on their taxes. No big deal, look at how much money they made/saved by flying unsafe aircraft in the first place.
Oh I see I can't perform a proper choke hold because of a typing error. I get it now. It must be some sort of a hillbilly logic going on here.
If oregonians want to bet up liars then they must spend all day beating up people because every body lies every day. Ever go a day without lying? How about to yourself?
If oregonians didn't hate homosexuals they wouldn't be passing legislation denying them basic human rights like right to marry. Oregonians are hateful people no doubt about it.
Maybe you could get away with it once but the corpies would be on to you soon enough. These people are unethical not stupid. They are not spending money on politicians cos they have nothing better to do with their money they are spending it because they get something out fo the deal. Once your ethical politician lies to them the money will dry out. Worse yet the corpies will fund their own candidate and defeat your honest politician.
Now you might say "voters are smarter then that" but really they are not. If the corpies can make you care about brown sugar water they can make you care about anything.
He has a republican senate and a republican house. He should be able to pass every single bill he wants. It takes no skill when the entire congress agrees with you on everything.
Oh yea those two shares will really get the attention of the CEO of GM. At least with the govt it's one person one vote. With the corp it's I have a majority of the stock ya'll can screw yourselves.
"The government has no such concern. Are you aware that over 95% of our country's pollution takes place on government property?"
you are mistaken on many points but...
This statistic is misleading. Of course the pollution occurs on govt property the business is not going to dump toxic waste on it's own property is it? In NJ trucks full of toxic sludge were routinely driven into public lands and emptied. The pollution may have occured on public lands but it was put there by the corporations.
Also if liberterians are for holding corporations responsible perhaps you can take this opportunity to explain just exacly how this would occur withoout some big bad govt to wield a stick? While you are at it perhaps you can provide some example of where a CEO was actually jailed for some crime his corporation committed.
"I am not going to be suprised if he even helps Microsoft some how with their split."
When the state of Idaho sued to stop the roadless wildreness initiative the Bush justice Dept filed a TWO SENTENCE BRIEF with the court and USED FOUR OF THEIR ALLOCATED THIRTY MINUTES to argue in front of the judge. The judge (a republican of course) was able to stop the initiative with a clear conscience.
Now the road building into the wilderness can continue as if nothing happened.
This is exactly how the Bush justice dept will prosecute MS. File a two sentence brief and get your worst lawyers to make a brief appearance in court. MS will of course spend a billion on lawyers and will win handily. The fix is in.
Slashdot Mirror
The first intelligent comment on this thread so far.
On the other hand advertising costs money which is reflected in the price of every thing you buy. It's a lose-lose for the consumer who not only has to sit through advertising but has to pay more for the underarm deoderant too.
You forgot to mention one alternative. Collect money for quality programming without ads. Kind of what HBO does huh?
"Now, that simply is not true, as anyone who takes any time to look around can see."
I live out west where I can go see what they have done to their lands. So yes please go see for yourself which lands you'd rather spend time gazing at or hiking in.
"It's the government land that's in terrible shape."
This is an absolute bullshit claim which of course you can not back up. To say that glacier national park is in terrible shape (especially compared to plum creek land in the same state) is just a out and out lie. Once again go check it out for yourself.
"And this new claim of yours contradicts what you said earlier when you agreed that 95% of pollution takes place on government land."
You said that not me. My position is that the private ranch and forests are all depleted of their natural resources. This point is indisputable. The ranchers in the west are absolutely dependent on public lands to graze on. Their land is ruined and unsuitable for rasing cattle anymore. Same with the timber companies. They have all overcut their lands and now are raiding the public forests for profits.
BTW the nature Conservancy is a non profit organization. It tries to rescue a miniscule percentage of the earth that is being raped by the corporations of the world. I hope to god you have the intelligence to distunguish what they are doing from what golden sunshine (what an orwellian name for a mining company!) are doing. Perhaps you really think that there is absolutely no difference between the Nature Conservancy and exxon who knows.
The timber companies have nottaken good care of their lands. They have cut all the trees off and now need more trees. Of course the only trees left are on govt land (because the govt actually took care of those lands instead of turning all the trees into profit). So after depleting theri own lands now they want to deplete the public lands.
You must have a different meaning of what "taking care of the land" is. It's not to cut down all the trees and sell them and then sell the land to developers so they can subdivide it and build suburbia. Govt is the only entitiy that has to try and balance all the uses for the land, timber, recreation, wildlife. Private companies only care about profits.
The same with ranching. Ranchers have no more grazing lands. Their cows have stripped all the grass, trampled all the river beds and covered their acres with shit. Having ruined their lands now they are screaming bloody murder to ruin the public lands too.
I agree with your last statement. We can not allow these companies to ruin our public lands like they have ruined their own. We must not let them log, mine, graze, or drain the water from the land that belongs to all Americans. Let them practice sustainable agriculture and forestry or go bankrupt.
"All I can say is have fun at the supermarket. Almost every good you buy was hauled via truck and the extra gas costs are being passed on in higher prices."
Fine I really don't mind that much. I realize that some people will hike up their prices but most will not. Look at the midwest or the west where gasoline is significantly higher then on the east cost. They are not paying more for food or toilet paper. Most companies will absorb the cost no big deal.
As for ANWAR it's just an apple in the fruit basket that Bush is giving to his masters. Mark Richie got a pardon for his bribes but the oil companies are going to get billions in profits from their bribes. Bush is definately going to treat his bribees much better then Clinton did. Amongst the other goodies in this basket.
1) Relaxed air quality rules so that they can burn more coal and burn it cheaper because they won't have to clean the exhaust.
2) Drilling on all public lands and offshore preserves. Literally they have been handed the keys to public lands. When this kind of thing happens in the third world we point and say corruption but Bush has sunk to the level of Argentina and Equador it's disgusting.
3) Tax subsidies to upgrade refineries because the oil companies just don't make enough money to fix their own damned plants (all business are communists when it comes to suckling on uncle sams teat).
4) Expanded Eminent Domain powers to seize private land for power lines.
The people who bribed Bush got a much better deal then the people who bribed clinton. Too bad Dan Burton does not have the integrity to call hearings into this chicanery. Even I could make a case for quid-pro-quo on this crap.
Dan Burton, Larry Claymen they are oddly silent when a member of their own party accepts bribes and gives away national lands.
None of the above can be cured by drilling for more oil.
If you have no water drilling for oil won't help.
If you have bad power plants drilling for oil won't help.
If you have bad infrastructure drilling for oil won't help.
Well I usually hear about free as in freedom especially from the GPL fans (which most linux fans are).
Either way paying $50.00 for a box at staples is far cry from paying $50.00 per user to MS.
I heard a lot of people claiming that the SCOUS took on the election case to reiterate states rights. Look how that turned out.
"The government allows them to pollute without repercussions, so pollute they do."
Man that's convoluted. The government does not allow them it's illegal. The corporations pollute because the govt does not have the resources to police it's property properly. Besides to suggest that the govt is evil and the polluters are good because the govt is unable to stop them from poisoning the land and water is just sick!. The sick fucks who put profits above public health are the real sickos in this equation.
" Natural resources--even ones held by mills, logging companies, etc.--tend to be in much better condition than government-owned properties"
Well this is a flat out lie. If you don't believe me watch how much the logging companies will scream when you suggest an end to logging on govt lands. They are already screaming bloody murder because the wood yield from federal lands is going down. The typical cyle for lumber company land is to cut most fo the trees down and then subdivide and sell the land. As long as they can cut taxpayer subsidized timber from the the federal lands they don't have to practice sustainable forestry. Go look into what plum creek is doing with their lands.
All companies are capitalists when they are making money and communists when they are losing it. The privately held timber lands have already been pretty much logged out. The timber companies are now desparate for trees from public lands.
Same with ranchers and grazing. Most ranchers use federal land for grazing their cattle. They pay way below market rates and scream bloody murder if anybody suggests otherwise.
If the ranchers and the loggers took care of their own land they would not need public lands would they?
One can only hope.
At $2.00 the gasolie is pretty cheap. I have a small car and I fill it once a month for about $20.00. The gas prices can double or triple and it would not affect me all that much and it would still cost less then starbucks coffee which I buy by the bucket. It cost more to get a gallon of water then a gallon of gasoline.
As for Anwar there is maybe a couple of months worth of oil up there not that much. It's a nice present to oil companies from bush for the bribes but it is not a long term solution to the so called gas crunch even if they find natural gas. You would save more gas then they will ever pull out of anwar if you simply got one or two miles per gallon better mileage out of the SUVs.
Building more plants would not help. California used less energy this year then last year yet the prices keep climbing. It's not a supply problem.
The humans that wrote the program all ate, drank and breathed natural resources. The software was most likely packaged, burned on to CDs, delivered via trucks, stocked on shelves inside stores all of which require immense amount of natural resources to build and sustain.
Software is the closest to a "low impact" product you can find because it requires so little to make but it still takes computers, buildings, heat, electricity, air, water, food, transportation etc to make it happen. Even delivery via the internet requires natural resources.
Sorry no such thing as a free lunch.
First of all it's impossible to grow trees at the same rate that they are being cut down. There are simply too many humans on this planet who need wood and fiber for too many things. Maybe one day we will use alternatives here in the US but for most of the world they are running out of trees in a hurry.
Also you point out how the economic structures we have set up only concentrate on the short term gains and completely ignore the long term consequences of the worldwide economy. Of course nobody is willing to pay for a tree or the woods, oc course trees, animals, oceans etc are worth more dead then alive. Nobody wants to leave the fish in the sea it's worth much more in a sushi bar!. This kind of thinking unfortunately is spelling doom for the salmon, bluefin tuna, squid, dolphins and much more alarmingly the algea and the plankton.
By taking natural resources and turning them into money you are setting yourself up for long term catastrophy. Once the plankton die we are not too far behind.
I am not familiar with the incidents you mentioned per se I would appreciate some links. In particular I would like to see if the people were jailed for criminal acts commited as an individual or criminal acts commited in the name of the corporation.
Maybe if you set fire to your factory to try and collect insurance you get charged criminally for arson but that has nothing to do with the fact that you are a CEO of a corporation.
Even if you are right even you have to admit that these are extremely rare.
" Do you want to convict somebody just because it's not perfect?"
First of all I only want criminal charges brought against the people who are actually responsible for death and mayhem. Secondly we do convict people because they are not perfect. Somebody can lead a perfectly fine life and one day commit murder then we jail them. We don't say well he is not perfect, this was just an abberation if he is found guilty he goes to jail.
As for value jet I find it hilarious that a corporation can be found guilty of a crime. What are you going to do jail a corporation. Of course not you are going to fine them and then they will write off that fine on their taxes. No big deal, look at how much money they made/saved by flying unsafe aircraft in the first place.
Oh I see I can't perform a proper choke hold because of a typing error. I get it now. It must be some sort of a hillbilly logic going on here.
If oregonians want to bet up liars then they must spend all day beating up people because every body lies every day. Ever go a day without lying? How about to yourself?
If oregonians didn't hate homosexuals they wouldn't be passing legislation denying them basic human rights like right to marry. Oregonians are hateful people no doubt about it.
Maybe you could get away with it once but the corpies would be on to you soon enough. These people are unethical not stupid. They are not spending money on politicians cos they have nothing better to do with their money they are spending it because they get something out fo the deal. Once your ethical politician lies to them the money will dry out. Worse yet the corpies will fund their own candidate and defeat your honest politician.
Now you might say "voters are smarter then that" but really they are not. If the corpies can make you care about brown sugar water they can make you care about anything.
Everyone lies to themselves at least ten times a day. Most of course don't know the truth in the first place and maybe that does not make it a lie.
Nobody is selling GNOME. Some people thinks it's better to "realease early, release often".
He has a republican senate and a republican house. He should be able to pass every single bill he wants. It takes no skill when the entire congress agrees with you on everything.
Oh yea those two shares will really get the attention of the CEO of GM. At least with the govt it's one person one vote. With the corp it's I have a majority of the stock ya'll can screw yourselves.
"The government has no such concern. Are you aware that over 95% of our country's pollution takes place on government property?"
you are mistaken on many points but...
This statistic is misleading. Of course the pollution occurs on govt property the business is not going to dump toxic waste on it's own property is it? In NJ trucks full of toxic sludge were routinely driven into public lands and emptied. The pollution may have occured on public lands but it was put there by the corporations.
Also if liberterians are for holding corporations responsible perhaps you can take this opportunity to explain just exacly how this would occur withoout some big bad govt to wield a stick? While you are at it perhaps you can provide some example of where a CEO was actually jailed for some crime his corporation committed.
"I am not going to be suprised if he even helps Microsoft some how with their split."
When the state of Idaho sued to stop the roadless wildreness initiative the Bush justice Dept filed a TWO SENTENCE BRIEF with the court and USED FOUR OF THEIR ALLOCATED THIRTY MINUTES to argue in front of the judge. The judge (a republican of course) was able to stop the initiative with a clear conscience.
Now the road building into the wilderness can continue as if nothing happened.
This is exactly how the Bush justice dept will prosecute MS. File a two sentence brief and get your worst lawyers to make a brief appearance in court. MS will of course spend a billion on lawyers and will win handily. The fix is in.
Hey don't forget the second amendment.
California used less energy this year then they did less year.
Less demand should mean lower rates no?
Also how does drilling for oil increase the supply of electricity? What percentage of electricity in the US is generated from oil?