What many readig this may not realize is that benzapp's words are a recitation of Noam Chomsky propoganda.
Who are the brainwashed ones? The ones that create a utopia in the past and demand one in the present, or those that realize that this is just so much hot air?
There is not one thing preventing you from hiring all of the programmers you like for $1,000/hr with no reguard to skill, qualifications or the market's pricing of your products.
Same thing with mowing your yard, fixing your plumbing/electrical/etc.
So, please, be my guest and compete using the labor standards that you express on your keyboard.
If there is anybody on/. that needs a job, or just wants to switch to one where you tell the boss what he will pay you, what work conditions he will creat for you and he will agree without question, contact the parent to this post.
I am glad to see that the People are finally challenging these evil greedy corporations that have sprung up from the mist like nasty weeds around the world.
Bravo to you sir! Bravo! I await the results of the success of you and your fellow traveler
Whitty said there will be no privacy issues because the machines are being designed to store only the number of miles traveled, not the exact locations visited.
Nice doublespeak there Whitty!
The way one would determine miles traveled using GPS is by connecting waypoints, locations, whatever cute word one wishes to use, but IF MILES TRAVELED IS TO BE DETERMINED, LOCATIONS MUST BE RECORDED.
Sorry, Big Brother Whitty, call them "coordinates" or whatever you like, you MUST use locations if you want to determine distance with GPS.
Besides that, this is the most hairbrained method of road taxation ever devised, sofar.
The follow on comments to parent are good too, especially the few people that know that taxing fuel covers weight, speed and inefficiency of a vehicle quite well, i.e., vehicles that get 10 MPG are taxed 3x as much as those that get 30 MPG, etc.
Note: not a criticisim of parent post at all, just adding info and criticizingthe person quoted from the article.
Actually, they do get money out if it. Under the name of "Tax Credit". Credit is money owed to you. So a "Tax Credit" is money the IRS owes to you (and they pay their bills).
Some of these tax credits were removed (I think by Dems), like a childcare tax credit that included people who pay no tax.
Anyway, the objection of the people objecting (I am sure not all are Leftists) is that this particular income tax cut does not include things outside of income taxes. The trott out some of the payroll taxes, that are indeed taxes and they are taxes on income, but they are not in the category of "income tax".
As usual, they have no arguement, so they expand the arguement into areas that do not apply.
Now, if they wished to ADD an across-the-board reduction in Social Security taxes, or other payroll taxes, I would be right there with them. Yes, put me on record as proposing this right now!
So, Left, are you with me? I want the payroll tax to be no greater than 10% total. Yes, this includes employer contributions. Anybody joining me or are the Leftists just blowing smoke again? [not directed at parent, this is directed at everybody complaining about the income tax cut not including payroll taxes]
Like I said, I myself wont see a tax cut, and I dont judge taxes based on the number amount, I judge taxes based on the percentage of a persons income minus cost of living.
Well, you might judge them that way and you can do all sorts of arithmetic shennanagins if you like, but rational/sane people judge amounts by the discreet amount.
Therefore, you may think someone that payed $10,000 in federal income tax to have payed some other amount, but anybody else with a functioning brain would say they payed $10,000.
Word problem:
Adam lives on an island, has a 100' powerboat that goes 100 KPH, he had a 1,000,000^2 foot home that costs $8,000/mo to maintain including utilities, he has 5 strippers over nightly at $1,000/hour for three hours and one hooker for $4,000 for two hours. He snorts $50,000 worth of cokaine/week and shoots $40,000 worth of heroine per month. John payed $10,000 in federal income tax last year.
Betty has a $1,000/month apartment, other living expenses total $1,000/month. Betty payed $10,000 in federal income tax last year.
Well, what other complaint have you heard on this? No I have "picked" the only thing that has been chanted into meaninglessness.
As I have mentioned in other posts on this, I think within this thread, I am for free markets of ideas, labor and capitol. I do not see allowing the ebb and flow of a market as "bad" I see it as natural.
BTW, this was an FCC ruling, not an FTC ruling, mergers are almost a non-issue here.
Too bad the FCC is not eliminating their restrictions on who can have a radio license (kinda like a 1st Amendment license I guess), to allow competing ideas to be heard.
"THEY" do not own every channel and WE can change the station.
Why is this so hard for you to grasp?
You are under the impression that it is more difficult to listen to a radio broadcast about how Jews secretly run the world than it is to evaluate a car purchase? BTW, the radio example is lifted directly from the DC Pacifica programming and MAY be one of the reasons they have such a small audience.
You equate adults choosing what to listen/watch to children deciding what to eat and use that as "evidence" that the most popular talk radio show is "bad" because you do not like that show? Then you bash silly entertainment? Is your next step to ban the Cartoon Channel and force the History Channel to be "All Chomsky All the Time"?
Umm, free speech should not be dictated by the government. Please, go back to North Korea, Cuba, Manhattan or some other place where "truth" is regulated by the government. I will stay right here.
What law proscribes what broadcasters may say on the air? There are plenty of laws that tell them what not to say on the air. You know, libel and slander (maybe you did not know that, from looking at your ravings).
Please, stop responding with a bunch of whiny babble about some stations not playing your party line. When you have a real arguement, please, bring it. You sound just like the Buchananites of 15 years ago that were whining about all of the media being controlled by the Left.
Okay, since roaming the dial is not enough for you here is a new suggestion: Buy a radio station and run it yourself.
Obviously you can have any station you want since stations that want to continue providing "variety" get bought up by whomever feels like having them. Go ahead, just go grab one.
BTW, about 15 years ago, some of my so-called conservative friends (they were really Socialists that proclaimed they were Conservative, as if that makes it so) were expressing the SAME arguements you and the other people I have responded to are saying.
Their complaint? The media was all liberal and their point of view was not getting out. Sound familiar?
My answer to them was the same as I gave you (other than laughing a lot more at them, since this is now too old to be funny).
Gosh, how things have changed (not). Other voices and points of view somehow got on the air.
Everyone pays taxes, some people get their taxes returned, but everoyne pays, so this isnt the question.
Well, even though your assertion is NOT true, the question here is on INCOME TAXES and even if we restrict your blanket statement to INCOME TAXES it is still false.
Many of your other comments are just as incorrect, but some do lead to my proposal that there be no distinction between married and unmarried people for tax purposes.
BTW, nobody is giving anybody anything, but since you bring it up please accept the forst $1,000,000.00 that i have not taken from anybody as a gift from me. I have decided not to take it from you. No need to send a thank you or anything, it is my big giveaway.
Well, it's pretty clear that you're a corporate shill, since you relegate the importance of the public to that of "product." But so it goes. Do try to forget that the spectrum is itself public, and that the FCC is regulating it on the basis of the public good.
Yea, there is one.
First, I have no connection to any of the firms involved (other than listening to their programming).
As the way I described the players in that market properly and you object I suspect someone has a hidden agenda. BTW, I am no fan of Noam Chomsky (as is evident in my journal), but this relationship is ONE thing he describes properly.
Nobody is shutting anybody down.
Nice straw man! That's a good one. No, we're just going to cull the voices off one by one. Why shut them down when we can just buy them up?
These voices you are hearing . ..
Anyway, if anybody is wishing to "make their voice heard" then they will not be bought up. Contrary to common fantasy "big media" does not run around with automatic weapons forcing people to sell. That is the Urban Music segment of a related industry.
Has any point of view been diminished since 1996? Ask the former employees of stations gobbled up by Clear Channel.
No point of view has been deminished and using an example of unemployment, yet another strawman, proves nothing at all.
Audiences shift, stations follow.
A lovely model for deregulation, they use their wealth and clout to buy stations outperforming their own only to shut them down, use their ownership of venues to deny bands who speak out against them the ability to perform, and use their grossly disporportionate marketpace presence to all but guarantee anyone who speaks out against their violently misogynist coroporate culture will "never work in this town again" in defiance of whistleblower and sexual harassment laws. (That's aside from their notorious political leanings and crappy airplay). Won't it be grand when they can buy 3 TV stations and a couple of newspapers? Then we wouldn't be able to hear a bad word said about those good ol' boys (ain't doin' no harm!)
So they do not agree with you, therefore that is bad. Somehow you think a station that pulls a great market share and is profitable can be vulnerable to being bought out unwillingly? Oh well. As with the rest of your rant, there is no logic there to grab onto.
Calling massive corporations with outsized resources and none of your or my moral restraint "boogeyman" may make you feel better at night, but it doesn't make their misbehavior any less real.
Yep, seems someone has an agenda here. Just come out and say it. You hate competition and you want to force an unpopular agenda onto the air. I prefer the free market of ideas, labor and capital.
You live in Market 1 and you can not find a variety???
Even within Westwood One they have variety, plus you have tons of other stations to choose from on FM/AM/SW1/SW2, etc.
Excuse me, but every time I drive to NYC from the DC area the problem is sifting through so many stations! One of my jokes, that is based on a kernel of truth, is the FM radio is my "NYC finder", as soon as I hear a Ramones song I know I am close.
Even WBAI can be heard well into New Jersey and they complain more than any other station about being "silenced" (see another post of mine about how true that is).
You just need a new radio, that is your solution. Let us know when you get one.
If you are trying to convinde people that their radio tuners are soldered into one station then you must be posting from North Korea.
I live in the USA and there are many stations playing all sorts of things that I have no interest in, but others are interested in listening to. Also, I have no trouble finding something entertaining/informative/both, but that is due to my willingness to scan the dial, switch between modulations, listen on the 'net, etc.
Sorry you are having so much trouble, try de-soldering your tuner.
First, there has not even been an accusation of collusion here. Not by the advertisers (who are the real customers of all commercial stations) and not by the product (the listeners/viewers) and not by the government.
Of course it is "easier" for 5 firms, each employing thousands of emplyees, to collude than it is for a larger number to collude, however this is irrelevant in this discussion. If you wish to propose the theory that there is indeed collusion going on now, be my guest.
No "point of view" has been deminished in the slightest. Nobody is shutting anybody down.
Now, if you have a valid point, please bring it forward.
I would like to see restrictions on licenses removed and more station assignments made, but then again, there is no corporate boogyman in my solution to point to.
Slashdot Mirror
Excellent. It is so refreshing to read the ideas of Milton Friedman in this sea of Chomsky babble.
What many readig this may not realize is that benzapp's words are a recitation of Noam Chomsky propoganda.
Who are the brainwashed ones? The ones that create a utopia in the past and demand one in the present, or those that realize that this is just so much hot air?
I think the former. YMMV
There is not one thing preventing you from hiring all of the programmers you like for $1,000/hr with no reguard to skill, qualifications or the market's pricing of your products.
/. that needs a job, or just wants to switch to one where you tell the boss what he will pay you, what work conditions he will creat for you and he will agree without question, contact the parent to this post.
Same thing with mowing your yard, fixing your plumbing/electrical/etc.
So, please, be my guest and compete using the labor standards that you express on your keyboard.
If there is anybody on
I am glad to see that the People are finally challenging these evil greedy corporations that have sprung up from the mist like nasty weeds around the world.
Bravo to you sir! Bravo! I await the results of the success of you and your fellow traveler
This message brought to you by the society to prevent African/Asian technical employment.
The phantom has struck without noting the change!
How long until they change it, again, to read "Warming: french"?
Don't worry, I am still preserving in the language french dip, will add fremch dip too. Adding french fried steak.
I suspected the buggy whip lobby was still around but never thought I would see it here.
/.
Oh wait, this is
Poppycock! As soon as I complained the banner was changed to a pleasent green. Overrated indeed.
No red before 1100 Eastern USian time PLEASE!??
Very true. Whenever I have to drive anywhere near NJ from VA I try to make sure I can get as much stabilized, liquified hydrogen, aka, gasoline as possible in NJ.
Whitty said there will be no privacy issues because the machines are being designed to store only the number of miles traveled, not the exact locations visited.
Nice doublespeak there Whitty!
The way one would determine miles traveled using GPS is by connecting waypoints, locations, whatever cute word one wishes to use, but IF MILES TRAVELED IS TO BE DETERMINED, LOCATIONS MUST BE RECORDED.
Sorry, Big Brother Whitty, call them "coordinates" or whatever you like, you MUST use locations if you want to determine distance with GPS.
Besides that, this is the most hairbrained method of road taxation ever devised, sofar.
The follow on comments to parent are good too, especially the few people that know that taxing fuel covers weight, speed and inefficiency of a vehicle quite well, i.e., vehicles that get 10 MPG are taxed 3x as much as those that get 30 MPG, etc.
Note: not a criticisim of parent post at all, just adding info and criticizingthe person quoted from the article.
Actually, they do get money out if it. Under the name of "Tax Credit". Credit is money owed to you. So a "Tax Credit" is money the IRS owes to you (and they pay their bills).
Some of these tax credits were removed (I think by Dems), like a childcare tax credit that included people who pay no tax.
Anyway, the objection of the people objecting (I am sure not all are Leftists) is that this particular income tax cut does not include things outside of income taxes. The trott out some of the payroll taxes, that are indeed taxes and they are taxes on income, but they are not in the category of "income tax".
As usual, they have no arguement, so they expand the arguement into areas that do not apply.
Now, if they wished to ADD an across-the-board reduction in Social Security taxes, or other payroll taxes, I would be right there with them. Yes, put me on record as proposing this right now!
So, Left, are you with me? I want the payroll tax to be no greater than 10% total. Yes, this includes employer contributions. Anybody joining me or are the Leftists just blowing smoke again? [not directed at parent, this is directed at everybody complaining about the income tax cut not including payroll taxes]
Okay, that was not as funny as this, but it is still funny.
Thanks for calling me Stalin too, but I will decline the invitation to join your camp.
Pleas, someone mod this up, this can not be hidden from the world.
Like I said, I myself wont see a tax cut, and I dont judge taxes based on the number amount, I judge taxes based on the percentage of a persons income minus cost of living.
Well, you might judge them that way and you can do all sorts of arithmetic shennanagins if you like, but rational/sane people judge amounts by the discreet amount.
Therefore, you may think someone that payed $10,000 in federal income tax to have payed some other amount, but anybody else with a functioning brain would say they payed $10,000.
Word problem:
Adam lives on an island, has a 100' powerboat that goes 100 KPH, he had a 1,000,000^2 foot home that costs $8,000/mo to maintain including utilities, he has 5 strippers over nightly at $1,000/hour for three hours and one hooker for $4,000 for two hours. He snorts $50,000 worth of cokaine/week and shoots $40,000 worth of heroine per month. John payed $10,000 in federal income tax last year.
Betty has a $1,000/month apartment, other living expenses total $1,000/month. Betty payed $10,000 in federal income tax last year.
Who payed more in federal income tax last year?
A. John
B. Betty
C. They both payed equal amounts.
The answer is C!!!!!!!!!
Where are you from, Uranis?
You can find pen and paper anyplace. Bring a VAX. They are getting harder to find.
Well, what other complaint have you heard on this? No I have "picked" the only thing that has been chanted into meaninglessness.
As I have mentioned in other posts on this, I think within this thread, I am for free markets of ideas, labor and capitol. I do not see allowing the ebb and flow of a market as "bad" I see it as natural.
BTW, this was an FCC ruling, not an FTC ruling, mergers are almost a non-issue here.
Too bad the FCC is not eliminating their restrictions on who can have a radio license (kinda like a 1st Amendment license I guess), to allow competing ideas to be heard.
Yes, other voices includes other points of view.
This is pointless. Have fun in your bland, bleak misery.
"THEY" do not own every channel and WE can change the station.
Why is this so hard for you to grasp?
You are under the impression that it is more difficult to listen to a radio broadcast about how Jews secretly run the world than it is to evaluate a car purchase? BTW, the radio example is lifted directly from the DC Pacifica programming and MAY be one of the reasons they have such a small audience.
You equate adults choosing what to listen/watch to children deciding what to eat and use that as "evidence" that the most popular talk radio show is "bad" because you do not like that show? Then you bash silly entertainment? Is your next step to ban the Cartoon Channel and force the History Channel to be "All Chomsky All the Time"?
Umm, free speech should not be dictated by the government. Please, go back to North Korea, Cuba, Manhattan or some other place where "truth" is regulated by the government. I will stay right here.
What law proscribes what broadcasters may say on the air? There are plenty of laws that tell them what not to say on the air. You know, libel and slander (maybe you did not know that, from looking at your ravings).
Please, stop responding with a bunch of whiny babble about some stations not playing your party line. When you have a real arguement, please, bring it. You sound just like the Buchananites of 15 years ago that were whining about all of the media being controlled by the Left.
Okay, since roaming the dial is not enough for you here is a new suggestion:
Buy a radio station and run it yourself.
Obviously you can have any station you want since stations that want to continue providing "variety" get bought up by whomever feels like having them. Go ahead, just go grab one.
BTW, about 15 years ago, some of my so-called conservative friends (they were really Socialists that proclaimed they were Conservative, as if that makes it so) were expressing the SAME arguements you and the other people I have responded to are saying.
Their complaint? The media was all liberal and their point of view was not getting out. Sound familiar?
My answer to them was the same as I gave you (other than laughing a lot more at them, since this is now too old to be funny).
Gosh, how things have changed (not). Other voices and points of view somehow got on the air.
Everyone pays taxes, some people get their taxes returned, but everoyne pays, so this isnt the question.
Well, even though your assertion is NOT true, the question here is on INCOME TAXES and even if we restrict your blanket statement to INCOME TAXES it is still false.
Many of your other comments are just as incorrect, but some do lead to my proposal that there be no distinction between married and unmarried people for tax purposes.
BTW, nobody is giving anybody anything, but since you bring it up please accept the forst $1,000,000.00 that i have not taken from anybody as a gift from me. I have decided not to take it from you. No need to send a thank you or anything, it is my big giveaway.
Well, it's pretty clear that you're a corporate shill, since you relegate the importance of the public to that of "product." But so it goes. Do try to forget that the spectrum is itself public, and that the FCC is regulating it on the basis of the public good.
Yea, there is one.
First, I have no connection to any of the firms involved (other than listening to their programming).
As the way I described the players in that market properly and you object I suspect someone has a hidden agenda. BTW, I am no fan of Noam Chomsky (as is evident in my journal), but this relationship is ONE thing he describes properly.
These voices you are hearing . .
Anyway, if anybody is wishing to "make their voice heard" then they will not be bought up. Contrary to common fantasy "big media" does not run around with automatic weapons forcing people to sell. That is the Urban Music segment of a related industry.
Has any point of view been diminished since 1996? Ask the former employees of stations gobbled up by Clear Channel.
No point of view has been deminished and using an example of unemployment, yet another strawman, proves nothing at all.
Audiences shift, stations follow.
A lovely model for deregulation, they use their wealth and clout to buy stations outperforming their own only to shut them down, use their ownership of venues to deny bands who speak out against them the ability to perform, and use their grossly disporportionate marketpace presence to all but guarantee anyone who speaks out against their violently misogynist coroporate culture will "never work in this town again" in defiance of whistleblower and sexual harassment laws. (That's aside from their notorious political leanings and crappy airplay). Won't it be grand when they can buy 3 TV stations and a couple of newspapers? Then we wouldn't be able to hear a bad word said about those good ol' boys (ain't doin' no harm!)
So they do not agree with you, therefore that is bad. Somehow you think a station that pulls a great market share and is profitable can be vulnerable to being bought out unwillingly? Oh well. As with the rest of your rant, there is no logic there to grab onto.
Calling massive corporations with outsized resources and none of your or my moral restraint "boogeyman" may make you feel better at night, but it doesn't make their misbehavior any less real.
Yep, seems someone has an agenda here. Just come out and say it. You hate competition and you want to force an unpopular agenda onto the air. I prefer the free market of ideas, labor and capital.
You live in Market 1 and you can not find a variety???
Even within Westwood One they have variety, plus you have tons of other stations to choose from on FM/AM/SW1/SW2, etc.
Excuse me, but every time I drive to NYC from the DC area the problem is sifting through so many stations! One of my jokes, that is based on a kernel of truth, is the FM radio is my "NYC finder", as soon as I hear a Ramones song I know I am close.
Even WBAI can be heard well into New Jersey and they complain more than any other station about being "silenced" (see another post of mine about how true that is).
You just need a new radio, that is your solution. Let us know when you get one.
I am happy to be of service in this matter.
If you are trying to convinde people that their radio tuners are soldered into one station then you must be posting from North Korea.
I live in the USA and there are many stations playing all sorts of things that I have no interest in, but others are interested in listening to. Also, I have no trouble finding something entertaining/informative/both, but that is due to my willingness to scan the dial, switch between modulations, listen on the 'net, etc.
Sorry you are having so much trouble, try de-soldering your tuner.
First, there has not even been an accusation of collusion here. Not by the advertisers (who are the real customers of all commercial stations) and not by the product (the listeners/viewers) and not by the government.
Of course it is "easier" for 5 firms, each employing thousands of emplyees, to collude than it is for a larger number to collude, however this is irrelevant in this discussion. If you wish to propose the theory that there is indeed collusion going on now, be my guest.
No "point of view" has been deminished in the slightest. Nobody is shutting anybody down.
Now, if you have a valid point, please bring it forward.
I would like to see restrictions on licenses removed and more station assignments made, but then again, there is no corporate boogyman in my solution to point to.