The notion of basic income is that it would only provide funds for food, a rental shithole, (minimal electricity & heating & public water), and maybe remedial internet/phone.
Its only enough for basic existence; the basic income recipient has to get a job to get "luxuries". That would be the "impetus" to work. BI may not "significantly" drive down GDP. Worse, technology is destroying jobs that can be completed by simple minded people. Significant unemployment is inevitable in the future; BI may be the only method to forstall massive starvation and social chaos.
Where does the money come from? Taxes from the people who work, except now you'll be a much higher percentage in taxes, to float the basic income regime. The key to success is to tax the top 1% of income/asset possessors. 90% to the top bracket may sound outrageous, but that was the rate back in the previous century when income tax was first implemented. And they had no reason to bitch, when they possessed 80% of the entire wealth of the US.
The success of BI will require the flat out acceptance and correctness of Keynesian economic theory; proper planning out of income/asset shifts, proper indirect pricing of "luxuries", and some means to ensure that food/water will always be cheap and plentiful. On one hand, it is European Socialism on steroids, but it certainly is achievable; and the only credible way (in my opinion) to head of the future chaos caused by massive unemployment by technological advance, which we will see in our lifetime.
> This is the result of supporting mediocre candidates who make mediocre decisions and never aspire to do anything extraordinary - government workers.
As opposed to funding the cream of private sector talent, who still have accomplished... almost nothing. Even Elon Musk is only duplicating what was done back in the 1960's.
And your limited mentality is ignoring the actual culprits for this failure: politicians, not the government workers. Back when Apollo was in full swing, the only thing NASA government workers did was run the launch facility. The rocket designs were contracted out to commercial companies. Perhaps there were gummint engineers involved with the module & lander, but even then I bet most of it was contracted out to aerospace companies.
The solution is not dismantling NASA (although it may help some areas). The solution is firing politicians until you get a set who understand they're only supposed to be contracting out commercial companies for the hard work, and award a multi-billion dollar bounty upon the company that gets it done. It may result in more astronaut deaths; but everyone is committed towards getting it done, rather than leaving it to NASA to figure out how to get it done.
Why on earth is NASA even allocating money towards a "crewed" module? On a supposed mission to Mars, you're not going to sit in the same seat for 8-12 months. The module concept made sense when it was a race to put SPAM around the moon. And the slashdot peanut gallery is right; Dragon is going to beat out the Orion module by years. NASA may as well kill this component of the program.
The two real challenges to a manned Mars mission will be to deliver a manned team as quickly as possible (and will probably require a genuine ion thrust engine and/or nuclear detonation propulsion), and to keep them alive long enough to survive the return trip. There's plenty of expenses there to drive the pork barrel; making a redundant, obsolete module design is just a waste of money.
Nope, still think ill of Richard Nixon. I recognize that he had the grace to resign, but with what the prosecutors had, he would have been the first POTUS to lose his presidency to impeachment.
1) You don't "ask" a child molester to leave the kids alone. MS obviously wants more of a presence in the internet niche of the industry. They've allowed IE to become irrelevant for at least since 2009. They've wasted a ton of money on Edge's development, and MS needs something to make Windows 10 look like its a winner. Its a cheap way for MS to get new Windows 10 users to take a look at their new web browser, and its not like MS makes it impossible to go back to making chrome or an inferior 3rd party browser the default again.
2) Speaking as an actual firefox user, for some inexplicable reason, the CEO of firefox insists on releasing notably inferior web browsers from its previous versions at the beginning of 2015!!! They are slower than the firefox versions from the start of the year, and the older firefox versions were still noticeably slower than the competition. The only reason why the older versions were tolerable was that they weren't horribly slow like your current product! Now I frequently get odd moments when firefox seems to need to hit up the CPU, without browsing activity, and because the firefox code has such poorly implemented threading, the browser will seize up while waiting for firefox to resolve its background knitting! And that's on machines with an i7 desktop CPU, and 16GB of RAM!
3) Its a sign of extreme cluelessness when Beard thinks he can deflect from his failure as a CEO, and blame Microsoft for his incompetence. This isn't 2003; no one thinks of MS as the evil empire anymore; more like the asshole grandpa who still doesn't need a bedpan. How about securing patrons or a financing model after Google decided not to give you a free lunch anymore? How about not releasing new versions with new features that denigrate what little positive opinion firefox has left with its users?!?! Your CTO(?) had the right idea when he suggested chucking non-webkit code and starting from scratch. It sounds like unthinkable refactoring that would leave firefox dead in the water for a year, but at least you would retain your current user base!!! Instead of trying to build a McMansion on top of a crumbling foundation.
4) Since he doesn't code, the only constructive thing Beard can do at this point, is try to help find a CEO less incompetent than he is (preferably with a development background), or at least put a deadline on your resignation within 6 months, in order to force the board to find a replacement.
With regard to her Husband: He would have been convicted and jailed as a sexual predator if he had been the executive of a private corporation.
With regard to your comment, you are a fucking moron. Consensual sex between two legal adults = sexual predator??? Also, private corporations cannot convict and imprison an employee. CEO's don't even necessarily lose their job when they violate corporate bylaws, if he/she properly fixed the board. Sexual harrassment suits are settled in CIVIL court; no jail time. And finally, this is slashdot. You're not inciting outrage from the female community, because its miniscule in size. You're just demonstrating your cluelessness.
Her emails almost certainly contain nothing incriminating. She is a smart women that has a lot of experience dealing with scandals and knows exactly what not to do.
Actually, I'm guessing Hilary did the private email setup to conceal her communications vis a vis her husband cutting deals for his foundation, and what she directed state department personnel to do afterwards. If she "really" was a smart woman with a lot of experience dealing with scandals, she wouldn't have been running a private email server at her home. It alone should be a strike against voting for her as POTUS; the problem is we don't know who's going to roll out of the Republican clown car for the general election.
What deletions? Its all backed up on NSA harddrives; everyone knows this. The NSA has no methods to hide, in this case. There isn't going to be any felony prosecution for hiding email, or for Benghazi. What I'm waiting for is a Hilary quid pro quo for her globe trotting, schmoozing husband.
That's precious. There's no way Sanders wins the Democrat nomination for POTUS, even if Hillary gets knocked out of the race. The Powers That Be would smother Sanders with campaign spending against him before that point.
Keep in mind the NSA is the same organisation that should, and probably did, know about the planned 11 September 2001 attacks in the United States of America but refused to share the intelligence with any other government agency or department.
You're an idiot. GWB was warned in august in the National Security briefing. He decided to ignore the memo.
Why was the embassy in a hostile country left undefended in the middle of a riot?
You're an idiot. The answer is "sequestration".
No one with an ounce of common sense gives a rat fuck about Libya. Foreign service personnel die all the time on the job; just like soldiers do in a war zone.
No, the time bomb I'm looking for is if Hilary did a quid pro quo on behalf of her schmoozing, globe-trotting husband.
I'm sick of seeing Hilary as an election trojan horse for the Democrats. I'll be glad if the DoJ launches an investigation on emailgate. If they find something that kills her candidacy, best do it before the Democrat National Convention. If not, there's no chance any Republican in the clown car will beat Hilary.
Doctors talk to each other all the time about their patients.
Doctors are expected to understand confidentiality. Now they just can't provide information on their "triage evaluation" on a specific patient. That triage secrecy would only last for a week tops; the surgery in most cases would be complete by then. We're just trying to prevent "gaming" the system by avoiding low survival percentage patients before a surgeon commits to a patient. Once they're "locked in", they can talk to the triage doctor as much as they like.
The result of "Payment for each Service" rather than "Payment for Outcomes". Standardize on what level of hopelessness the insurance company aren't required to pay, and doctors will cease to prescribe "Hail Mary's".
It doesn't matter. The metrics/system will be determined by the state's medical board, based on national research by statisticians & epidemiologists. The important thing is to prevent hospital managers and surgeons from "gaming" the system.
1) Have a different doctor triage the patient, standardize the criteria, keep the evaluation secret. Strip privileges from doctor that leaks evaluations, and/or fine hospitals for staff caught revealing evaluations. 2) Initially round robin assign the patient to the surgeon pool. If the surgeon declines the patient, keep going to the "pool". If all available surgeons reject patient, null the evaluation value, randomly assign to available surgeon. Add death panel criteria to reject operating on patient. 3) Change the formula to give "more points" to more difficult surgeries. 4) The end result should focus on "doctors that lose the most patients that should "survive" the operation". Add extra penalty points for medical inquests (triggered by lawsuit) that determine the doctor/staff goofed for the final weighted score. 5) Optionally allow publicly available tiered ratings.
I did, using the Windows partition tool in the "advanced" disk management menu.
Yesterday's update of Windows 10 delete the Linux partition on my toy computer.
That will probably become news on Phoronix or The Register, if that's the case. I'm inclined to beleive you're either mistaken, or something other than a Windows 10 update did that.
CURRENTLY, the Greek economy doesn't work without infusions, because of its ridiculous debt, and profligate public sector spending. Greece goes drachma, and eventually it can rebuild its economy to the point some foreign bank would be able to lend it money. The bottom line is that the IMF and EUCB will have to take a hit on its loans, and if they're unreasonable, they're going to lose close to 100% of it.
Greece is not going to raise taxes on its cargo ships, unless it agrees to let an EUCB agency take over its taxation and dictates any federal spending. And I don't think Greece's shipping infrastructure is that significant. The largest cargo ship capacity comes from Panama, Liberia, and some other countries.
ll you need is to cut country off from the international financing,
At best, the EU Central Bank can cut off Greece. The US is not going to cut off USD exchanges; it jeopardizes its status as the world reserve currency. The US did not even cut off Russia, during the Ukraine escapades. The only two countries formally cut off from western banking transactions is North Korea and Iran. And Iran is not even cut off economically from Russia, China, or India. I think even South Korea gets oil from Iran.
The only two banks that Greece's banks will not be able to do business with is the EUCB and the IMF. In the short term, it won't be able to get loans from any Western bank, but that's only the short term.
you make a deal with the people who understand what's actually at stake.
Put Greece into economic slavery for at least a century? Its utterly implausible that Greece can "ever" payback the debt it owes to the EUCB/IMF at 100 cents to the Euro, without having a currency it can inflate. Germany did not continue to payoff its Versailles Treaty World War I debts after World War II.
The bankers are evil. They've lent Greece the equivalent of 170% of its current GNP. Its OBVIOUSLY more than Greece could ever pay back (except to the scumbag Greek politicians). If a banker makes a stupid loan, they should take the loss when the borrower can't pay back. Not try to attempt debtor slavery for generations. You've never heard of "predatory" lending?
Those 'evil' bankers as you like to think of them are simply middlemen who represent EU countries.
No, European politicians are the middlemen of the Evil bankers.
If Greece doesn't pay back it's debt in full the money has to come from somewhere.
Yes, it comes from the bankers. They take a loss on their loan. Its called capitalism.
If Greece doesn't pay back it's debt and it's wiped why wouldn't they rack it back up again with the hope that it again will be wiped.
They should never want to lend to Greece again. Its called learning from their mistakes. On the other hand, there would be nothing stopping Greece from developing trade relationships with countries other than the Eurozone, and rebuilding up their own financial assets. This is what bankruptcy means. The difference is that bankruptcy does not require 100% loss for the creditors, or is the debtor required to repay 100% of outstanding debts. This process is called "negotiation". If neither party can come to an agreement, they go their separate ways. Greece will have to start from scratch, not being able to borrow from other nations at "reasonable" rates. But they won't be stuck with a debt that's 170% of GDP, which they would never be able to pay back in a century (or many centuries).
Slashdot Mirror
The notion of basic income is that it would only provide funds for food, a rental shithole, (minimal electricity & heating & public water), and maybe remedial internet/phone.
Its only enough for basic existence; the basic income recipient has to get a job to get "luxuries". That would be the "impetus" to work. BI may not "significantly" drive down GDP. Worse, technology is destroying jobs that can be completed by simple minded people. Significant unemployment is inevitable in the future; BI may be the only method to forstall massive starvation and social chaos.
Where does the money come from? Taxes from the people who work, except now you'll be a much higher percentage in taxes, to float the basic income regime. The key to success is to tax the top 1% of income/asset possessors. 90% to the top bracket may sound outrageous, but that was the rate back in the previous century when income tax was first implemented. And they had no reason to bitch, when they possessed 80% of the entire wealth of the US.
The success of BI will require the flat out acceptance and correctness of Keynesian economic theory; proper planning out of income/asset shifts, proper indirect pricing of "luxuries", and some means to ensure that food/water will always be cheap and plentiful. On one hand, it is European Socialism on steroids, but it certainly is achievable; and the only credible way (in my opinion) to head of the future chaos caused by massive unemployment by technological advance, which we will see in our lifetime.
> This is the result of supporting mediocre candidates who make mediocre decisions and never aspire to do anything extraordinary - government workers.
As opposed to funding the cream of private sector talent, who still have accomplished... almost nothing. Even Elon Musk is only duplicating what was done back in the 1960's.
And your limited mentality is ignoring the actual culprits for this failure: politicians, not the government workers. Back when Apollo was in full swing, the only thing NASA government workers did was run the launch facility. The rocket designs were contracted out to commercial companies. Perhaps there were gummint engineers involved with the module & lander, but even then I bet most of it was contracted out to aerospace companies.
The solution is not dismantling NASA (although it may help some areas). The solution is firing politicians until you get a set who understand they're only supposed to be contracting out commercial companies for the hard work, and award a multi-billion dollar bounty upon the company that gets it done. It may result in more astronaut deaths; but everyone is committed towards getting it done, rather than leaving it to NASA to figure out how to get it done.
Hate to say it, but you're absolutely right.
Why on earth is NASA even allocating money towards a "crewed" module? On a supposed mission to Mars, you're not going to sit in the same seat for 8-12 months. The module concept made sense when it was a race to put SPAM around the moon. And the slashdot peanut gallery is right; Dragon is going to beat out the Orion module by years. NASA may as well kill this component of the program.
The two real challenges to a manned Mars mission will be to deliver a manned team as quickly as possible (and will probably require a genuine ion thrust engine and/or nuclear detonation propulsion), and to keep them alive long enough to survive the return trip. There's plenty of expenses there to drive the pork barrel; making a redundant, obsolete module design is just a waste of money.
Nope, still think ill of Richard Nixon. I recognize that he had the grace to resign, but with what the prosecutors had, he would have been the first POTUS to lose his presidency to impeachment.
Thank God, as incompetent as Mozilla's management appears, they're still not that stupid.
1) You don't "ask" a child molester to leave the kids alone. MS obviously wants more of a presence in the internet niche of the industry. They've allowed IE to become irrelevant for at least since 2009. They've wasted a ton of money on Edge's development, and MS needs something to make Windows 10 look like its a winner. Its a cheap way for MS to get new Windows 10 users to take a look at their new web browser, and its not like MS makes it impossible to go back to making chrome or an inferior 3rd party browser the default again.
2) Speaking as an actual firefox user, for some inexplicable reason, the CEO of firefox insists on releasing notably inferior web browsers from its previous versions at the beginning of 2015!!! They are slower than the firefox versions from the start of the year, and the older firefox versions were still noticeably slower than the competition. The only reason why the older versions were tolerable was that they weren't horribly slow like your current product! Now I frequently get odd moments when firefox seems to need to hit up the CPU, without browsing activity, and because the firefox code has such poorly implemented threading, the browser will seize up while waiting for firefox to resolve its background knitting! And that's on machines with an i7 desktop CPU, and 16GB of RAM!
3) Its a sign of extreme cluelessness when Beard thinks he can deflect from his failure as a CEO, and blame Microsoft for his incompetence. This isn't 2003; no one thinks of MS as the evil empire anymore; more like the asshole grandpa who still doesn't need a bedpan. How about securing patrons or a financing model after Google decided not to give you a free lunch anymore? How about not releasing new versions with new features that denigrate what little positive opinion firefox has left with its users?!?! Your CTO(?) had the right idea when he suggested chucking non-webkit code and starting from scratch. It sounds like unthinkable refactoring that would leave firefox dead in the water for a year, but at least you would retain your current user base!!! Instead of trying to build a McMansion on top of a crumbling foundation.
4) Since he doesn't code, the only constructive thing Beard can do at this point, is try to help find a CEO less incompetent than he is (preferably with a development background), or at least put a deadline on your resignation within 6 months, in order to force the board to find a replacement.
Yup, I'm glad you see what its about. The Democrats don't need a trojan horse for the 2016 general election.
With regard to her Husband: He would have been convicted and jailed as a sexual predator if he had been the executive of a private corporation.
With regard to your comment, you are a fucking moron. Consensual sex between two legal adults = sexual predator??? Also, private corporations cannot convict and imprison an employee. CEO's don't even necessarily lose their job when they violate corporate bylaws, if he/she properly fixed the board. Sexual harrassment suits are settled in CIVIL court; no jail time. And finally, this is slashdot. You're not inciting outrage from the female community, because its miniscule in size. You're just demonstrating your cluelessness.
Her emails almost certainly contain nothing incriminating. She is a smart women that has a lot of experience dealing with scandals and knows exactly what not to do.
Actually, I'm guessing Hilary did the private email setup to conceal her communications vis a vis her husband cutting deals for his foundation, and what she directed state department personnel to do afterwards. If she "really" was a smart woman with a lot of experience dealing with scandals, she wouldn't have been running a private email server at her home. It alone should be a strike against voting for her as POTUS; the problem is we don't know who's going to roll out of the Republican clown car for the general election.
What deletions? Its all backed up on NSA harddrives; everyone knows this. The NSA has no methods to hide, in this case. There isn't going to be any felony prosecution for hiding email, or for Benghazi. What I'm waiting for is a Hilary quid pro quo for her globe trotting, schmoozing husband.
they're just paving the way for a real progressive candidate.
Bahahahahahahahahahahhahaahhahahahahahahh *choke* *wheeze* *giggle*
That's precious. There's no way Sanders wins the Democrat nomination for POTUS, even if Hillary gets knocked out of the race. The Powers That Be would smother Sanders with campaign spending against him before that point.
Keep in mind the NSA is the same organisation that should, and probably did, know about the planned 11 September 2001 attacks in the United States of America but refused to share the intelligence with any other government agency or department.
You're an idiot. GWB was warned in august in the National Security briefing. He decided to ignore the memo.
Why was the embassy in a hostile country left undefended in the middle of a riot?
You're an idiot. The answer is "sequestration".
No one with an ounce of common sense gives a rat fuck about Libya. Foreign service personnel die all the time on the job; just like soldiers do in a war zone.
No, the time bomb I'm looking for is if Hilary did a quid pro quo on behalf of her schmoozing, globe-trotting husband.
I'm sick of seeing Hilary as an election trojan horse for the Democrats. I'll be glad if the DoJ launches an investigation on emailgate. If they find something that kills her candidacy, best do it before the Democrat National Convention. If not, there's no chance any Republican in the clown car will beat Hilary.
Doctors talk to each other all the time about their patients.
Doctors are expected to understand confidentiality. Now they just can't provide information on their "triage evaluation" on a specific patient. That triage secrecy would only last for a week tops; the surgery in most cases would be complete by then. We're just trying to prevent "gaming" the system by avoiding low survival percentage patients before a surgeon commits to a patient. Once they're "locked in", they can talk to the triage doctor as much as they like.
Tier the settlement payouts. The higher win percentage won't matter if payouts are "egregiously" lower than what could be obtained in court.
The result of "Payment for each Service" rather than "Payment for Outcomes". Standardize on what level of hopelessness the insurance company aren't required to pay, and doctors will cease to prescribe "Hail Mary's".
It doesn't matter. The metrics/system will be determined by the state's medical board, based on national research by statisticians & epidemiologists. The important thing is to prevent hospital managers and surgeons from "gaming" the system.
1) Have a different doctor triage the patient, standardize the criteria, keep the evaluation secret. Strip privileges from doctor that leaks evaluations, and/or fine hospitals for staff caught revealing evaluations.
2) Initially round robin assign the patient to the surgeon pool. If the surgeon declines the patient, keep going to the "pool". If all available surgeons reject patient, null the evaluation value, randomly assign to available surgeon. Add death panel criteria to reject operating on patient.
3) Change the formula to give "more points" to more difficult surgeries.
4) The end result should focus on "doctors that lose the most patients that should "survive" the operation". Add extra penalty points for medical inquests (triggered by lawsuit) that determine the doctor/staff goofed for the final weighted score.
5) Optionally allow publicly available tiered ratings.
Did you, or did Windows do that to you?
I did, using the Windows partition tool in the "advanced" disk management menu.
Yesterday's update of Windows 10 delete the Linux partition on my toy computer.
That will probably become news on Phoronix or The Register, if that's the case. I'm inclined to beleive you're either mistaken, or something other than a Windows 10 update did that.
CURRENTLY, the Greek economy doesn't work without infusions, because of its ridiculous debt, and profligate public sector spending. Greece goes drachma, and eventually it can rebuild its economy to the point some foreign bank would be able to lend it money. The bottom line is that the IMF and EUCB will have to take a hit on its loans, and if they're unreasonable, they're going to lose close to 100% of it.
Greece is not going to raise taxes on its cargo ships, unless it agrees to let an EUCB agency take over its taxation and dictates any federal spending. And I don't think Greece's shipping infrastructure is that significant. The largest cargo ship capacity comes from Panama, Liberia, and some other countries.
ll you need is to cut country off from the international financing,
At best, the EU Central Bank can cut off Greece. The US is not going to cut off USD exchanges; it jeopardizes its status as the world reserve currency. The US did not even cut off Russia, during the Ukraine escapades. The only two countries formally cut off from western banking transactions is North Korea and Iran. And Iran is not even cut off economically from Russia, China, or India. I think even South Korea gets oil from Iran.
The only two banks that Greece's banks will not be able to do business with is the EUCB and the IMF. In the short term, it won't be able to get loans from any Western bank, but that's only the short term.
you make a deal with the people who understand what's actually at stake.
Put Greece into economic slavery for at least a century? Its utterly implausible that Greece can "ever" payback the debt it owes to the EUCB/IMF at 100 cents to the Euro, without having a currency it can inflate. Germany did not continue to payoff its Versailles Treaty World War I debts after World War II.
All of Styx, Nix, Kerberos, and Hydra orbit the barycenter.
And how do YOU know that?
The bankers are evil. They've lent Greece the equivalent of 170% of its current GNP. Its OBVIOUSLY more than Greece could ever pay back (except to the scumbag Greek politicians). If a banker makes a stupid loan, they should take the loss when the borrower can't pay back. Not try to attempt debtor slavery for generations. You've never heard of "predatory" lending?
Those 'evil' bankers as you like to think of them are simply middlemen who represent EU countries.
No, European politicians are the middlemen of the Evil bankers.
If Greece doesn't pay back it's debt in full the money has to come from somewhere.
Yes, it comes from the bankers. They take a loss on their loan. Its called capitalism.
If Greece doesn't pay back it's debt and it's wiped why wouldn't they rack it back up again with the hope that it again will be wiped.
They should never want to lend to Greece again. Its called learning from their mistakes. On the other hand, there would be nothing stopping Greece from developing trade relationships with countries other than the Eurozone, and rebuilding up their own financial assets. This is what bankruptcy means. The difference is that bankruptcy does not require 100% loss for the creditors, or is the debtor required to repay 100% of outstanding debts. This process is called "negotiation". If neither party can come to an agreement, they go their separate ways. Greece will have to start from scratch, not being able to borrow from other nations at "reasonable" rates. But they won't be stuck with a debt that's 170% of GDP, which they would never be able to pay back in a century (or many centuries).