I'd say it's more like "We didn't like how you were doing things before, so we're going to change them." Call it an expansion of the Monroe Doctrine, if you will. And yes, the prospect of getting large amounts of oil from a nation other than Saudi Arabia was most certainly a factor.
Not saying that any of this SHOULD have happened. It just sounds like your reasoning is grounded solely in your dislike for Bush, and that makes a poor basis for a rational argument.
Perhaps we could up that production a bit by ending the farm subsidies that pay farmers to NOT grow crops.
More efficient engines would be great, but we have a renewable resource that we could be using NOW. Hydrogen fuel cells and whatnot, while promising technologies, are not here yet.
Indeed, because throwing money at problems has been so successful at solving other societal problems.
Now believe it or not, I'm all for alternative fuels and whatnot. I just don't think that saddling commuters with punative taxes (which is what your suggestion essentially boils down to) is the way to get there.
Frankly, I can't understand why third-world and developing countries can have cars that run on 100% ethanol, yet we in the States can't. Well, I do.... but it still doesn't make any practical sense. I don't know how we can loosen oil companies' stranglehold on this country, but I'm pretty sure that simply raising taxes isn't the answer to that particular problem.
All I'm asking for is some accurate and consistent depiction of the issue at hand. I suspect that the number of people who wake up with no concept of who they are is similar to the number of movie and record executives murdered/kidnapped on the high seas.
I'm really tired of hearing this term. Nobody's identity is being physically stolen; therefore it is not theft. Please reference a SINGLE case when a "victim" woke up to find that he/she NO LONGER HAD AN IDENTITY!! It's even more absurd than arguing that copyright infringement is theft!
It really grinds my gears when industry lobbyists and shills use inflammatory rhetoric to exaggerate the impact of mundane, victimless crimes.
"The worst part about this is that RMS is actually one of the most qualified people to discuss the topic"...and yet he doesn't even try to make people take him seriously.
Like it or not, appearance goes a long way in establishing one's credibility. RMS knows this, yet chose not to expend even a minimal effort to enhance his image.
For all of his hard work for free software, he seems to go out of his way to stifle his own movement. If he considers maintaning his "revolutionary" vagrant appearance more important than the success of his work, perhaps you should start looking for a new spokesperson.
Clearly, though, you feel that he doesn't give enough. What, then, would be enough? How many billions of dollars must Bill Gates give away in order to get your approval?
My guess is that you (and most people here) will always demonize Gates regardless of any enormous positive impact he ends up making on the world. That isn't moral superiority; that's enmity.
Why does it not surprise me that thankless dickheads would look such a gift horse in the mouth, even when it has the potential to benefit an entire community.
That's the kind of thoughtless, reactionary, religious zealotry that most people here ridicule.
I love people like you who decide for the rest of us Scrooge McDucks how much we aught to be giving away to charity. Thank goodness the Bill Gateses of the world don't give to charity in order to impress thankless people like you. Otherwise they'd see the futility of that goal and stop giving altogether.
Unless you care to match his contributions, I kindly invite you to shut the hell up.
"The government makes a few things "Free" such as parks, streets, beaches, police, army,... but people would refuse to even fund those basic things if they had the choice."
Indeed. Thank GOD us taxpayers don't have any significant power over our benevolent legislative overlords.
I can't disagree with anything you said. The answer, however, isn't to keep our borders wide open while waiting for Mexico to get their act together.
And I also imagine that any Mexican trying to legally immigrate to the U.S. has got to be extremely frustrated with both Fox and Bush. I can't think of a worse slap in the face to them than rewarding illegals by moving them (essentially) to the front of the line.
Perhaps your country should start figuring out why virtually every citizen wants to leave, and fix your own goddamned problems instead of exporting them here. We're tired of being your welfare state.
And if honest resentment and frustration is trollish, than by God mod me down. Somebody needs to say it.
The Mexican government actively encourages their citizens to enter to the U.S. illegally, and often assists them in doing so. From my point of view, our relations are hardly "benign".
Of course, GP already knows this, but rather chooses to use emotional rhetoric to justify illegal immigration. Either that, or GP doesn't differentiate between "guest" and "trespasser".
Ubuntu isn't necessarily trying to "put a dent" in Windows. Maybe they just want to make a good Linux distribution. You can have the latter without being motivated by the former.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd say it's more like "We didn't like how you were doing things before, so we're going to change them." Call it an expansion of the Monroe Doctrine, if you will. And yes, the prospect of getting large amounts of oil from a nation other than Saudi Arabia was most certainly a factor.
Not saying that any of this SHOULD have happened. It just sounds like your reasoning is grounded solely in your dislike for Bush, and that makes a poor basis for a rational argument.
Perhaps we could up that production a bit by ending the farm subsidies that pay farmers to NOT grow crops.
More efficient engines would be great, but we have a renewable resource that we could be using NOW. Hydrogen fuel cells and whatnot, while promising technologies, are not here yet.
"I live in the USA, and I welcome a higher gas tax and higher gas prices"
"Even though higher gas prices aren't hurting me substantially"
Thank goodness you're the only person in this country who matters.
Indeed, because throwing money at problems has been so successful at solving other societal problems.
Now believe it or not, I'm all for alternative fuels and whatnot. I just don't think that saddling commuters with punative taxes (which is what your suggestion essentially boils down to) is the way to get there.
Frankly, I can't understand why third-world and developing countries can have cars that run on 100% ethanol, yet we in the States can't. Well, I do.... but it still doesn't make any practical sense. I don't know how we can loosen oil companies' stranglehold on this country, but I'm pretty sure that simply raising taxes isn't the answer to that particular problem.
Because NOT letting people run around with guns really solved Washington DC's and Chicago's violent crime problem, didn't it?
You are correct. My identity has never been physically taken from me without (or with, for that matter) my consent.
(and 2 down-mods on a single post constitutes "excessive bad posting"? What kind of fascists are running this site?)
Copyright infringement != theft
Fraud != theft
Extortion != theft
All I'm asking for is some accurate and consistent depiction of the issue at hand. I suspect that the number of people who wake up with no concept of who they are is similar to the number of movie and record executives murdered/kidnapped on the high seas.
I'm really tired of hearing this term. Nobody's identity is being physically stolen; therefore it is not theft. Please reference a SINGLE case when a "victim" woke up to find that he/she NO LONGER HAD AN IDENTITY!! It's even more absurd than arguing that copyright infringement is theft!
It really grinds my gears when industry lobbyists and shills use inflammatory rhetoric to exaggerate the impact of mundane, victimless crimes.
Of course, this is a cheap media stunt.
And the FSF will get exactly what they paid for.
"The worst part about this is that RMS is actually one of the most qualified people to discuss the topic" ...and yet he doesn't even try to make people take him seriously.
Like it or not, appearance goes a long way in establishing one's credibility. RMS knows this, yet chose not to expend even a minimal effort to enhance his image.
For all of his hard work for free software, he seems to go out of his way to stifle his own movement. If he considers maintaning his "revolutionary" vagrant appearance more important than the success of his work, perhaps you should start looking for a new spokesperson.
"...RMS was acting in a meglamonaical fashion in this particular case."
Stallman? Megalomaniacal?? Oh God! Say it isn't so!
Clearly, though, you feel that he doesn't give enough. What, then, would be enough? How many billions of dollars must Bill Gates give away in order to get your approval?
My guess is that you (and most people here) will always demonize Gates regardless of any enormous positive impact he ends up making on the world. That isn't moral superiority; that's enmity.
Do you remember all those other prospective students you "mercilessly crushed" when you were admitted to college?
Do you remember all those other job-seekers you "mercilessly crushed" when you got your first job?
Do you remember all those other colleagues you "mercilessly crushed" when you got that performance bonus?
What kind of a despised, cut-throat, take-no-prisoners villain shold YOU be remembered as?
Why does it not surprise me that thankless dickheads would look such a gift horse in the mouth, even when it has the potential to benefit an entire community.
That's the kind of thoughtless, reactionary, religious zealotry that most people here ridicule.
I love people like you who decide for the rest of us Scrooge McDucks how much we aught to be giving away to charity. Thank goodness the Bill Gateses of the world don't give to charity in order to impress thankless people like you. Otherwise they'd see the futility of that goal and stop giving altogether.
Unless you care to match his contributions, I kindly invite you to shut the hell up.
And if you MUST own one of these potential murderers, for God's sake get some insurance!
"The government makes a few things "Free" such as parks, streets, beaches, police, army, ... but people would refuse to even fund those basic things if they had the choice."
Indeed. Thank GOD us taxpayers don't have any significant power over our benevolent legislative overlords.
See Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution:
"No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed."
Meaning that if a law is passed today making a certain activity illegal, one cannot be retroactively prosecuted under that law.
Insightful? Com'on folks, high school civics.
Parent would only be funny if he wasn't serious. He really DOES think he's making the world a better place! How charmingly self-righteous!
I can't disagree with anything you said. The answer, however, isn't to keep our borders wide open while waiting for Mexico to get their act together.
And I also imagine that any Mexican trying to legally immigrate to the U.S. has got to be extremely frustrated with both Fox and Bush. I can't think of a worse slap in the face to them than rewarding illegals by moving them (essentially) to the front of the line.
Perhaps your country should start figuring out why virtually every citizen wants to leave, and fix your own goddamned problems instead of exporting them here. We're tired of being your welfare state.
And if honest resentment and frustration is trollish, than by God mod me down. Somebody needs to say it.
The Mexican government actively encourages their citizens to enter to the U.S. illegally, and often assists them in doing so. From my point of view, our relations are hardly "benign".
Of course, GP already knows this, but rather chooses to use emotional rhetoric to justify illegal immigration. Either that, or GP doesn't differentiate between "guest" and "trespasser".
Ubuntu isn't necessarily trying to "put a dent" in Windows. Maybe they just want to make a good Linux distribution. You can have the latter without being motivated by the former.
Bu... bu... but what if she wants to find professional-grade graphics manipulation program and all she has to work with is Paint, and...
Forget it man, parent proved his point. Time to cut your losses.