Much as I agree with your premise, I have to argue with your examples. Dysentery and the Flu were "lucky" accidents for British and Spanish empire builders. Maybe, yellow fever was intentionally distributed by donated blankets -- but these biological weapons are really hard to aim, and the bad hygiene of Europeans, was never INTENTIONALLY a military strategy.
A case could be made, however, for Microbes deciding human dominance, over actual militaries. Even in the US Civil War, more troops died of poor footwear and the Flu, than from enemy bullets. Regardless of the invention of rifled muzzles and cannons giving the North an advantage for range -- it's like good boots and coats won the war.
In addition; when the British and French introduced Alcohol to Indians, addiction was common, and they could later trade bottles for the deaths of other Indians (later, collecting "scalps" in grisly simile to fur trading), is probably a better example of damaging your opponent without killing them directly.
>> If the French had perhaps urged the British, after the Americans had broken off from their "stewardship", to spend all their money on internal security, and on building ships to control a land-locked economy, well, that would have been very clever.
A lot of Native Americans died by fighting proxy wars between the French and English, definitely a downside of the natives having no central government.
>> Maybe MODERN warfare will make technology and robots cause more damage than disease -- but it's also likely they will end up mimicking the same battle of the immune system; just in more virtual environments. The weakest part of the robot is it's software, and the resilience of it's delicate components, after all.
The DOWNSIDE of your system, is that in cities like New York, the neighbors are going to take a sledge to your car if it blares for more than a minute, and they will fine you more than your car is worth if it happens again.
I'm 5'10" and built like a slim gymnast who has let himself go. I weigh 220 lbs but sometimes I bloat a bit and my love handles need more love.
I like long walks on the beach and jogging -- well, when you do it of course. I'll just enjoy a lemon spritzer and a steamed towel.
What are the chances of getting you to chase me if I steal your mouse? How angry will you be -- because I plan to be naughty./// OK, just kidding -- I couldn't help it because it sounded like you were filling out a personals column and GPS/WiFi sound REALLY kinky.
You don't need to read anyone else's answers -- because I have it.
It doesn't require Lo-Jack, expensive devices, software, or a McGyvered solution....... are you sitting down, because this will blow your mind? No, really, make sure you are seated.
OK, here goes;
Dirty Laundry. Especially if you've got some underwear or old socks. I keep dirty gym clothes in my front seat for just this situation -- you slide your laptop under that, and thieves have better things to do. Theft is a VISUAL crime -- what they see is what they take. If there is a nice car and nothing inside it -- then it might be in the trunk. If it's a nice car and they see dirty socks -- they know you are a slob and figure someone ELSE has the iPad.
I really like the idea of getting a Cert for being able to drive drunk -- it makes a lot of sense.
For instance, because of my Irish background -- I should just be exempt, for as my alcohol level climbs, my coordination actually improves!
But MOST of the drunk driving arrests in our area are going to be due to road blocks or sweeps -- which would be bad for me.
As long as I don't pass out -- I'm good to drive.
Along the same lines, there are people with SUVs, no distractions, and no alcohol who cannot function with a radio on. You often see them singing to themselves as they drive through the stop light and ploy through your car. It isn't until the second verse of "Sailing Away" that they notice that they are dragging someone's dog on their bumper.
My daughter is fed up that I haven't bought her an iPhone yet. Does that count?
Of course not. Even though 52% of surveyed kids all wanted an iPhone, iPad, or iTouch for Christmas, the MARKETING TRUTH here is that young people are fed up with smart phones.
Unless of course "soured" is a new code word for "Windows Mobile OS", and we aren't talking about Gummy Bears...
"Observation" is probably the most epically bad choice of words ever in the history of physics.
It's spawned the entire New Age religion -- as if the particles were noticing "eyes on them" and started to behave.
Any interaction with other particles/waves causes decoherence. So hopefully, this will help quell all the romantic notions that particles have consciousness -- it really isn't necessary.
I've got a much simpler, amateur explanation for Quantum Observation;
Let's say the Photon is the size of a person, or an Electron the size of a Pig. "Observation" is like launching a Cow at that Human or Pig with a catapult, and then being totally surprised that you ruined the planned stroll of that person/pig.
Before I take the alleged "Law of Quantum Physics" concerning observation seriously, we've got to find a way to OBSERVE with things that have less mass and energy than the particle or wave in question.
I bought an iTouch and got an iPad (included as severance from my company). The latest device has bout 32 Gigs and that is almost entirely Apps. Most of these apps have been free, and a handful cost less than $5.
Having had iPods, iTouch and now iPad for about as long as they've been available, I think in total I probably spent less than $150 since the iTunes store has been ready for business. I get most of my music from "can't pass up" deals at Amazon.
Apple would go out of business if it depended on the iTunes store; it's obviously a loss-leader.
>> The iHaters saying I've been ripped off and I'm a clueless snob chasing expensive and trendy baubles do not consider that I never have had a car lease. I've finally paid off my home, and I haven't purchased a shiny Bauble since I married my wife. I only pay for VALUE.
I'm with CircleTimesSquare on this.... "Big Government" is a useless term.
What you meant to say is "strong centralized government" -- which should be understood independent on how much money is spent, or how many people hired to work for government.
We have a military and about 1 million people working in organizations like; TSA, NSA, HMS, CIA, etc. I think we could SHRINK that part. We also have bureaucrats who do reports on economics. We have the FDA, EPA, CDC -- all necessary functions if they weren't corrupted by a corrupt government and lobbying.
The "size" is independent of its power. And if Government could shut down a company like BP when it failed to follow it's regulations and destroyed an ocean -- then other companies wouldn't be using actuarial tables to decide if they can "get away with" risking public life and the environment.
Our election system and fundraising, mean that we have a WEAK Government, that is dependent on corporate money and therefore is totally under its influence.
capitalism is an economic system that can exist within different political systems, what you don't understand is that capitalism is not itself a political system.... When a company like BP has so much money and we have an ELECTION system that requires money and can take it from Corporations -- that means a lot of Judges and Politicians OWE BP. Your semantic point doesn't change the reality of the situation; Capitalism without restraint BECOMES the government.
Haiti, Mexico, Honduras and many other totalitarian and awful places to be poor are "run" by Capitalists. It doesn't matter what political system you begin with if any group outside the government is calling the shots.
You nailed it quite succinctly. The COMPLAINTS about our systems are not necessarily "anti-capitalism" -- they are anti-corruption. And as you point out, corruption is inevitable if you don't make RULES that force the market to remain open.
The reason the OWS protests are in front of Wall Street and not the Government -- is that they recognize that Hank Paulson allows Obama to be President -- not the other way around.
Tickets are a "right to rent a space" - so the customer doesn't own a ticket -- the ticket represents a "rental."
If we follow the LAWS of this nation; "The Consumer is Sovereign." Meaning; I can buy a car and sell it, and I can run it off a cliff if it doesn't damage someone else's property or cause harm -- it is MY car. Even on that concept, our CorpGov has put limits, because you cannot buy and sell more than a couple cars a year in most states -- obviously because this interferes with "legitimate car dealers" -- meaning those who've paid for the legislation to stop you.
When I buy an airplane ticket -- I often check the prices of some online "clearinghouses" for a better price -- why does TicketMaster raise prices, but Travelocity lowers them? They are both instances of a unique event and an empty seat that means a loss if it isn't filled. But with Airlines, the "scalper" is selling off otherwise unused seats, and,... well, in the case of a scalper, they are trying to profit while not being a mega-billion dollar company like TicketMaster.
If it were MERELY a way to get tickets online-- then charging a Buck for the "service" would be fine. But it's really a profit-gobbling obscenity, that creates a monopoly for Ticket prices.
We even have laws against scalping now -- which wouldn't be necessary if tickets were just SOLD at the gate, or there were enough concerts/large venue performances that scarcity weren't a problem.
But TicketMaster in essence is a Monopoly on top of local Monopolies. You aren't going to watch a Braves baseball game unless you are at the Braves stadium or their competitors -- this goes the same for watching a concert; reasonably, nobody is going to drive 200 miles to the next concert venue for that particular artist.
>> So either there will have to be a regulated Limit on prices -- because TicketMaster can fix them, or there has to be no TICKETMASTER at all. The could be sold off to all the local companies that sell tickets as a "clearinghouse" since that's the useful function they serve.
When most of the profits go to the middleman -- there is ALWAYS a problem in a system.
In this case, LightSquared might be taking bandwidth away from Ad Hoc wireless networks -- of course Grassley is concerned about his military backers and their precession GPS -- likely because Drones given to police stations are going to need to accurately pinpoint hippies in a crowd to drop payloads of Pepper Gas on.
>> Either way; I'd much prefer that a bunch of people started using WiMax and creating a self-organizing Internet of our own. Come on SlashDot - we are just the geeky anarchists to get it done!
If you get stung a lot by bees, pretty soon, you are going to suspect that bees sting.
If you were trying to prove that Grassly was actually concerned about "government transparency" -- then please refer to the secret meetings for "indefinite detention" and tell me how transparent THAT is.
Trying to prove that Grassly isn't doing this for the Military-grade GPS system or some other donor is a bit HIGHER BAR. Assuming the worst isn't unreasonable these days.
It would cost money to start, and then it could MAKE more money than it costs by selling soil.
BEFORE we can do this, however, we have to have a revolution and a good barbecue sauce to deal with all the corruption. If Congress doesn't give up it's Pork, keep reminding them how tasty Newt Gingrich looks.
I think that we should FEAR every new proposal until we get election reform, because a municipal compost will of course be used for the Dissidents captured by the DHS Drones flying over our cities.
MANDATORY composting for the city doesn't mean YOU have to mandatorily compost does it? Couldn't we just have a big goat or bucket that makes the rounds and you bring out your dead or spoiled cabbages? What do you really fear here?
AND don't be the token "reasonable" Libertarian and spoil my clear mental picture: You are a white engineer or programmer, between the age of 19 and not-to-old to clear brush/kill commies with your bare teeth. You had a paper-route or some other make-work job that taught you the value of earning your own beer money. You made good grades in College, so you figure everyone below the curve is fodder for Darwin. You Believe that Rules should apply to everyone, as long as none of these rules actually annoys you -- then; "THOSE DAMN TAXES!" To calm down/meditate, you drag out a well bookmarked and highlighted addition of "Atlas Shrugged" and re-read the part where the last smart people are necessary to impregnate the last fertile females, this of course, means YOU. The Turner diaries are under a glass that says; "In case of Emergencies."
That some small areas were melting -- I can believe. Greenland also has lots of volcanic activity.
However, today we've got satellites and can look over the entire planet.
I also fail to see how this anecdote, is not something that thousands of Climatologists might have overlooked.
>> This "doubt" of Global Warming, is kind of like a write-in campaign from thousands of school kids saying; "Please don't launch your rocket until all the math that you haven't figured out yet is solved!" And in crayon, thousands of school kids show how Zero isn't a number because there isn't anything left, and might point out that the sun looks like a Zero -- so someone might have been confused. It's all very cute and adorable, but it would mean we'd never have gotten off the planet and we cannot move forward until every anecdotal discrepancy is accounted for to the satisfaction of people who couldn't be bothered to become Rocket Scientists or Climatologists.
When Climatologists can walk on water AND perfectly predict future weather patterns (a higher bar from predicting CHANGE) you will QUIT BEING AN ASSHOLE.
Excuse them for just trying to warn you. I suppose the Smoke Alarm in your house is also inaccurate because it can be confused by kitchen smoke -- might as well throw that out as well.
When the world is perfect, you will then be free to be responsible.
We get so excited about the debate of "should we tax or shouldn't we" -- we forget the debate about; "Why do we have a 'Wall Street' to begin with?" Turning over a stock in anything less than three years, and definitely less than 1 year is NOT an investment in a company -- it's an attempt to "play the market." One or two day traders might win at this -- but the professionals, who have machines that can trade in nanoseconds and shave time with the competition by using shorter network lengths to WS computers for trades are going to win. Market manipulation is also too lucrative to worry about the SEC and such -- much better to buy the regulators (as we've seen).
>> However, when we consider the Trillions more that our Government had to bail out Wall Street more than just the public "TARP funds" -- and that banks like Bank of America might be posting bigger losses in the range of $75 Trillion with the FDIC backing them. So a few pennies a trade will require a few hundred years just to PAY BACK expenses they've incurred -- much less "cover" future risks.
Another way to say this is; who is MORE crazy? The person who wants to tax the Mafia or the person who thinks you cannot trust the mafia in the first place? There is no way a group that can get the FDIC to cover $75 Trillion in "bad bets" after the fact, and AFTER a bail out for the same "mistake" (I call it fraud), is a group that CANNOT get around any tax. The Day Trader will see a tax, but if there is enough of a fee to stop the market manipulators -- be sure that they will get compensated where you are not looking.
Wall Street's EXCUSE to suck up 40% of all profits is that they help provide funds to let companies grow -- having seen the rampant leveraged buyouts, the VC funds used to sell away parts of companies, and the shuttering of tens of thousands of businesses to provide "fodder" for Hedge Funds -- it's a bit like allowing a Mercenary to continue to operate in a country after wiping out a town, because you've seen him walk a little old lady across the street once.
I once made my living with Financial Services companies -- but it felt a bit like carrying ammunition for a mercenary. Biting the hand that feeds you should be a mark of integrity, and I'd like to make a living building something or making the world a better place. ALL Financial services are a ruse, because they are predicated on "investing wisely" -- which is always a pitch of "getting back more than you put in." For every wise investment to do better than just the average of stocks, SOMEONE has to lose. By the time a company has stocks on Wall Street, it's either on someone's menu or it has all the money it needs -- and some VC firm reaped that benefit before you did.
You have to PAY the Army somehow to drag away the lazy workers who don't like the money YOU say that they earned. Later, the Military MIGHT say they deserve more money because beating skulls in is hard work.
Only the people who benefit, can actually BE Libertarians in this scenario, so I suppose, it fits in perfectly with a free market dictatorship like China.
but the lack of pollution controls, means that there is nobody down-wind, and you cannot benefit from screwing up the environment -- because it is already screwed.
>> Face it; China LOOKS like a Libertarian utopia, but it's already BEEN a Libertarian utopia and there is nothing left to squeeze. The USA is actually a better Libertarian Utopia, because we still have a few suckers who can lower wages, we still have some clean water supplies that can get privatized, and GE can still can up clean air and sell you that while they fill the rest with smog.
We need to be more grateful for the USA for all the great things it has -- until of course, it is "utopia'd" into the ground.
A Libertarian Utopia on an 880 square kilometer ice sheet?
In theory, it sounds like a great idea -- which works out perfectly for Libertarians as "in theory," they have great ideas as well.
Unfortunately, there is no middle class of Penguins there for Polar Bears to work to death, nor an infrastructure created by intensive "wealth stealing" socialist programs to run into the ground with neglect to cover for the Low Tax theory of progress.
Of course, they've probably got DECADES to go before the iceberg breaks up -- so they've got THAT long not to refreeze ice or invest in a new iceberg, so if their only goal is staying afloat with "FREE MARKET FORCES" -- they can take credit for air pockets in ice, I suppose.
As long as this results in a lot of Libertarian pioneers not using up our air talking bitching about who "earns" stuff while the float away on a block of ice -- It's at least a worthy endeavor.
Slashdot Mirror
Much as I agree with your premise, I have to argue with your examples.
Dysentery and the Flu were "lucky" accidents for British and Spanish empire builders. Maybe, yellow fever was intentionally distributed by donated blankets -- but these biological weapons are really hard to aim, and the bad hygiene of Europeans, was never INTENTIONALLY a military strategy.
A case could be made, however, for Microbes deciding human dominance, over actual militaries. Even in the US Civil War, more troops died of poor footwear and the Flu, than from enemy bullets. Regardless of the invention of rifled muzzles and cannons giving the North an advantage for range -- it's like good boots and coats won the war.
In addition; when the British and French introduced Alcohol to Indians, addiction was common, and they could later trade bottles for the deaths of other Indians (later, collecting "scalps" in grisly simile to fur trading), is probably a better example of damaging your opponent without killing them directly.
>> If the French had perhaps urged the British, after the Americans had broken off from their "stewardship", to spend all their money on internal security, and on building ships to control a land-locked economy, well, that would have been very clever.
A lot of Native Americans died by fighting proxy wars between the French and English, definitely a downside of the natives having no central government.
>> Maybe MODERN warfare will make technology and robots cause more damage than disease -- but it's also likely they will end up mimicking the same battle of the immune system; just in more virtual environments. The weakest part of the robot is it's software, and the resilience of it's delicate components, after all.
The DOWNSIDE of your system, is that in cities like New York, the neighbors are going to take a sledge to your car if it blares for more than a minute, and they will fine you more than your car is worth if it happens again.
I'm 5'10" and built like a slim gymnast who has let himself go. I weigh 220 lbs but sometimes I bloat a bit and my love handles need more love.
I like long walks on the beach and jogging -- well, when you do it of course. I'll just enjoy a lemon spritzer and a steamed towel.
What are the chances of getting you to chase me if I steal your mouse? How angry will you be -- because I plan to be naughty. /// OK, just kidding -- I couldn't help it because it sounded like you were filling out a personals column and GPS/WiFi sound REALLY kinky.
You don't need to read anyone else's answers -- because I have it.
It doesn't require Lo-Jack, expensive devices, software, or a McGyvered solution.... ... are you sitting down, because this will blow your mind? No, really, make sure you are seated.
OK, here goes;
Dirty Laundry. Especially if you've got some underwear or old socks. I keep dirty gym clothes in my front seat for just this situation -- you slide your laptop under that, and thieves have better things to do. Theft is a VISUAL crime -- what they see is what they take. If there is a nice car and nothing inside it -- then it might be in the trunk. If it's a nice car and they see dirty socks -- they know you are a slob and figure someone ELSE has the iPad.
I really like the idea of getting a Cert for being able to drive drunk -- it makes a lot of sense.
For instance, because of my Irish background -- I should just be exempt, for as my alcohol level climbs, my coordination actually improves!
But MOST of the drunk driving arrests in our area are going to be due to road blocks or sweeps -- which would be bad for me.
As long as I don't pass out -- I'm good to drive.
Along the same lines, there are people with SUVs, no distractions, and no alcohol who cannot function with a radio on. You often see them singing to themselves as they drive through the stop light and ploy through your car. It isn't until the second verse of "Sailing Away" that they notice that they are dragging someone's dog on their bumper.
My daughter is fed up that I haven't bought her an iPhone yet. Does that count?
Of course not. Even though 52% of surveyed kids all wanted an iPhone, iPad, or iTouch for Christmas, the MARKETING TRUTH here is that young people are fed up with smart phones.
Unless of course "soured" is a new code word for "Windows Mobile OS", and we aren't talking about Gummy Bears...
"Observation" is probably the most epically bad choice of words ever in the history of physics.
It's spawned the entire New Age religion -- as if the particles were noticing "eyes on them" and started to behave.
Any interaction with other particles/waves causes decoherence. So hopefully, this will help quell all the romantic notions that particles have consciousness -- it really isn't necessary.
I've got a much simpler, amateur explanation for Quantum Observation;
Let's say the Photon is the size of a person, or an Electron the size of a Pig. "Observation" is like launching a Cow at that Human or Pig with a catapult, and then being totally surprised that you ruined the planned stroll of that person/pig.
Before I take the alleged "Law of Quantum Physics" concerning observation seriously, we've got to find a way to OBSERVE with things that have less mass and energy than the particle or wave in question.
from my own experience I'd have to concur.
I bought an iTouch and got an iPad (included as severance from my company). The latest device has bout 32 Gigs and that is almost entirely Apps. Most of these apps have been free, and a handful cost less than $5.
Having had iPods, iTouch and now iPad for about as long as they've been available, I think in total I probably spent less than $150 since the iTunes store has been ready for business. I get most of my music from "can't pass up" deals at Amazon.
Apple would go out of business if it depended on the iTunes store; it's obviously a loss-leader.
>> The iHaters saying I've been ripped off and I'm a clueless snob chasing expensive and trendy baubles do not consider that I never have had a car lease. I've finally paid off my home, and I haven't purchased a shiny Bauble since I married my wife. I only pay for VALUE.
I think the BEST example of "profits before people" is the Irish Potato famine.
All tyrannies can be chalked up to; "Unresponsive to the common good of the people."
I'm with CircleTimesSquare on this .... "Big Government" is a useless term.
What you meant to say is "strong centralized government" -- which should be understood independent on how much money is spent, or how many people hired to work for government.
We have a military and about 1 million people working in organizations like; TSA, NSA, HMS, CIA, etc. I think we could SHRINK that part.
We also have bureaucrats who do reports on economics. We have the FDA, EPA, CDC -- all necessary functions if they weren't corrupted by a corrupt government and lobbying.
The "size" is independent of its power. And if Government could shut down a company like BP when it failed to follow it's regulations and destroyed an ocean -- then other companies wouldn't be using actuarial tables to decide if they can "get away with" risking public life and the environment.
Our election system and fundraising, mean that we have a WEAK Government, that is dependent on corporate money and therefore is totally under its influence.
capitalism is an economic system that can exist within different political systems, what you don't understand is that capitalism is not itself a political system. ... When a company like BP has so much money and we have an ELECTION system that requires money and can take it from Corporations -- that means a lot of Judges and Politicians OWE BP. Your semantic point doesn't change the reality of the situation; Capitalism without restraint BECOMES the government.
Haiti, Mexico, Honduras and many other totalitarian and awful places to be poor are "run" by Capitalists. It doesn't matter what political system you begin with if any group outside the government is calling the shots.
Can we MOD this up to 11 please?
You nailed it quite succinctly. The COMPLAINTS about our systems are not necessarily "anti-capitalism" -- they are anti-corruption. And as you point out, corruption is inevitable if you don't make RULES that force the market to remain open.
The reason the OWS protests are in front of Wall Street and not the Government -- is that they recognize that Hank Paulson allows Obama to be President -- not the other way around.
Scalping is only illegal based on a technicality.
Tickets are a "right to rent a space" - so the customer doesn't own a ticket -- the ticket represents a "rental."
If we follow the LAWS of this nation; "The Consumer is Sovereign." Meaning; I can buy a car and sell it, and I can run it off a cliff if it doesn't damage someone else's property or cause harm -- it is MY car. Even on that concept, our CorpGov has put limits, because you cannot buy and sell more than a couple cars a year in most states -- obviously because this interferes with "legitimate car dealers" -- meaning those who've paid for the legislation to stop you.
When I buy an airplane ticket -- I often check the prices of some online "clearinghouses" for a better price -- why does TicketMaster raise prices, but Travelocity lowers them? They are both instances of a unique event and an empty seat that means a loss if it isn't filled. But with Airlines, the "scalper" is selling off otherwise unused seats, and,... well, in the case of a scalper, they are trying to profit while not being a mega-billion dollar company like TicketMaster.
Crooks hate competition.
If it were MERELY a way to get tickets online-- then charging a Buck for the "service" would be fine. But it's really a profit-gobbling obscenity, that creates a monopoly for Ticket prices.
We even have laws against scalping now -- which wouldn't be necessary if tickets were just SOLD at the gate, or there were enough concerts/large venue performances that scarcity weren't a problem.
But TicketMaster in essence is a Monopoly on top of local Monopolies. You aren't going to watch a Braves baseball game unless you are at the Braves stadium or their competitors -- this goes the same for watching a concert; reasonably, nobody is going to drive 200 miles to the next concert venue for that particular artist.
>> So either there will have to be a regulated Limit on prices -- because TicketMaster can fix them, or there has to be no TICKETMASTER at all. The could be sold off to all the local companies that sell tickets as a "clearinghouse" since that's the useful function they serve.
When most of the profits go to the middleman -- there is ALWAYS a problem in a system.
... is when the goals of the sponsors coincide.
In this case, LightSquared might be taking bandwidth away from Ad Hoc wireless networks -- of course Grassley is concerned about his military backers and their precession GPS -- likely because Drones given to police stations are going to need to accurately pinpoint hippies in a crowd to drop payloads of Pepper Gas on.
>> Either way; I'd much prefer that a bunch of people started using WiMax and creating a self-organizing Internet of our own. Come on SlashDot - we are just the geeky anarchists to get it done!
What he said! ;)
Assume the worst of Grassley and you are going to be correct MOST of the time.
If you get stung a lot by bees, pretty soon, you are going to suspect that bees sting.
If you were trying to prove that Grassly was actually concerned about "government transparency" -- then please refer to the secret meetings for "indefinite detention" and tell me how transparent THAT is.
Trying to prove that Grassly isn't doing this for the Military-grade GPS system or some other donor is a bit HIGHER BAR. Assuming the worst isn't unreasonable these days.
It would cost money to start, and then it could MAKE more money than it costs by selling soil.
BEFORE we can do this, however, we have to have a revolution and a good barbecue sauce to deal with all the corruption. If Congress doesn't give up it's Pork, keep reminding them how tasty Newt Gingrich looks.
I think that we should FEAR every new proposal until we get election reform, because a municipal compost will of course be used for the Dissidents captured by the DHS Drones flying over our cities.
MANDATORY composting for the city doesn't mean YOU have to mandatorily compost does it? Couldn't we just have a big goat or bucket that makes the rounds and you bring out your dead or spoiled cabbages? What do you really fear here?
AND don't be the token "reasonable" Libertarian and spoil my clear mental picture:
You are a white engineer or programmer, between the age of 19 and not-to-old to clear brush/kill commies with your bare teeth.
You had a paper-route or some other make-work job that taught you the value of earning your own beer money.
You made good grades in College, so you figure everyone below the curve is fodder for Darwin.
You Believe that Rules should apply to everyone, as long as none of these rules actually annoys you -- then; "THOSE DAMN TAXES!"
To calm down/meditate, you drag out a well bookmarked and highlighted addition of "Atlas Shrugged" and re-read the part where the last smart people are necessary to impregnate the last fertile females, this of course, means YOU. The Turner diaries are under a glass that says; "In case of Emergencies."
How's my Blogging so far?
That some small areas were melting -- I can believe. Greenland also has lots of volcanic activity.
However, today we've got satellites and can look over the entire planet.
I also fail to see how this anecdote, is not something that thousands of Climatologists might have overlooked.
>> This "doubt" of Global Warming, is kind of like a write-in campaign from thousands of school kids saying; "Please don't launch your rocket until all the math that you haven't figured out yet is solved!" And in crayon, thousands of school kids show how Zero isn't a number because there isn't anything left, and might point out that the sun looks like a Zero -- so someone might have been confused. It's all very cute and adorable, but it would mean we'd never have gotten off the planet and we cannot move forward until every anecdotal discrepancy is accounted for to the satisfaction of people who couldn't be bothered to become Rocket Scientists or Climatologists.
When Climatologists can walk on water AND perfectly predict future weather patterns (a higher bar from predicting CHANGE) you will QUIT BEING AN ASSHOLE.
Excuse them for just trying to warn you. I suppose the Smoke Alarm in your house is also inaccurate because it can be confused by kitchen smoke -- might as well throw that out as well.
When the world is perfect, you will then be free to be responsible.
We get so excited about the debate of "should we tax or shouldn't we" -- we forget the debate about; "Why do we have a 'Wall Street' to begin with?"
Turning over a stock in anything less than three years, and definitely less than 1 year is NOT an investment in a company -- it's an attempt to "play the market." One or two day traders might win at this -- but the professionals, who have machines that can trade in nanoseconds and shave time with the competition by using shorter network lengths to WS computers for trades are going to win. Market manipulation is also too lucrative to worry about the SEC and such -- much better to buy the regulators (as we've seen).
>> However, when we consider the Trillions more that our Government had to bail out Wall Street more than just the public "TARP funds" -- and that banks like Bank of America might be posting bigger losses in the range of $75 Trillion with the FDIC backing them. So a few pennies a trade will require a few hundred years just to PAY BACK expenses they've incurred -- much less "cover" future risks.
Another way to say this is; who is MORE crazy? The person who wants to tax the Mafia or the person who thinks you cannot trust the mafia in the first place? There is no way a group that can get the FDIC to cover $75 Trillion in "bad bets" after the fact, and AFTER a bail out for the same "mistake" (I call it fraud), is a group that CANNOT get around any tax. The Day Trader will see a tax, but if there is enough of a fee to stop the market manipulators -- be sure that they will get compensated where you are not looking.
Wall Street's EXCUSE to suck up 40% of all profits is that they help provide funds to let companies grow -- having seen the rampant leveraged buyouts, the VC funds used to sell away parts of companies, and the shuttering of tens of thousands of businesses to provide "fodder" for Hedge Funds -- it's a bit like allowing a Mercenary to continue to operate in a country after wiping out a town, because you've seen him walk a little old lady across the street once.
I once made my living with Financial Services companies -- but it felt a bit like carrying ammunition for a mercenary. Biting the hand that feeds you should be a mark of integrity, and I'd like to make a living building something or making the world a better place. ALL Financial services are a ruse, because they are predicated on "investing wisely" -- which is always a pitch of "getting back more than you put in." For every wise investment to do better than just the average of stocks, SOMEONE has to lose. By the time a company has stocks on Wall Street, it's either on someone's menu or it has all the money it needs -- and some VC firm reaped that benefit before you did.
You have to PAY the Army somehow to drag away the lazy workers who don't like the money YOU say that they earned. Later, the Military MIGHT say they deserve more money because beating skulls in is hard work.
Only the people who benefit, can actually BE Libertarians in this scenario, so I suppose, it fits in perfectly with a free market dictatorship like China.
but the lack of pollution controls, means that there is nobody down-wind, and you cannot benefit from screwing up the environment -- because it is already screwed.
>> Face it; China LOOKS like a Libertarian utopia, but it's already BEEN a Libertarian utopia and there is nothing left to squeeze. The USA is actually a better Libertarian Utopia, because we still have a few suckers who can lower wages, we still have some clean water supplies that can get privatized, and GE can still can up clean air and sell you that while they fill the rest with smog.
We need to be more grateful for the USA for all the great things it has -- until of course, it is "utopia'd" into the ground.
A Libertarian Utopia on an 880 square kilometer ice sheet?
In theory, it sounds like a great idea -- which works out perfectly for Libertarians as "in theory," they have great ideas as well.
Unfortunately, there is no middle class of Penguins there for Polar Bears to work to death, nor an infrastructure created by intensive "wealth stealing" socialist programs to run into the ground with neglect to cover for the Low Tax theory of progress.
Of course, they've probably got DECADES to go before the iceberg breaks up -- so they've got THAT long not to refreeze ice or invest in a new iceberg, so if their only goal is staying afloat with "FREE MARKET FORCES" -- they can take credit for air pockets in ice, I suppose.
As long as this results in a lot of Libertarian pioneers not using up our air talking bitching about who "earns" stuff while the float away on a block of ice -- It's at least a worthy endeavor.