Ah now there is your problem, you should talk to your admissions department and advise them to deny entrance to students who eat at mcdonalds or burger king.
No, it runs far deeper than that. "Spread the wealth" would seem to point to taking the money that I earn, and 'spreading' it to others who haven't earned it. Rightly or wrongly, thats what it sounds like. This goes along with Hillary's line during the campaign of (speaking of the oil company's profits) "we want to take those profits and put them..."
Whether it be a 3 man plumbing operation, or Big Oil...'taking profits' leaves a bad taste in many peoples mouths.
Taking my money to provide necessary infrastructure is no problem. Taking it and giving that money to people who have not earned it is a problem.
And what are government grants to charity? Welfare? Public schools? scholarships? I'm sure your OK with all of that. Furthermore.. the government shouldnt need your OK for every penny it spends. Should they send a letter for you to approve when a soldier is wounded and needs medical attention?
Rightly or wrongly, "spread the wealth" sounds exactly like that.
So what if it is? We are one nation, not millions of individuals doing their own thing. As a whole we have to care about each person and lift each other up.
I earn money, it's mine, not yours. Beyond infrastructure and basic assistance, it is exactly that. Why can't I choose whom to spread it to? New employees, charities, whomever.
You can.. its called voting! if you dont like how your money is spent, get signatures, pass a bill, write your congressman, or vote out the politician who spent it wrong.
Funny, revealing the truth, history, and motivations of public figures used to be called "good journalism". Of course this was back when journalists didn't have to reveal their sources. But now it's easy to track down where a source of info comes from.
Hmm forgive me i cant seem to get this thought to come out right.
Back in the 80's and early 90's, people were only doing a handful of tasks with computers, and they were doing them one at a time. Word processing and games, that was 99% of it for most non-geeks. The stuff you needed to run programs could be written on the palm of your hand.
Look where we are now! People expect their PC to do a bazillion different things, and everything should work together in a global network and automatically update itself. The time it takes to get an OS installed and the myriad components working and accessible is a huge investment. Add to that learning the interface to a of new bunch of apps all written by different groups. Most people are perfectly justified in returning software if the learning curve is even mildly steep, or if things dont work 100%.
I think there is some validity to the fear of storing your data on a big company's public cloud. If there are problems, the potential for a loss of data or productivity could affect companies on a global scale. This could even be detrimental to the economy.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah now there is your problem, you should talk to your admissions department and advise them to deny entrance to students who eat at mcdonalds or burger king.
No, it runs far deeper than that. "Spread the wealth" would seem to point to taking the money that I earn, and 'spreading' it to others who haven't earned it. Rightly or wrongly, thats what it sounds like.
This goes along with Hillary's line during the campaign of (speaking of the oil company's profits) "we want to take those profits and put them..."
Whether it be a 3 man plumbing operation, or Big Oil...'taking profits' leaves a bad taste in many peoples mouths.
Taking my money to provide necessary infrastructure is no problem. Taking it and giving that money to people who have not earned it is a problem.
And what are government grants to charity?
Welfare? Public schools? scholarships? I'm sure your OK with all of that.
Furthermore.. the government shouldnt need your OK for every penny it spends. Should they send a letter for you to approve when a soldier is wounded and needs medical attention?
Rightly or wrongly, "spread the wealth" sounds exactly like that.
So what if it is? We are one nation, not millions of individuals doing their own thing. As a whole we have to care about each person and lift each other up.
I earn money, it's mine, not yours.
Beyond infrastructure and basic assistance, it is exactly that. Why can't I choose whom to spread it to? New employees, charities, whomever.
You can.. its called voting! if you dont like how your money is spent, get signatures, pass a bill,
write your congressman, or vote out the politician who spent it wrong.
Funny, revealing the truth, history, and motivations of public figures used to be called "good journalism". Of course this was back when journalists didn't have to reveal their sources.
But now it's easy to track down where a source of info comes from.
Hmm forgive me i cant seem to get this thought to come out right.
Back in the 80's and early 90's, people were only doing a handful of tasks with computers, and they were doing them one at a time. Word processing and games, that was 99% of it for most non-geeks. The stuff you needed to run programs could be written on the palm of your hand.
Look where we are now! People expect their PC to do a bazillion different things, and everything should work together in a global network and automatically update itself. The time it takes to get an OS installed and the myriad components working and accessible is a huge investment. Add to that learning the interface to a of new bunch of apps all written by different groups. Most people are perfectly justified in returning software if the learning curve is even mildly steep, or if things dont work 100%.
I think there is some validity to the fear of storing your data on a big company's public cloud.
If there are problems, the potential for a loss of data or productivity could affect companies on a global scale. This could even be detrimental to the economy.