Today the terrorist won. We no longer want Others into our country where we can learn from them,
Oh B.S. We're still letting in ONE MILLION legal immigrants per year. Are you one of those people who equates a rising irritation with the vast levels of illegal immigrants that we have with a general opposition to immigration in general?
When the population of the US hits 1/2 billion, will you equate a resistance against even more immigration with some sort of xenophobia?
Do you not get it that some people are okay with legal immigration but are tired of the vast quantaties of social services being used to house/feed illegals?
Do you not get it that some people are okay with immigration as long as it is in sustainable numbers?
Do you not get it that some people don't want to see immigration levels that are going to turn us into a crowded shithole like China and India?
More power to you but get real... Smartphones aren't the problem... Big brother and the companies that do its dirty work are the problem..
Bullshit... Spying/tracking issues aside, I'm seeing people being fired because they can't put those fucking phones down and do some goddamn work. I haven't run any studies or conducted any polls so I have no authority to claim any stats, but I can see what I can see with my own eyes and it's disturbing..
All I can do right now is make some assumptions based on what I read / see and I think a good chunk of the population is highly susceptible to.. I dunno wtf to call it.. Maybe entertainment addiction? They can't go more than 5 minutes without checking facebook or twitter or.. whatever the fuck they are going but the behavior is exactly like I've seen with junkies... It's not a small amount either.. I don't have stats.. But if I had to GUESS off the top of my head.. It's upper 20% or maybe low 30% of the population..
I actually watched a girl get fired when her boss told her put her phone down, finish up her work and.. blah blah blah fuck around on the phone at lunch on her own time.. She picked her phone up before he was finished speaking.. And honestly, I don't think she even realized she was doing it... It was so habitual...
Not all of us have a smart phone.. So your statement of "everyone" is false. I actually know a few people who have flip phones. Some of us decided that smart phones aren't a good trade for privacy. Although to be perfectly honest, I never got to the point where I rejected a smart phone for privacy reasons.. I just didn't want to be one of the idiots who act as if their phone is glued to their hand.
I've known more people fired over excessive phone usage at work than people fired for all other reasons combined. It's.. disturbing how many people can't put a phone down long enough to save their job.. And I'm not talking about unreasonable firings over trivial usage.. I'm talking about people fired because by 10:00am they're still fucking around on the phone versus doing any work...
Well, I'll give you this one: Liberals are more generous with other people's money. Conservatives are more generous with their own money.
In an even starker finding, the study shows that the religious and conservative states are the most generous givers. Seventeen of the most generous states, in relative terms, voted for Romney in 2012, while 15 of the 17 least generous ones picked Obama for re-election.
This may expose a correlation between conservative voters believing that redistribution is something that should be done out of their own pocket, not by the government.
My point is that, in opposition to what the GP said, securing a system is not a one time deal. You do the best you can, and that is never going to be enough. Security is in evolving system. You defend against what you can today and tomorrow you defend against the new threats.. You can try to defend against unknown attacks, but that is a pretty hard thing to do.
But yeah, good comeback... "Those apologetics.." hope you didn't blow a blood vessel thinking that one up.
Ah the wall. Ever wonder how Mexicans get under the existing wall so fast?
The problem is that you people seem to think that even a partial success is a failure. Are walls perfect? No... But the Berlin Wall showed that they are effective. They aren't foolproof, but they are absolutely more effective than having nothing.
What idiot thinks that 1,500 miles of barbed wire is going to stop anyone?
Why is it racist to think that 30,000,000 illegals, in a country that takes in 1,000,000 legal immigrants PER YEAR, might be a problem?
I kinda secretly wish all governments would spiral into failure and the world economy would just cease to be a thing.
Are you one of those idiots who thinks the world would be better with anarchy? Or is it just capitalism? Do you have any idea just how shitty life was before capitalism? It wasn't good man... It wasn't like the movies.. Do you understand that prior to the invention of antibiotics that any infection was potentially life threatening? A broken bone could KILL you.. It didn't always, but it sure as fuck killed a lot of people.. Marrow infections, etc...
For fuck's sake, the average lifespan globally in 1950, was 50 years old. (global average - the industrialized nations had much higher lifespans of course). But that was only 68 years ago. Also, just as an aside, in Asia and the Middle East, in 1950, the average lifespan was 42.
No. PP's comprehension is spot on. If the NSA and other TLAs worried more about securing domestic assets and less about how they were going to poke around themselves, we (and our 5 Eyes partners) wouldn't be in the sorry state we are in now.
Again you express your ignorance. If the NSA didn't spend time learning how to poke around systems, how the fuck would they know what kinds of attacks to secure OUR systems against?
You're an idiot. I don't say that lightly. Nothing is impervious to attack. With the internet it's even less so.
You build a secure system.. You invest time into it.. Now your adversary has all of the time in the world to attempt to breach it. In fact, you may have thousands of adversaries that you don't even know about.
Even if you build a system to accept connections from only a single IP address, if the machine at that particular IP address is breached (or any of the addresses allowed to connect to it) then you have a problem.. Once anything is connected to the public internet it is vulnerable. At best you can only secure it against known attacks.
A 62-year-old homeless woman from Calgary, Canada found a purse stuffed with over $10,000 in cash, and even though she was living at the local YWCA shelter at the time, she chose to turn it in. “It never crossed my mind to keep the money,” she said. “It’s not mine to keep.”
Some may, some may not. Not everyone is a thief, regardless of circumstances. Context generally has very little to do with a person's character at the other end of the spectrum. While I don't dispute that someone may steal to eat, having material goods seems to have very little effect in preventing crooks from being crooks. If that was the case, rich people wouldn't embezzle or commit fraud to become even richer.
"When it is stolen it will be by an evil person or a weak willed person with some evil in their heart."
That is everyone.
It is demonstrably not so. An anecdote to be sure, but I had a friend find a wallet with $3K in cash in it.. He tracked down the owner and returned it. The news is full of cases like this. A simple google search turned up hundreds of stories such as:
A 62-year-old homeless woman from Calgary, Canada found a purse stuffed with over $10,000 in cash, and even though she was living at the local YWCA shelter at the time, she chose to turn it in. “It never crossed my mind to keep the money,” she said. “It’s not mine to keep.”
Agreed. However I am unaware of any state charges at present. Are you?
Such charges would also have to be leveled after he leaves office, I believe, as there is no precedent for charging a sitting President (any sitting Federal Official that I am aware of) in a state court while in office.
You can certainly narrow it down to 120 degrees, because that's generally the shape of a cell.
Not certainly. Verizon still likes to use Omni-directional antennas in remote areas. The site at the top of Christmas Tree Pass in Nevada (for example) is served by an omni. There are others in So Cal, NV, and AZ, but off the top of my head I can only name the CT Pass site.
Another rousing game of "Spot the Liberal" who refuses to distinguish between things and behaviors.
A pile of cash, sitting on a table in the middle of the room will not cause everyone who walks by to be evil. Nobody who qualifies as a good person is going to steal it.
When it is stolen it will be by an evil person or a weak willed person with some evil in their heart.
I say Millenials start at year 1979, he claims it's 1985+. But yeah, the Earth would be better without that generation.
You're wrong. It's no earlier than 1980, but what year of the 80's is not agreed upon.
Millennials, also known as Generation Y or Gen Y, are the generational demographic cohort following Generation X and preceding Generation Z. There are no precise dates for when this cohort starts or ends; demographers and researchers typically use the early 1980s as starting birth years and the mid-1990s to early 2000s as ending birth years.
How is it that you don't understand that Trump, regardless of guilt, will never go to prison?
The moment he was indicted Pence would pardon him. The constitution contains no provision for overriding a pardon, so it would be permanent. Trump would have a 100% clean record and couldn't be charged with anything prior to the moment of the pardon.
This has precedent to support it. Ford pardoned Nixon. Nixon was guilty as hell, but he couldn't be charged with anything.
Your continued rants about prison only serve to show you are absolutely delusional and out of touch with the real world.
You've been watching too many movies.. Cell tower triangulation isn't nearly as good as it is depicted in the movies (former cell tower tech here). At best you can narrow the target to a sector of 90 or 120 degrees.. Maybe you can work out distance. but if the person is far away from the tower, at best you're narrowing it down to a few blocks.. or tens of blocks..
Yeah, the Stingray devices can help even more, but the resources required tend to push the use of those to more high profile crimes.. Drug trafficking, terrorism, etc..
It is a problem. Of that there is no doubt. The question is "How do we solve or at least tackle the problem without devolving to a point where no communications can take place that aren't vetted by a third party?"
That's a tough one....
This may not be an issue that can be solved in the context of freedom. If you give two people the freedom to communicate in private sometimes they will communicate evil.
Mind you, I'm not suggesting we don't keep trying to come up with solutions. But in a free society it may not be possible to prevent all types of crimes. Some will have to be punished after the fact.. The only solution I see, at present, is to devolve to a Though Crime or Pre-Crime society... That's not an appealing thought either.
Are you completely fucking insane? Have you even been to a grocery store in the western (capitalistic) world? It is a cornucopia of abundance... There are HUNDREDS of varieties of bread. Every possible variation of bread is made available.. Wheat, white, stone ground, 7 grain, Hawaiian, Sour Dough, etc etc etc etc etc.. Hundreds of types of water, meat... I could go on and on and on.
You ever see a grocery store in a communist/socialist country? Bare shelves a lot of the time.... At most 1 or two choices per product... Starvation on a mass scale... North Korea, USSR, China (perhaps as many as 100 million starved during the great leap forward).
Your problem is you have no spine. You reject the ability to take charge of your own destiny. You blame everyone and everything else for your position or lot in life. Your way is the way of the coward. All of your statements point to "Everyone is out to get me".
I will have no further debate with you. You are not rational. You have the mind of a child.
Your philosophy is evil. People are the center of the universe, in a sense. When you treat the individual as the most important part of a society there is far less ability to justify doing evil to him. An individual is rewarded for his successes and punished (in a sense) for his failures and his crimes.
Your philosophy makes the individual just another cog in the machine. Communism/Socialism isn't just a different way of doing things. It is immoral and EVIL. You strip the individual of his identity and declare him to be a component of the collective. You want to reduce man to the level of the ant. You wish to raise those in power to the level of the Queen ant. She'll guide and direct the hive.. The rest are disposable.
I REJECT your philosophy and will fight it. Your philosophy is the seizure of another man's labor because "He's privileged that he has the ability to work.. There's other people who can't work.. They must be taken care of, by all means necessary"
No, it's not. That is the great lie of the Communists. You debase everyone, you belittle everyone, you depreciate EVERYONE. You reduce a man's success to "the community". You stand up and declare that "Nobody is responsible for their own gains. Everyone is riding on the backs of everyone else". And it is a FUCKING LIE.
People gather in groups for MUTUAL benefit, sure. That's not in debate. But honorable people gather in those groups for quid-pro-quo. Each is expected to pull his own weight, contribute a bit, and in return the contribution will be returned in some fashion. But for the groups to work you cannot have members who are a drain.
You declare the owner of a business to be exploiting the workers.. Another lie. All workers are there voluntarily. None were forced. If they aren't happy with the wages offered they have two choices; seek employment elsewhere or start their own business and employ themselves.
Your declaration that the group is responsible for the success of the a business is another great lie. When a company fails the creditors can't go after the employees. They can only go after the owner. The owner may lose everything. His house, his savings, etc.. When a company has a bad year and takes a loss, the owners don't show up and ask the employees to chip in. An owner may ask the employees to take reduced wages NOW to keep the company solvent, but generally once the company is back on firm footing the wages are repaid WITH INTEREST. In some cases the wages may have been too high in the first place and the reduction may be permanent or semi-permanent, but once again the employee can either seek employment elsewhere or start their own business.
The company may attempt to stay afloat by taking out a loan or selling stock. In small communities this money generally comes from the community itself. Workers who have saved money in the bank are compensated with interest payments, from the bank, when this money is loaned out. In this scenario the loan could be made to the very same company they are working at. Or, the workers may buy stock in the company they are working at. They trade money NOW for interest payments LATER. That interest is ALWAYS compensation for risk. The greater the risk the greater the interest that is demanded.
I'm not going to sit here and teach you economics, but your communist model has failed 100% of the time. There is not a single communist country that is successful. China is not communist. China is fascist (state run business) or a capitalistic oligarchy. It's not perfectly clear which it is. I suspect it is a bastardization of both.
Communism, as implemented, has resulted in hundreds of millions of deaths. Capitalism has it's share of deaths too, but it's less.
I'm not going to declare that Capitalism is the best system, there might be a better one waiting to be created. But, it is the best system so far. CAPITALISM, not communism, is directly responsible for increasing the wealth of the greatest percentage of people in human history. Prior to capitalism we had feudalism and in that system 98% of the population was POOR. Only the nobility had a decent standard of living.
I don't know the stats, offhand, for other countries, but in the United States the poverty rate is around 12.9%-13.9%. That number could be better, but in the context of history that is an AMAZING SUCCESS. In less than 250 years we have managed to reduce poverty/subsistence living from 98% to only 14%.
All of the world's life saving and life extending pharmaceuticals have been invented in capitalistic societies. Why is this? If communism and collectivism is so good, how come you fuck faces don't invent anything? I'll answer that for you. Without capitalism you don't have the resources or the rewards to invent at the same level.
When you look at the world's poorest countries, they aren't capitalist. They're either communist or dictatorships. I'd argue that the typical dictatorship is very close to Feudalism. So no great surprise there...
Slashdot Mirror
Today the terrorist won. We no longer want Others into our country where we can learn from them,
Oh B.S. We're still letting in ONE MILLION legal immigrants per year. Are you one of those people who equates a rising irritation with the vast levels of illegal immigrants that we have with a general opposition to immigration in general?
When the population of the US hits 1/2 billion, will you equate a resistance against even more immigration with some sort of xenophobia?
Do you not get it that some people are okay with legal immigration but are tired of the vast quantaties of social services being used to house/feed illegals?
Do you not get it that some people are okay with immigration as long as it is in sustainable numbers?
Do you not get it that some people don't want to see immigration levels that are going to turn us into a crowded shithole like China and India?
More power to you but get real... Smartphones aren't the problem... Big brother and the companies that do its dirty work are the problem..
Bullshit... Spying/tracking issues aside, I'm seeing people being fired because they can't put those fucking phones down and do some goddamn work. I haven't run any studies or conducted any polls so I have no authority to claim any stats, but I can see what I can see with my own eyes and it's disturbing..
All I can do right now is make some assumptions based on what I read / see and I think a good chunk of the population is highly susceptible to.. I dunno wtf to call it.. Maybe entertainment addiction? They can't go more than 5 minutes without checking facebook or twitter or.. whatever the fuck they are going but the behavior is exactly like I've seen with junkies... It's not a small amount either.. I don't have stats.. But if I had to GUESS off the top of my head.. It's upper 20% or maybe low 30% of the population..
I actually watched a girl get fired when her boss told her put her phone down, finish up her work and .. blah blah blah fuck around on the phone at lunch on her own time.. She picked her phone up before he was finished speaking.. And honestly, I don't think she even realized she was doing it... It was so habitual...
Not all of us have a smart phone.. So your statement of "everyone" is false. I actually know a few people who have flip phones. Some of us decided that smart phones aren't a good trade for privacy. Although to be perfectly honest, I never got to the point where I rejected a smart phone for privacy reasons.. I just didn't want to be one of the idiots who act as if their phone is glued to their hand.
I've known more people fired over excessive phone usage at work than people fired for all other reasons combined. It's.. disturbing how many people can't put a phone down long enough to save their job.. And I'm not talking about unreasonable firings over trivial usage.. I'm talking about people fired because by 10:00am they're still fucking around on the phone versus doing any work...
That is most Republicans. The Liberals typically share it. Republicans - me me me. Liberals - us us us.
Wrong asshat.. Conservatives give a LOT more to charity that liberals. Don't facts suck?
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/...
Well, I'll give you this one: Liberals are more generous with other people's money. Conservatives are more generous with their own money.
In an even starker finding, the study shows that the religious and conservative states are the most generous givers. Seventeen of the most generous states, in relative terms, voted for Romney in 2012, while 15 of the 17 least generous ones picked Obama for re-election.
This may expose a correlation between conservative voters believing that redistribution is something that should be done out of their own pocket, not by the government.
Somehow it would be evil for your homeless woman to keep abandoned money in the street
It's not abandoned and you know it. Go play your fucking word games with someone more gullible.
My point is that, in opposition to what the GP said, securing a system is not a one time deal. You do the best you can, and that is never going to be enough. Security is in evolving system. You defend against what you can today and tomorrow you defend against the new threats.. You can try to defend against unknown attacks, but that is a pretty hard thing to do.
But yeah, good comeback... "Those apologetics.." hope you didn't blow a blood vessel thinking that one up.
Ah the wall. Ever wonder how Mexicans get under the existing wall so fast?
The problem is that you people seem to think that even a partial success is a failure. Are walls perfect? No... But the Berlin Wall showed that they are effective. They aren't foolproof, but they are absolutely more effective than having nothing.
What idiot thinks that 1,500 miles of barbed wire is going to stop anyone?
Why is it racist to think that 30,000,000 illegals, in a country that takes in 1,000,000 legal immigrants PER YEAR, might be a problem?
I kinda secretly wish all governments would spiral into failure and the world economy would just cease to be a thing.
Are you one of those idiots who thinks the world would be better with anarchy? Or is it just capitalism? Do you have any idea just how shitty life was before capitalism? It wasn't good man... It wasn't like the movies.. Do you understand that prior to the invention of antibiotics that any infection was potentially life threatening? A broken bone could KILL you.. It didn't always, but it sure as fuck killed a lot of people.. Marrow infections, etc...
For fuck's sake, the average lifespan globally in 1950, was 50 years old. (global average - the industrialized nations had much higher lifespans of course). But that was only 68 years ago. Also, just as an aside, in Asia and the Middle East, in 1950, the average lifespan was 42.
No. PP's comprehension is spot on. If the NSA and other TLAs worried more about securing domestic assets and less about how they were going to poke around themselves, we (and our 5 Eyes partners) wouldn't be in the sorry state we are in now.
Again you express your ignorance. If the NSA didn't spend time learning how to poke around systems, how the fuck would they know what kinds of attacks to secure OUR systems against?
You're an idiot. I don't say that lightly. Nothing is impervious to attack. With the internet it's even less so.
You build a secure system.. You invest time into it.. Now your adversary has all of the time in the world to attempt to breach it. In fact, you may have thousands of adversaries that you don't even know about.
Even if you build a system to accept connections from only a single IP address, if the machine at that particular IP address is breached (or any of the addresses allowed to connect to it) then you have a problem.. Once anything is connected to the public internet it is vulnerable. At best you can only secure it against known attacks.
A 62-year-old homeless woman from Calgary, Canada found a purse stuffed with over $10,000 in cash, and even though she was living at the local YWCA shelter at the time, she chose to turn it in. “It never crossed my mind to keep the money,” she said. “It’s not mine to keep.”
http://listverse.com/2013/09/0...
Some may, some may not. Not everyone is a thief, regardless of circumstances. Context generally has very little to do with a person's character at the other end of the spectrum. While I don't dispute that someone may steal to eat, having material goods seems to have very little effect in preventing crooks from being crooks. If that was the case, rich people wouldn't embezzle or commit fraud to become even richer.
"When it is stolen it will be by an evil person or a weak willed person with some evil in their heart."
That is everyone.
It is demonstrably not so. An anecdote to be sure, but I had a friend find a wallet with $3K in cash in it.. He tracked down the owner and returned it. The news is full of cases like this. A simple google search turned up hundreds of stories such as:
A 62-year-old homeless woman from Calgary, Canada found a purse stuffed with over $10,000 in cash, and even though she was living at the local YWCA shelter at the time, she chose to turn it in. “It never crossed my mind to keep the money,” she said. “It’s not mine to keep.”
Your argument is false.
Agreed. However I am unaware of any state charges at present. Are you?
Such charges would also have to be leveled after he leaves office, I believe, as there is no precedent for charging a sitting President (any sitting Federal Official that I am aware of) in a state court while in office.
You can certainly narrow it down to 120 degrees, because that's generally the shape of a cell.
Not certainly. Verizon still likes to use Omni-directional antennas in remote areas. The site at the top of Christmas Tree Pass in Nevada (for example) is served by an omni. There are others in So Cal, NV, and AZ, but off the top of my head I can only name the CT Pass site.
Nope, they go together.
Another rousing game of "Spot the Liberal" who refuses to distinguish between things and behaviors.
A pile of cash, sitting on a table in the middle of the room will not cause everyone who walks by to be evil. Nobody who qualifies as a good person is going to steal it.
When it is stolen it will be by an evil person or a weak willed person with some evil in their heart.
I say Millenials start at year 1979, he claims it's 1985+. But yeah, the Earth would be better without that generation.
You're wrong. It's no earlier than 1980, but what year of the 80's is not agreed upon.
Millennials, also known as Generation Y or Gen Y, are the generational demographic cohort following Generation X and preceding Generation Z. There are no precise dates for when this cohort starts or ends; demographers and researchers typically use the early 1980s as starting birth years and the mid-1990s to early 2000s as ending birth years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
How is it that you don't understand that Trump, regardless of guilt, will never go to prison?
The moment he was indicted Pence would pardon him. The constitution contains no provision for overriding a pardon, so it would be permanent. Trump would have a 100% clean record and couldn't be charged with anything prior to the moment of the pardon.
This has precedent to support it. Ford pardoned Nixon. Nixon was guilty as hell, but he couldn't be charged with anything.
Your continued rants about prison only serve to show you are absolutely delusional and out of touch with the real world.
Uh, pretty sure it was the Nazis that marked people for horrible deaths... What does that say about you?
You've been watching too many movies.. Cell tower triangulation isn't nearly as good as it is depicted in the movies (former cell tower tech here). At best you can narrow the target to a sector of 90 or 120 degrees.. Maybe you can work out distance. but if the person is far away from the tower, at best you're narrowing it down to a few blocks.. or tens of blocks..
Yeah, the Stingray devices can help even more, but the resources required tend to push the use of those to more high profile crimes.. Drug trafficking, terrorism, etc..
It is a problem. Of that there is no doubt. The question is "How do we solve or at least tackle the problem without devolving to a point where no communications can take place that aren't vetted by a third party?"
That's a tough one....
This may not be an issue that can be solved in the context of freedom. If you give two people the freedom to communicate in private sometimes they will communicate evil.
Mind you, I'm not suggesting we don't keep trying to come up with solutions. But in a free society it may not be possible to prevent all types of crimes. Some will have to be punished after the fact.. The only solution I see, at present, is to devolve to a Though Crime or Pre-Crime society... That's not an appealing thought either.
Are you completely fucking insane? Have you even been to a grocery store in the western (capitalistic) world? It is a cornucopia of abundance... There are HUNDREDS of varieties of bread. Every possible variation of bread is made available.. Wheat, white, stone ground, 7 grain, Hawaiian, Sour Dough, etc etc etc etc etc.. Hundreds of types of water, meat... I could go on and on and on.
You ever see a grocery store in a communist/socialist country? Bare shelves a lot of the time.... At most 1 or two choices per product... Starvation on a mass scale... North Korea, USSR, China (perhaps as many as 100 million starved during the great leap forward).
Your problem is you have no spine. You reject the ability to take charge of your own destiny. You blame everyone and everything else for your position or lot in life. Your way is the way of the coward. All of your statements point to "Everyone is out to get me".
I will have no further debate with you. You are not rational. You have the mind of a child.
Your philosophy is evil. People are the center of the universe, in a sense. When you treat the individual as the most important part of a society there is far less ability to justify doing evil to him. An individual is rewarded for his successes and punished (in a sense) for his failures and his crimes.
Your philosophy makes the individual just another cog in the machine. Communism/Socialism isn't just a different way of doing things. It is immoral and EVIL. You strip the individual of his identity and declare him to be a component of the collective. You want to reduce man to the level of the ant. You wish to raise those in power to the level of the Queen ant. She'll guide and direct the hive.. The rest are disposable.
I REJECT your philosophy and will fight it. Your philosophy is the seizure of another man's labor because "He's privileged that he has the ability to work.. There's other people who can't work.. They must be taken care of, by all means necessary"
FUCK YOU AND YOUR EVIL PHILOSOPHY
No, it's not. That is the great lie of the Communists. You debase everyone, you belittle everyone, you depreciate EVERYONE. You reduce a man's success to "the community". You stand up and declare that "Nobody is responsible for their own gains. Everyone is riding on the backs of everyone else". And it is a FUCKING LIE.
People gather in groups for MUTUAL benefit, sure. That's not in debate. But honorable people gather in those groups for quid-pro-quo. Each is expected to pull his own weight, contribute a bit, and in return the contribution will be returned in some fashion. But for the groups to work you cannot have members who are a drain.
You declare the owner of a business to be exploiting the workers.. Another lie. All workers are there voluntarily. None were forced. If they aren't happy with the wages offered they have two choices; seek employment elsewhere or start their own business and employ themselves.
Your declaration that the group is responsible for the success of the a business is another great lie. When a company fails the creditors can't go after the employees. They can only go after the owner. The owner may lose everything. His house, his savings, etc.. When a company has a bad year and takes a loss, the owners don't show up and ask the employees to chip in. An owner may ask the employees to take reduced wages NOW to keep the company solvent, but generally once the company is back on firm footing the wages are repaid WITH INTEREST. In some cases the wages may have been too high in the first place and the reduction may be permanent or semi-permanent, but once again the employee can either seek employment elsewhere or start their own business.
The company may attempt to stay afloat by taking out a loan or selling stock. In small communities this money generally comes from the community itself. Workers who have saved money in the bank are compensated with interest payments, from the bank, when this money is loaned out. In this scenario the loan could be made to the very same company they are working at. Or, the workers may buy stock in the company they are working at. They trade money NOW for interest payments LATER. That interest is ALWAYS compensation for risk. The greater the risk the greater the interest that is demanded.
I'm not going to sit here and teach you economics, but your communist model has failed 100% of the time. There is not a single communist country that is successful. China is not communist. China is fascist (state run business) or a capitalistic oligarchy. It's not perfectly clear which it is. I suspect it is a bastardization of both.
Communism, as implemented, has resulted in hundreds of millions of deaths. Capitalism has it's share of deaths too, but it's less.
I'm not going to declare that Capitalism is the best system, there might be a better one waiting to be created. But, it is the best system so far. CAPITALISM, not communism, is directly responsible for increasing the wealth of the greatest percentage of people in human history. Prior to capitalism we had feudalism and in that system 98% of the population was POOR. Only the nobility had a decent standard of living.
I don't know the stats, offhand, for other countries, but in the United States the poverty rate is around 12.9%-13.9%. That number could be better, but in the context of history that is an AMAZING SUCCESS. In less than 250 years we have managed to reduce poverty/subsistence living from 98% to only 14%.
All of the world's life saving and life extending pharmaceuticals have been invented in capitalistic societies. Why is this? If communism and collectivism is so good, how come you fuck faces don't invent anything? I'll answer that for you. Without capitalism you don't have the resources or the rewards to invent at the same level.
When you look at the world's poorest countries, they aren't capitalist. They're either communist or dictatorships. I'd argue that the typical dictatorship is very close to Feudalism. So no great surprise there...
It conflicts with what the GP said.. That was my point.. But keep buying those Apple products...
Cars out of warranty are still subject to recalls when a flaw is discovered. Your argument fails.