You think a budget surplus is going to help at this point? The politicians have probably already spent the money in their heads, they just have to put it to paper. AND it would take about 100 years of that record $10BN budget surpluses to pay off our HUGE $400BN debt. Of course, we are racking up more debt by the second since they never tell you about the unfunded liabilities (which is just a fancy name for future debt). How many state employees are going to retire over the next 100 years? (hint, all of them). That is yet MORE MORE MORE MORE debt.
I've seen cases where firemen for the state retire at 103% of baseline. How the fuck is this possible? We are actually paying retirees MORE to not work, than we ever paid them (baseline) to actually do WORK. Only in this fucked up state.............
Are you that retarded? a negative growth rate would be (for example) for every 10 people only 2 children are produced. That's a growth rate of -8.
Asshole.
150k/year should be enough to pay for all of that. I make half that and I can easily let the wife stay home with the kids, own a house, pay off and have 2 cars, go out to eat and do day trips and vacations with 3 kids and still put ~500-1000/mo in savings.
You are a fucking communist. Seriously.
"I can do this, so everyone else should too". How about you go FUCK YOURSELF?
You leftie cocksuckers love diversity, until the moment it's economic diversity. YOU ARE A CUNT.
You're right about our shitty infrastructure and defense budget. You are, however, wrong about people starving in the streets. It is nearly impossible for anyone in this country, who is not addicted to drugs or has a severe mental illness, to starve to death.
Starving to death in the streets is a lie told over and over by the left when they try to justify taking _more_ of your money. The statistics do NOT back up your statement.
In 2016 NOBODY in the entire USA starved to death due to lack of money to buy food. Yeah, as far as anyone can tell NOT A SINGLE PERSON. There were a handful of murders where old people were deliberately starved to death so a relative could obtain their shit (inheritance) and a few cases where a mother/father spent their money on drugs instead of formula/food for the baby/children. In these cases the money was available for food, it was just withheld or deliberately used for drugs.
Every year there are also a handful of cases where people deliberately starve themselves due to some psychological problem (anorexia, etc)
Soup Kitches/Food Pantries are EVERYWHERE, as are Food Stamps and EBT.
If you don't understand that a tax rate of 50.01% or greater is SLAVERY then you are a fucking asshole.
I don't give a fuck what you do, if some third party can come along and say "while you work, WE will take the MAJORITY of whatever you earn, and do with it whatever we want", then you are A SLAVE.
(one of the places) Freedom ends is at 50.00% combined income tax (fed, state, county, city) Yes, there are places where you actually have to pay 4 income taxes (here in CA the state collects on behalf of the county and city)
If you think someone should be penalized more because they have taken the time to learn a skill, enter a field with higher pay, go to college longer, or take a larger risk/reward by starting a successful business, then you are a FUCKING COMMUNIST ASSHOLE.
You also do not believe in fairness, you think someone else should foot your bills, and you are petty. There should be exactly one tax bracket. I don't care if it's (combined) 10% or 40%. It should be applied equally. All men (and women) are supposed to be equal under the law.
10% from someone making $20K a year is not a huge tax hit. 10% from someone making $200K is a much larger AMOUNT of money.
The middle class always foots the bill for everything, yet this country is hell bent on killing the middle class.
The problem is NOT the rich. If we taxed the ultra-rich at 100%, we could run the Federal Government for about 1 year (maybe with a deficit, maybe not). But it would occur ONCE (their wealth would be gone). And then we would have to go back to destroying the middle class.
The vast majority of rich people did not become rich by somehow fucking other people over. They started successful businesses or invested correctly, or hit the lottery. None of these things somehow made anyone else poorer. Please note I said "vast majority". Don't start cherry picking single examples of some rich asshole crook. Crimes are crimes and should be treated as such.
I agreed with almost everything you said until you went sideways.
Corporations create jobs, but so do rich people. Rich people (generally) have servants (maids, housekeepers, etc), assistants, drivers, perhaps a yacht that is staffed with people, (I remember reading somewhere that Larry Ellison has a MASSIVE yacht with a crew of 130).
The poor create no jobs.. Everybody else is probably at least indirectly responsible for some jobs. Even a lot of middle class folks I know (myself included) have a person who cleans house for them. It's not a company, it's a just a person. But she has a full time self-created job.
Just because you repeat something does not make it true. I have gotten so tired of hearing this oft-repeated line.
The line that corporations are legally bound to maximize profits is complete and utter bullshit.
This is a direct quote from the US Supreme Court: “Modern corporate law does not require for-profit corporations to pursue profit at the expense of everything else, and many do not.”
Contrary to what you, and every other asshat who repeats this bullshit line, believe, the primary duty of the officers of a corporation is to the best interests of the COMPANY not the shareholders nor the bottom line.
That's it. Don't go reading anything into the above sentence, because the sentence above is the total settled case law in most of the US. The best interests of the company. End of story. Vague.. Yes.. Don't fill in anything in an attempt to make it less vague. It's vague. The Supreme Court has upheld that "responsibility". The only people charged with deciding what to do with that vagueness are the board.
You sound like a statist. Or... a small child.. "But.. But.. why don't they have to pay too!?!?"
I have no love of religion, but I have no problem with the government staying out of it completely, even to the point of not being permitted to tax it.
There is no power the government does not abuse, and the power to tax is also the power to destroy.
I have seen far too much good done by small religious organizations. Like unions, religions tend to do good when small. Once they get to a certain size.. Well.. But that's the nature of it, and the religions need be kept in check by members. NOT the government.
Repeat after me, THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOTHING GOOD OR EFFICIENTLY.
Saying that you are paying for someone because they don't pay taxes is a false argument. Bring me proof that the church places a burden on society and then we'll talk.. But in the meantime, the members of said church usually pay their taxes. If they don't, that's a separate problem. But generally, the church itself, not the members, is tax exempt.
The problem both of you have is envisioning the political spectrum as if it is a horizontal line with a left and a right.
That is not accurate. The political spectrum is far more accurately described as a "horseshoe" shape. With left and right being very close to one another (Think of it like an upside down U.. or right side up U I guess.. Doesn't really matter which direction it points...).
While communism and fascism are at opposite ends of the political spectrum, their practices and policies are nearly identical. Communism would be at one tip of the inverted horseshoe (or U if you prefer) and fascism would be at the opposite tip)
Both fascism and communism, in practice, place the government in charge of everything and both despise any sort of individualism. Everything is controlled by the state for the benefit of the state.
Regardless of how fascism and communism are drawn on paper, in reality they both behave nearly identically..
Oh for fuck's sake.... You goddamn tree huggers.. How the hell do you expect people to go overseas? A goddamn boat?
Do you own a car? How about you do your part and sell it. Once you walk the walk, you can talk the talk. But choosing one thing to bitch about while you pollute with your car... Fuck off...
Obvious you don't know what you are talking about. As has been pointed out, if a logo/trademark is very well know, the scope of its protection can extend beyond an industry.
Try setting up a company called Iced Brew Mocha and using a logo similar to IBM's.
You'd be sued and you would lose. IBM's logo is globally recognized. Doesn't matter that they don't make Mocha.
It'll be up to a judge or a jury to decide if PayPal is a widely known logo.
it's the regulations that let the banks pull this exact shit.
Deregulate and when they do stupid shit, they go bankrupt. No more bailouts, no more lifelines... Do stupid shit and your business will cease to exist.
Anybody that is still using a bank for anything beyond a mortgage is a fucking retard. Credit unions exist. They are non-profit.. Why the hell would you keep a savings/checking account at an institution that exists solely to make a huge profit off of you?
The same way every other business learns.. You let them go bankrupt, then you sell off their assets. When banks realize that a stupid decision will have actual consequences....
When are you cunts gonna get it through your heads that the 1st amendment has nothing to do with hunting, self defense, or recreation? Those are just side benefits.
The largest murderers in history (by volume) are GOVERNMENTS. More people have been killed by governments turning on them, than any psychotic serial killer or thugged out gang member could ever hope to even imagine.
Government murders run into the TENS OF MILLIONS.
Our founders codified these gun rights to protect us FROM THE GOVERNMENT. If you think the good old US of A is somehow unique and could never turn on its own population, I'd like to direct your attention to Japanese Americans during WWII.
I concede they weren't killed in the camps, but they were locked up without charge or trial. They were citizens and their own government turned on them. Locked up for an hour or a year.. It doesn't matter. It's WRONG.
The precedent has been set. The government CAN and WILL turn on the population again at some point in the future.. I don't know what will precipitate it, but it will happen.
Less class inequality? Are you fucking high?
You assholes still have monarchs. You can't get any more unequal than that.
At least over here, literally any citizen has a shot at the top spot.
Apple//c - circa 1984 or 1985. A year or two later I got a//e. Which was way more expandable. I had a 10MB hard drive, color printer (with the//c), color monitor (//c), and an external 1200bps modem. Ah, those were the days.
Statistically, a degree matters per life earning power.
I think you missed the point I was making. The point was, a degree at any cost is not beneficial. Sure, a degree is great. Is it still great if it takes you 20 years to pay it off? If you can't go through college and, at the end, walk away with your degree and no debt (or at least minimal debt) you are not doing yourself any favors.
"The standard repayment plan for federal student loans puts borrowers on a 10-year track to pay off their debt, but research has shown the average bachelor's degree holder takes 21 years to pay off his or her loans."
Are you high? I saw a report the other day that there is a massive shortage of labor in the construction industry, specifically heavy equipment operators (excavators, backhoes, forklifts, etc). This shortage is estimated to be around 500,000 jobs. As a general rule, these are jobs that pay very well. Now, by very well, I do mean "very well for blue collar". With overtime and whatnot, you can easily do $100K/year in California as a heavy equipment operator. That's not bad, and you don't need a 4 year degree to do it. You can provide for a family and send your kids to college on $100K/year.
Education is good. Knowledge is good. But the lie we have all been sold is "Education at any cost is good". No.. No it isn't. Driving yourself into debt for 30 years is not good!
Part of the problem we have now is that most young people seem to be allergic to any kind of manual labor. They don't want to invest the sweat equity to get to the upper levels. I have a close friend who works for the local electric company. For 5 years, as an apprentice, he worked his ass off. He was the "bitch". He did the dirtiest jobs, he was the go-for. The pay sucked. The hours were long. But, once that 5 year apprenticeship was over and he made journeyman, his pay shot up to $45/hour and with overtime he was rolling in money. He made journeyman right before the 2007 fires here in California. During the fires, he was "at work" for 24 hours a day. 8 hours on, 8 off, 8 on, 8 off..... He did this for 3 months. In those three months he made $60,000 (take home) (double/triple time, hazardous pay, etc all factored in). He used that money to buy his first house.
The point is, there are jobs out there that pay very well, and don't require you do bury yourself in debt. They just require determination and sweat.
Slashdot Mirror
Because you are a lazy fuck?
Bullshit. There were WHITE SLAVES. They were not indentured servants. They were Irish who rebelled against the crown and were SOLD>
Let me guess... You are a liberal?
You think a budget surplus is going to help at this point? The politicians have probably already spent the money in their heads, they just have to put it to paper. AND it would take about 100 years of that record $10BN budget surpluses to pay off our HUGE $400BN debt. Of course, we are racking up more debt by the second since they never tell you about the unfunded liabilities (which is just a fancy name for future debt). How many state employees are going to retire over the next 100 years? (hint, all of them). That is yet MORE MORE MORE MORE debt.
I've seen cases where firemen for the state retire at 103% of baseline. How the fuck is this possible? We are actually paying retirees MORE to not work, than we ever paid them (baseline) to actually do WORK. Only in this fucked up state.............
That is actually quite inexpensive.
You fail at math and physics.
Are you that retarded? a negative growth rate would be (for example) for every 10 people only 2 children are produced. That's a growth rate of -8. Asshole.
150k/year should be enough to pay for all of that. I make half that and I can easily let the wife stay home with the kids, own a house, pay off and have 2 cars, go out to eat and do day trips and vacations with 3 kids and still put ~500-1000/mo in savings.
You are a fucking communist. Seriously.
"I can do this, so everyone else should too". How about you go FUCK YOURSELF?
You leftie cocksuckers love diversity, until the moment it's economic diversity. YOU ARE A CUNT.
You're right about our shitty infrastructure and defense budget. You are, however, wrong about people starving in the streets. It is nearly impossible for anyone in this country, who is not addicted to drugs or has a severe mental illness, to starve to death.
Starving to death in the streets is a lie told over and over by the left when they try to justify taking _more_ of your money. The statistics do NOT back up your statement.
In 2016 NOBODY in the entire USA starved to death due to lack of money to buy food. Yeah, as far as anyone can tell NOT A SINGLE PERSON. There were a handful of murders where old people were deliberately starved to death so a relative could obtain their shit (inheritance) and a few cases where a mother/father spent their money on drugs instead of formula/food for the baby/children. In these cases the money was available for food, it was just withheld or deliberately used for drugs.
Every year there are also a handful of cases where people deliberately starve themselves due to some psychological problem (anorexia, etc)
Soup Kitches/Food Pantries are EVERYWHERE, as are Food Stamps and EBT.
If you don't understand that a tax rate of 50.01% or greater is SLAVERY then you are a fucking asshole.
I don't give a fuck what you do, if some third party can come along and say "while you work, WE will take the MAJORITY of whatever you earn, and do with it whatever we want", then you are A SLAVE.
(one of the places) Freedom ends is at 50.00% combined income tax (fed, state, county, city) Yes, there are places where you actually have to pay 4 income taxes (here in CA the state collects on behalf of the county and city)
If you think someone should be penalized more because they have taken the time to learn a skill, enter a field with higher pay, go to college longer, or take a larger risk/reward by starting a successful business, then you are a FUCKING COMMUNIST ASSHOLE.
You also do not believe in fairness, you think someone else should foot your bills, and you are petty. There should be exactly one tax bracket. I don't care if it's (combined) 10% or 40%. It should be applied equally. All men (and women) are supposed to be equal under the law.
10% from someone making $20K a year is not a huge tax hit. 10% from someone making $200K is a much larger AMOUNT of money.
The middle class always foots the bill for everything, yet this country is hell bent on killing the middle class.
The problem is NOT the rich. If we taxed the ultra-rich at 100%, we could run the Federal Government for about 1 year (maybe with a deficit, maybe not). But it would occur ONCE (their wealth would be gone). And then we would have to go back to destroying the middle class.
The vast majority of rich people did not become rich by somehow fucking other people over. They started successful businesses or invested correctly, or hit the lottery. None of these things somehow made anyone else poorer. Please note I said "vast majority". Don't start cherry picking single examples of some rich asshole crook. Crimes are crimes and should be treated as such.
I agreed with almost everything you said until you went sideways.
Corporations create jobs, but so do rich people. Rich people (generally) have servants (maids, housekeepers, etc), assistants, drivers, perhaps a yacht that is staffed with people, (I remember reading somewhere that Larry Ellison has a MASSIVE yacht with a crew of 130).
The poor create no jobs.. Everybody else is probably at least indirectly responsible for some jobs. Even a lot of middle class folks I know (myself included) have a person who cleans house for them. It's not a company, it's a just a person. But she has a full time self-created job.
Just because you repeat something does not make it true. I have gotten so tired of hearing this oft-repeated line.
The line that corporations are legally bound to maximize profits is complete and utter bullshit.
This is a direct quote from the US Supreme Court: “Modern corporate law does not require for-profit corporations to pursue profit at the expense of everything else, and many do not.”
Contrary to what you, and every other asshat who repeats this bullshit line, believe, the primary duty of the officers of a corporation is to the best interests of the COMPANY not the shareholders nor the bottom line.
That's it. Don't go reading anything into the above sentence, because the sentence above is the total settled case law in most of the US. The best interests of the company. End of story. Vague.. Yes.. Don't fill in anything in an attempt to make it less vague. It's vague. The Supreme Court has upheld that "responsibility". The only people charged with deciding what to do with that vagueness are the board.
You sound like a statist. Or... a small child.. "But.. But.. why don't they have to pay too!?!?"
I have no love of religion, but I have no problem with the government staying out of it completely, even to the point of not being permitted to tax it.
There is no power the government does not abuse, and the power to tax is also the power to destroy.
I have seen far too much good done by small religious organizations. Like unions, religions tend to do good when small. Once they get to a certain size.. Well.. But that's the nature of it, and the religions need be kept in check by members. NOT the government.
Repeat after me, THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOTHING GOOD OR EFFICIENTLY.
Saying that you are paying for someone because they don't pay taxes is a false argument. Bring me proof that the church places a burden on society and then we'll talk.. But in the meantime, the members of said church usually pay their taxes. If they don't, that's a separate problem. But generally, the church itself, not the members, is tax exempt.
The problem both of you have is envisioning the political spectrum as if it is a horizontal line with a left and a right.
That is not accurate. The political spectrum is far more accurately described as a "horseshoe" shape. With left and right being very close to one another (Think of it like an upside down U.. or right side up U I guess.. Doesn't really matter which direction it points...).
While communism and fascism are at opposite ends of the political spectrum, their practices and policies are nearly identical. Communism would be at one tip of the inverted horseshoe (or U if you prefer) and fascism would be at the opposite tip)
Both fascism and communism, in practice, place the government in charge of everything and both despise any sort of individualism. Everything is controlled by the state for the benefit of the state.
Regardless of how fascism and communism are drawn on paper, in reality they both behave nearly identically..
Oh for fuck's sake.... You goddamn tree huggers.. How the hell do you expect people to go overseas? A goddamn boat? Do you own a car? How about you do your part and sell it. Once you walk the walk, you can talk the talk. But choosing one thing to bitch about while you pollute with your car... Fuck off ...
Like the dollar? The dollar is the de facto currency of the world for drugs.
Obvious you don't know what you are talking about. As has been pointed out, if a logo/trademark is very well know, the scope of its protection can extend beyond an industry. Try setting up a company called Iced Brew Mocha and using a logo similar to IBM's. You'd be sued and you would lose. IBM's logo is globally recognized. Doesn't matter that they don't make Mocha. It'll be up to a judge or a jury to decide if PayPal is a widely known logo.
Reagan? It started with Nixon. Reagan just kept the ball rolling. Maybe expanded it a bit. But, the blame lays solely at the feet of Nixon.
it's the regulations that let the banks pull this exact shit.
Deregulate and when they do stupid shit, they go bankrupt. No more bailouts, no more lifelines... Do stupid shit and your business will cease to exist.
Anybody that is still using a bank for anything beyond a mortgage is a fucking retard. Credit unions exist. They are non-profit.. Why the hell would you keep a savings/checking account at an institution that exists solely to make a huge profit off of you?
The same way every other business learns.. You let them go bankrupt, then you sell off their assets. When banks realize that a stupid decision will have actual consequences....
The largest murderers in history (by volume) are GOVERNMENTS. More people have been killed by governments turning on them, than any psychotic serial killer or thugged out gang member could ever hope to even imagine.
Government murders run into the TENS OF MILLIONS.
Our founders codified these gun rights to protect us FROM THE GOVERNMENT. If you think the good old US of A is somehow unique and could never turn on its own population, I'd like to direct your attention to Japanese Americans during WWII.
I concede they weren't killed in the camps, but they were locked up without charge or trial. They were citizens and their own government turned on them. Locked up for an hour or a year.. It doesn't matter. It's WRONG.
The precedent has been set. The government CAN and WILL turn on the population again at some point in the future.. I don't know what will precipitate it, but it will happen.
Less class inequality? Are you fucking high? You assholes still have monarchs. You can't get any more unequal than that. At least over here, literally any citizen has a shot at the top spot.
Apple //c - circa 1984 or 1985. A year or two later I got a //e. Which was way more expandable. I had a 10MB hard drive, color printer (with the //c), color monitor (//c), and an external 1200bps modem. Ah, those were the days.
I think you missed the point I was making. The point was, a degree at any cost is not beneficial. Sure, a degree is great. Is it still great if it takes you 20 years to pay it off? If you can't go through college and, at the end, walk away with your degree and no debt (or at least minimal debt) you are not doing yourself any favors.
"The standard repayment plan for federal student loans puts borrowers on a 10-year track to pay off their debt, but research has shown the average bachelor's degree holder takes 21 years to pay off his or her loans."
Think about that.... 21 fucking years.
Are you high? I saw a report the other day that there is a massive shortage of labor in the construction industry, specifically heavy equipment operators (excavators, backhoes, forklifts, etc). This shortage is estimated to be around 500,000 jobs. As a general rule, these are jobs that pay very well. Now, by very well, I do mean "very well for blue collar". With overtime and whatnot, you can easily do $100K/year in California as a heavy equipment operator. That's not bad, and you don't need a 4 year degree to do it. You can provide for a family and send your kids to college on $100K/year. Education is good. Knowledge is good. But the lie we have all been sold is "Education at any cost is good". No.. No it isn't. Driving yourself into debt for 30 years is not good! Part of the problem we have now is that most young people seem to be allergic to any kind of manual labor. They don't want to invest the sweat equity to get to the upper levels. I have a close friend who works for the local electric company. For 5 years, as an apprentice, he worked his ass off. He was the "bitch". He did the dirtiest jobs, he was the go-for. The pay sucked. The hours were long. But, once that 5 year apprenticeship was over and he made journeyman, his pay shot up to $45/hour and with overtime he was rolling in money. He made journeyman right before the 2007 fires here in California. During the fires, he was "at work" for 24 hours a day. 8 hours on, 8 off, 8 on, 8 off..... He did this for 3 months. In those three months he made $60,000 (take home) (double/triple time, hazardous pay, etc all factored in). He used that money to buy his first house. The point is, there are jobs out there that pay very well, and don't require you do bury yourself in debt. They just require determination and sweat.
Are you high? The Federal Reserve is NOT NOT NOT a part of the US Government. It is a corporation owned by member banks. IT IS NOT FEDERAL.