Unfortunately, the markets can be distorted far easier than government regulators. Without the FDA or FAA, no doubt there would be countless more deaths attributed to bad medicine and aircraft incidents. It doesn't matter if these drug and airline companies are monopolies or small players. Of course with FDA and FAA we are dealing with outcomes that is hard to quantify (ie. Human lives), which is different to the case with consumer regulation which is basically what this net neutrality thing is.
The problems you are facing here revolves around the lack of information in the market and the lack of understanding of this information by the consumer. This prevents actors from acting rationally and tends to distort the market causing inefficiencies. As there will always be a discrepancy in the strength in this market participants (ie. ISP and individual users), these situation are unavoidable. This is further complicated by the fact that infrastructure is expensive and it is not cost-effective to replicate network infrastructure for each ISP delivering services.
If there are no efficient economic fixes for these problems, then regulation is necessary to preserve the benefits we are focusing. I'm not saying that regulation is always good, but sometimes it is a necessary tool to achieve what cannot be achieved by the market alone.
If you have a problem with the efficiency of government and bad legislation, what you should be focusing on is to improve government and to do your civic duty. You have the power to vote and to converse with your elected representatives. You also have the option of running for office yourself to improve government. Big government is not necessarily good and *may* lead to tyranny, but the problem is without government oversight these day, large corporations will step in and deprive you of your rights and property just as a tyrannical government would.
No matter how much discipline is mandated, in a monetary union of 16 member states, there are bound to be disparities in financial positions between them.
The problem is that there is no real co-ordinated fiscal policy and at the same time monetary policy is rigid because of the single currency. The problem is co-ordination and by proxy the lack of centralization of power within in EU to make the single currency work, and that is the main difference from the US and it's single currency.
Europe is not screwed but the Eurozone is in a way. It's not nothing to do with T-Bill or Gilts (UK) or any other government bonds (at least not directly).
The Eurozone is screwed because very simply put, it is very hard to have a single currency when you don't have a single government. The federal government dishes out billions of dollars to states which require subsides (such as Alaska and Alabama) at the expense of states which have positive net federal tax receipts (such as New Jersey and New York). When the European Union has to do this to help out poorer states, the procedure is complicated and ultimately the power is held by the national governments of the member-states. Witness the German bailout of Greece for example. This makes the currency fragile and amplifies uncertainty in markets.
First, let me assure you that I do have a sound grasp of basic microeconomic theory.
Now, on to your post, what you are talking about is not capitalism, but rather on intervention of governments (ie. laissez-faire) in markets. Specifically what you described is a price ceiling.
Government intervention has it's problems, however, also keep in mind the market can also be distorted absent government intervention (eg. lack of information, concentration of market power, perfectly inelastic demand).
The solution to these ills? Well, often it is government intervention (eg, consumer regulation, antitrust, nationalization, etc.)
Not exactly. Capitalism is not the same as free markets.
Capitalism is the idea that private enterprise control the means of production. Labor is not capital so there is no way that a worker that doesn't own any means of production would be a capitalist! I mean, she could subscribe to capitalism, but in no way is she a capitalist.
Furthermore, Marxism (thankfully) does not define capitalism, but merely presents a caricaturisation of it to further its own agenda.
Capitalism is a system which tends towards a small subset of the population controlling the means of production for the majority of the population. Look at the wealth distribution of all the self-identified capitalist nations and then tell me with a straight face that wealth is owned by the "people". Wealth distribution is heavily skewed, just check the latest GINI co-efficient figures. In most countries, 10% of people own more than half of total wealth.
Here, you have two choices to quell civil unrest; redistribute wealth by public policy (eg. taxation, public education, welfare), or; enforce authoritarian government to establish social order.
It is up to those with influence (read: money) to chose. Whether for self-preservation they would agree to be governed in a way which their wealth is redistributed for the social good, or, whether to take power themselves to enforce social order.
Fascism is a sub-case of the latter. It's really quite simple. Mussolini didn't force the capitalists. They colluded with him!
The is nothing democratic about capitalism at all. Fascists do not need to pretend they are capitalists; they are capitalists. Fascism is the logical extension of corporatism, developed as the capitalist friendly answer to the socialistic theories of class conflict. In essence, Fascism is "those who owns the means of production, also control the state". This is to establish harmony in the different sectors of society in order to further the agendas of those that own the means of production.
The idea of democracy that the state is answerable to the populace, and that really has nothing to do with private enterprise at all. It is possible to have a social democracy for example but not a fascist democracy. Socialism by definition does not require authoritarianism, but fascism and communism does.
NTP solved this ages ago by distributing atomic clock accuracy through the network.
The only problem this will solve is where it is a private network not connected to public NTP servers (or organizations that do not trust public NTP). In that case, they would most likely be able to afford a atomic clock.
Apple outsources its hardware production... but core software production is always in-house. You can say that Apple is a software house that also does hardware design, but then MS does all sorts of hardware design as well (e.g peripherals, Xbox, surface, etc...)
Yup.. wait till the budget horrorshow start and tell me who has the stronger hand..
It's not the 1980s anymore and there is no more blue-collar types that can pad the massive redistribution of wealth (back to the wealthy). It's the lower middle class and newly grads next.
I don't know which world you're in but football is big in China and less so but catching on in India (behind Cricket of course). There really is just no comparison with the MLB.
The moral rights that you are referring to is more akin to natural rights. Natural rights do not rest on the belief of the individuals. Rather, they rest on some universal value that is shared by all of mankind. This subject has been discussed to death (see the writings of Locke and Paine) since the Enlightenment.
Cantonese is a dialect of Chinese (as is Mandarin). In fact it is more akin to Middle Chinese than modern Mandarin. It is commonly accepted that Tang dynasty poetry sounds better in Cantonese due to the more similar tonal structure. Basically, it is believed that Cantonese has gone through less changes over the (1500) years from Middle Chinese than Mandarin.
It is similar to how it is now believed that Elizabethan English sounds more like American English than British English / Received Pronunciation. When colonists leave a mother country to settle a new area, which is sufficiently cut off from the rest of its culture, it tends to preserve more features of the original spoken language.
For Cantonese, the areas of Guangdung Province (ie. Canton Province) was settled around the time of the Han and Tang Dynasties, displacing the native (most likely) Polynesian tribes that lived there before. You can write Cantonese in Chinese, but some charaters that are used is specific to Cantonese to denote Cantonese words.
Another thing to note is that Chinese was not invented to write Mandarin, but in fact was the script used to Classical Chinese (a standard form of written Chinese grammar and lexicon from well over 2000 years ago). All Chinese dialects adapted the script to write venercular words subsequently.
It’s located in the/emmc partition which is internal to the phone but it is not the/data partition which is “internal storage”/emmc is more akin to how the SD card is used on other Android phone (to store media) so it is the natural place to put the browser thumbnail cache.
I really don’t see what the big fuss is about. You can mount the drive and delete the directory. That’s all there is to it! HTC even has a command to reformat that partition if you want to “factory reset”.
This really is much ado about nothing. All HTC needs to do relabel the “factory reset” to “format data partition”. Shoddy journalism at it’s best.
People left the farms to work in factories because... guest what... Farms were undergoing mechanization as well... !!!
If people left farms to work in factories which resulted in a severe negative effect on food production, severe inflation or revolution would ensue.
What started in the west 150 years ago had started to happen in China only in the last 40 years or so.... That's the reason that there were so many people born in China in that period.. the surplus in food production allowed for a larger population...
What?? Given Microsoft's history of fixing their bugs, I would of released it as a 0-day instead of a 5-day! Google's just doing everybody a favor. Looks at all the other companies that are afraid of angering MS. Don't forget that Google's recent security breach is directly because of MS products.
What's wrong with taxation when you have representation? We live in societies, you know, not in castles with a moat. I pay my share to keep everything humming along and you should pay yours. If you have problem with that, then change it through the political system.
The main idea to any strategy introduced to internalize the externalities is to let the market re-balance the equation. The idea is to change the "game", so that the players get nudged in the "right" direction..
It subsidizes the rail system in the UK. Not that it needs any subsidizing with the prices that the train operators charge. It is a worse-of-breed hybrid public/private system, where all the profits are privatized and most of the infrastructure investment is subsidized by the government. Who should we thank for this mess? Thatcher and John Major.
You completely miss my point. I wasn't talking about whether there was anything as good as petroleum, I was talking about whether the cost of petroleum accurately reflected the social and environmental problems that using it causes.
Laissez Faire does not mean no government regulation. It has more to do with duties and tariffs on trade (or state involvement in industry). One of the problems we have at the moment (esp. in the US) is that oil products are not being taxed properly to account of all the negative attributes that relying on oil on a enormous scale brings.
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunately, the markets can be distorted far easier than government regulators. Without the FDA or FAA, no doubt there would be countless more deaths attributed to bad medicine and aircraft incidents. It doesn't matter if these drug and airline companies are monopolies or small players. Of course with FDA and FAA we are dealing with outcomes that is hard to quantify (ie. Human lives), which is different to the case with consumer regulation which is basically what this net neutrality thing is.
The problems you are facing here revolves around the lack of information in the market and the lack of understanding of this information by the consumer. This prevents actors from acting rationally and tends to distort the market causing inefficiencies. As there will always be a discrepancy in the strength in this market participants (ie. ISP and individual users), these situation are unavoidable. This is further complicated by the fact that infrastructure is expensive and it is not cost-effective to replicate network infrastructure for each ISP delivering services.
If there are no efficient economic fixes for these problems, then regulation is necessary to preserve the benefits we are focusing. I'm not saying that regulation is always good, but sometimes it is a necessary tool to achieve what cannot be achieved by the market alone.
If you have a problem with the efficiency of government and bad legislation, what you should be focusing on is to improve government and to do your civic duty. You have the power to vote and to converse with your elected representatives. You also have the option of running for office yourself to improve government. Big government is not necessarily good and *may* lead to tyranny, but the problem is without government oversight these day, large corporations will step in and deprive you of your rights and property just as a tyrannical government would.
No matter how much discipline is mandated, in a monetary union of 16 member states, there are bound to be disparities in financial positions between them.
The problem is that there is no real co-ordinated fiscal policy and at the same time monetary policy is rigid because of the single currency. The problem is co-ordination and by proxy the lack of centralization of power within in EU to make the single currency work, and that is the main difference from the US and it's single currency.
Europe is not screwed but the Eurozone is in a way. It's not nothing to do with T-Bill or Gilts (UK) or any other government bonds (at least not directly).
The Eurozone is screwed because very simply put, it is very hard to have a single currency when you don't have a single government. The federal government dishes out billions of dollars to states which require subsides (such as Alaska and Alabama) at the expense of states which have positive net federal tax receipts (such as New Jersey and New York). When the European Union has to do this to help out poorer states, the procedure is complicated and ultimately the power is held by the national governments of the member-states. Witness the German bailout of Greece for example. This makes the currency fragile and amplifies uncertainty in markets.
And your point is......
Are you searching for the concept of Mens Rea? Because this too has been discussed to death.
I'm not pro-copyright, but if you are approaching legal subjects, you need to at least use standard terminology.
Way to go, winning the argument by redefining the phrase "universal value" for posterity! Orwell would be proud...
First, let me assure you that I do have a sound grasp of basic microeconomic theory.
Now, on to your post, what you are talking about is not capitalism, but rather on intervention of governments (ie. laissez-faire) in markets. Specifically what you described is a price ceiling.
Government intervention has it's problems, however, also keep in mind the market can also be distorted absent government intervention (eg. lack of information, concentration of market power, perfectly inelastic demand).
The solution to these ills? Well, often it is government intervention (eg, consumer regulation, antitrust, nationalization, etc.)
It's all quite complicated, really.
Not exactly. Capitalism is not the same as free markets.
Capitalism is the idea that private enterprise control the means of production. Labor is not capital so there is no way that a worker that doesn't own any means of production would be a capitalist! I mean, she could subscribe to capitalism, but in no way is she a capitalist.
Furthermore, Marxism (thankfully) does not define capitalism, but merely presents a caricaturisation of it to further its own agenda.
Capitalism is a system which tends towards a small subset of the population controlling the means of production for the majority of the population. Look at the wealth distribution of all the self-identified capitalist nations and then tell me with a straight face that wealth is owned by the "people". Wealth distribution is heavily skewed, just check the latest GINI co-efficient figures. In most countries, 10% of people own more than half of total wealth.
Here, you have two choices to quell civil unrest; redistribute wealth by public policy (eg. taxation, public education, welfare), or; enforce authoritarian government to establish social order.
It is up to those with influence (read: money) to chose. Whether for self-preservation they would agree to be governed in a way which their wealth is redistributed for the social good, or, whether to take power themselves to enforce social order.
Fascism is a sub-case of the latter. It's really quite simple. Mussolini didn't force the capitalists. They colluded with him!
The is nothing democratic about capitalism at all. Fascists do not need to pretend they are capitalists; they are capitalists. Fascism is the logical extension of corporatism, developed as the capitalist friendly answer to the socialistic theories of class conflict. In essence, Fascism is "those who owns the means of production, also control the state". This is to establish harmony in the different sectors of society in order to further the agendas of those that own the means of production.
The idea of democracy that the state is answerable to the populace, and that really has nothing to do with private enterprise at all. It is possible to have a social democracy for example but not a fascist democracy. Socialism by definition does not require authoritarianism, but fascism and communism does.
NTP solved this ages ago by distributing atomic clock accuracy through the network.
The only problem this will solve is where it is a private network not connected to public NTP servers (or organizations that do not trust public NTP). In that case, they would most likely be able to afford a atomic clock.
He's right if you think about it.
Apple outsources its hardware production... but core software production is always in-house. You can say that Apple is a software house that also does hardware design, but then MS does all sorts of hardware design as well (e.g peripherals, Xbox, surface, etc...)
Yup.. wait till the budget horrorshow start and tell me who has the stronger hand..
It's not the 1980s anymore and there is no more blue-collar types that can pad the massive redistribution of wealth (back to the wealthy). It's the lower middle class and newly grads next.
I don't know which world you're in but football is big in China and less so but catching on in India (behind Cricket of course). There really is just no comparison with the MLB.
right.. go on.. one small step astray and off to another election..
The moral rights that you are referring to is more akin to natural rights. Natural rights do not rest on the belief of the individuals. Rather, they rest on some universal value that is shared by all of mankind. This subject has been discussed to death (see the writings of Locke and Paine) since the Enlightenment.
Cantonese is a dialect of Chinese (as is Mandarin). In fact it is more akin to Middle Chinese than modern Mandarin. It is commonly accepted that Tang dynasty poetry sounds better in Cantonese due to the more similar tonal structure. Basically, it is believed that Cantonese has gone through less changes over the (1500) years from Middle Chinese than Mandarin.
It is similar to how it is now believed that Elizabethan English sounds more like American English than British English / Received Pronunciation. When colonists leave a mother country to settle a new area, which is sufficiently cut off from the rest of its culture, it tends to preserve more features of the original spoken language.
For Cantonese, the areas of Guangdung Province (ie. Canton Province) was settled around the time of the Han and Tang Dynasties, displacing the native (most likely) Polynesian tribes that lived there before. You can write Cantonese in Chinese, but some charaters that are used is specific to Cantonese to denote Cantonese words.
Another thing to note is that Chinese was not invented to write Mandarin, but in fact was the script used to Classical Chinese (a standard form of written Chinese grammar and lexicon from well over 2000 years ago). All Chinese dialects adapted the script to write venercular words subsequently.
It’s located in the /emmc partition which is internal to the phone but it is not the /data partition which is “internal storage” /emmc is more akin to how the SD card is used on other Android phone (to store media) so it is the natural place to put the browser thumbnail cache.
I really don’t see what the big fuss is about. You can mount the drive and delete the directory. That’s all there is to it! HTC even has a command to reformat that partition if you want to “factory reset”.
This really is much ado about nothing. All HTC needs to do relabel the “factory reset” to “format data partition”. Shoddy journalism at it’s best.
It's a cache directory to store thumbnails of sites you visited.
BGR has lost my respect forever. It was really a poorly done article.
Yeah, but Powershell is to shells like Esperanto is to languages.
People left the farms to work in factories because... guest what... Farms were undergoing mechanization as well... !!!
If people left farms to work in factories which resulted in a severe negative effect on food production, severe inflation or revolution would ensue.
What started in the west 150 years ago had started to happen in China only in the last 40 years or so.... That's the reason that there were so many people born in China in that period.. the surplus in food production allowed for a larger population...
What?? Given Microsoft's history of fixing their bugs, I would of released it as a 0-day instead of a 5-day! Google's just doing everybody a favor. Looks at all the other companies that are afraid of angering MS. Don't forget that Google's recent security breach is directly because of MS products.
What's wrong with taxation when you have representation? We live in societies, you know, not in castles with a moat. I pay my share to keep everything humming along and you should pay yours. If you have problem with that, then change it through the political system.
The main idea to any strategy introduced to internalize the externalities is to let the market re-balance the equation. The idea is to change the "game", so that the players get nudged in the "right" direction..
It subsidizes the rail system in the UK. Not that it needs any subsidizing with the prices that the train operators charge. It is a worse-of-breed hybrid public/private system, where all the profits are privatized and most of the infrastructure investment is subsidized by the government. Who should we thank for this mess? Thatcher and John Major.
You completely miss my point. I wasn't talking about whether there was anything as good as petroleum, I was talking about whether the cost of petroleum accurately reflected the social and environmental problems that using it causes.
Laissez Faire does not mean no government regulation. It has more to do with duties and tariffs on trade (or state involvement in industry). One of the problems we have at the moment (esp. in the US) is that oil products are not being taxed properly to account of all the negative attributes that relying on oil on a enormous scale brings.
/faceplam
The new BP is just a rebrand after the BP + AMOCO (ie. AMerican Oil COmpany) merger.