Everyone wants to make their tax liability the least it can legally be
Not true. I could lessen my tax liability by claiming every cent I gave to charity and every item to goodwill, but I don't. It would cheapen the gift and isn't worth the effort to me.
those awful rich who seem to be getting away with paying nothing actually seem to be paying a large share of the burden
your straw man notwithstanding, I think most folks want fairness. If the rich make the majority of the money (which they most certainly do) they should pay the majority of the taxes.
There is no cosmic law of ownership. It's quite brash to cry claim such when that ownership is protected and permitted by the blood, sweat, and labor of others. It's called the social contract, and we (the people) _do_ let you.
That's a very myopic view of rationality. One might just as easily rationalize that by not tracking down and exploiting every possible loophole that you are both saving effort and contributing to a societal structure that enables your own continued ability to prosper. Offering the bare minimum required is rarely seen as edifying in any context. I wonder, do you rationalize tipping in the same way?
And yet at that same basic level they know that there are 5 times as many Christians as atheists, and a huge percentage more Christians than rapists, and yet they blame the much smaller groups. There is no justifying this response as a numeric analysis, it's simply a gut reaction that shows prejudices against certain groups.
I don't think you know how these companies work. We've seen this exact scenario play out with IE and firefox. Apple embraced HTML 5 because they had no real choice, they must keep up with web standards in order to remain competitive.
If China were growing North Korea as a precious lotus flower, NK would not have its current dysfunctional, dystopic, and disgruntled government. I'd liken the relationship more to the raising of a junkyard dog; lean, mean and unmanageable, but suitable for keeping the uninvited off your property.
It's not that folks are "too cool". It's incredibly inefficient to break concentration on complex tasks for tedium that could be more appropriately handled in a scheduled meeting or even a simple email. The interrupter may get what they need, but it's at the cost of the company generally. I can't tell you how frustrating it is to be 4 threads deep debugging an issue only to have a project manager drop in to get simple information they could easily have requested by email.
What's worse, I think many people understand how badly interruptions sets back our work. However, they only care about their own priorities/deadlines and believe that whatever they are working on is more important. Which, in some cases it might be, but many times it's not in my experience.
I agree vehemently on the value of and face time and communication, but I cannot fathom how anyone attempting to focus on a challenging task could function in your described environment. I would expect slower development and more errors due to interruption. I'm guessing, since it sounds like it was your idea at your company, you're a little more attuned to the positive aspects of the decision.
There is some additional growth in govt and spending, particularly in the security arena that I'd be all for cutting dramatically (I'm looking at you DHS). However, a bigger issue is that the economy is still recovering, so tax revenues are still low.
This article explains it decently (and has original image I linked):
This isn't a democratic only spending spree though they're to blame as well. I'd say more blame could be heaped on the government for poor decisions on which risks/investments are worth the reward in the realm of defense, health care, stimulus, and financial regulation.
Because it is the truth? I don't like it one bit, but they've been leeching intellectual property for decades now, and we (the US) have hardly lifted a finger. I've yet to see the US Govt. demonstrate any resolve to deal with this problem in any form or fashion, aside from the occasional murmur in a stump speech. When they actually do say something, china will release a solemn response about about trade wars, protectionism, hints at currency dumping, etc.
1. Why would you go from 15% (capital gains rate) to 60% (quadruple) taxes? A little over double seems closer to what general labor taxation. 2. it's wrong to assume 100% taxation of Mr. Moneybags income, rather assume taxation on the "small slice" of profit, since the other calculations of risk should be borne out in the ledger reckoning. Thus, even quadrupling the taxes should only affect the profit portion of the interest, and should be nowhere near 60% higher. 3. The financial world has regularly and repeatedly threatened us with slowing economies for attempting to do anything like reform. So far, it's been nothing but bluster as the very tiny amount of regulation and requirements on capital that have been instated have instead led to more profits for the banks. I predict a similar outcome with tax reform.
Of course, that's a pretty demanding spec, and would be nigh on impossible starting from scratch. However, the short term benefits of being able to handle the scenario you describe are at the distinct loss of data integrity, performance, and scalability. There shouldn't be need to create new database for all those data sources. They should already be in a database, and the database should have already enforced the data validation. Pulling the data out and performing calculations should be the bread and butter of your report writer, and he/she should have it done by noon.
Rather than your scenario of a mad rush to try and piece together information from a smattering of data repositories and silo'ed calculations, put in the work to host your data correctly, and you won't have the need to do these acrobatics to keep your business running. It probably won't be as bad as you think, technology has gotten pretty nimble.
Is there some way to stop people from seeing evolution as a threat?
I wish there were. In my discussions on this topic, it's a dealbreaker. Evolution -> no creation story -> no garden of eden -> no original sin -> no underpinnings for Christian theology. One can make a metaphorical argument to defend the tenants but it's apparently harder to swallow.
That may be a problem with the system, but it wasn't the cause of the collapse. The massive, massive fraud and collusion between ratings agencies and financial institutions was a more central issue. CDO's, derivatives, and other similarly complex and powerful financial instruments trading trillions on poorly valuated debt magnified problematic but recoverable issue into an economy crushing issue. Unfortunately, this contagion persists and the offending financial instruments are still largely unregulated. We'll see if the ratings agencies actually get their feet held to the fire in the upcoming trials.
I've never found that to be a compelling argument. If there were any legitimate scenario where forgoing earmarks would result in money back for _his_ district, that would be hypocrisy. Had he not fought for them, his district would have simply been funding the bloat of government to the benefit of everyone else, which is even further counter to his belief set. There are many legitimate reasons to criticize the guy, but this one rings hollow.
Your argument is merely on the sophistication of the algorithm in question. It may or may not pass a turing test but it's a damned sight more advanced than a dictionary lookup.
yes, they changed the operators when they added google plus, and it sucks. Their supposed replacement was to put single words in quotes to replace the + for a single word. Seems like the - operator still works? Until we get google "minus" anyway.
I'm fairly fond of Google, but I wouldn't hesitate to call what they do "reading" my email. Definition #1 on dictionary.com:
Read: verb (used with object) 1.to look at carefully so as to understand the meaning of (something written, printed, etc.): to read a book; to read music.
I'd say that's pretty spot on with what Google is doing. I can only hope this fuels a desire for encrypted mail.
Jefferson fought many battles against slavery. No doubt his ownership of slaves was wrong and hypocritical, but certainly worth noting that he did fight against it.
I haven't read much about the "raping" from Jefferson, are you referring to Sally Hemings?
If you're worried about freedom and democracy being taken away by armed aggressors, I don't think your fellow 2nd amendment defending citizens are the ones you need to be worried about.
I'd like to see some actual metrics. I try to pay with cash on most purchases, and it does seem faster the majority of the time. The lack of uniformity in interfaces and additional options (credit or debit? What's your pin? Cash back? Is this total correct?) with cards give me the impression it is slower.
Regardless, I just prefer the privacy of not having everything I buy tracked.
Slashdot Mirror
Everyone wants to make their tax liability the least it can legally be
Not true. I could lessen my tax liability by claiming every cent I gave to charity and every item to goodwill, but I don't. It would cheapen the gift and isn't worth the effort to me.
those awful rich who seem to be getting away with paying nothing actually seem to be paying a large share of the burden
your straw man notwithstanding, I think most folks want fairness. If the rich make the majority of the money (which they most certainly do) they should pay the majority of the taxes.
There is no cosmic law of ownership. It's quite brash to cry claim such when that ownership is protected and permitted by the blood, sweat, and labor of others. It's called the social contract, and we (the people) _do_ let you.
That's a very myopic view of rationality. One might just as easily rationalize that by not tracking down and exploiting every possible loophole that you are both saving effort and contributing to a societal structure that enables your own continued ability to prosper. Offering the bare minimum required is rarely seen as edifying in any context. I wonder, do you rationalize tipping in the same way?
And yet at that same basic level they know that there are 5 times as many Christians as atheists, and a huge percentage more Christians than rapists, and yet they blame the much smaller groups. There is no justifying this response as a numeric analysis, it's simply a gut reaction that shows prejudices against certain groups.
I don't think you know how these companies work. We've seen this exact scenario play out with IE and firefox. Apple embraced HTML 5 because they had no real choice, they must keep up with web standards in order to remain competitive.
If China were growing North Korea as a precious lotus flower, NK would not have its current dysfunctional, dystopic, and disgruntled government. I'd liken the relationship more to the raising of a junkyard dog; lean, mean and unmanageable, but suitable for keeping the uninvited off your property.
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free."
-Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
No, you're making a false distinction between one definition of slavery and the existence of another word with a similar definition.
check out this one:
Slave:
3. a person under the domination of another person or some habit or influence: a slave to television
It's not that folks are "too cool". It's incredibly inefficient to break concentration on complex tasks for tedium that could be more appropriately handled in a scheduled meeting or even a simple email. The interrupter may get what they need, but it's at the cost of the company generally. I can't tell you how frustrating it is to be 4 threads deep debugging an issue only to have a project manager drop in to get simple information they could easily have requested by email.
What's worse, I think many people understand how badly interruptions sets back our work. However, they only care about their own priorities/deadlines and believe that whatever they are working on is more important. Which, in some cases it might be, but many times it's not in my experience.
I agree vehemently on the value of and face time and communication, but I cannot fathom how anyone attempting to focus on a challenging task could function in your described environment. I would expect slower development and more errors due to interruption. I'm guessing, since it sounds like it was your idea at your company, you're a little more attuned to the positive aspects of the decision.
There is some additional growth in govt and spending, particularly in the security arena that I'd be all for cutting dramatically (I'm looking at you DHS). However, a bigger issue is that the economy is still recovering, so tax revenues are still low.
This article explains it decently (and has original image I linked):
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/24/opinion/sunday/24sun4.html
The majority of the budget deficit and increase in spending can be blamed on 4 major items:
1. The war in iraq
2. Bush era tax cuts
3. Financial collapse and related stimulus spending
4. Ever increasing health care costs
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2011/07/24/opinion/sunday/24editorial_graph2/24editorial_graph2-popup.gif
This isn't a democratic only spending spree though they're to blame as well. I'd say more blame could be heaped on the government for poor decisions on which risks/investments are worth the reward in the realm of defense, health care, stimulus, and financial regulation.
Does anyone explain why this was modded up?
Because it is the truth? I don't like it one bit, but they've been leeching intellectual property for decades now, and we (the US) have hardly lifted a finger. I've yet to see the US Govt. demonstrate any resolve to deal with this problem in any form or fashion, aside from the occasional murmur in a stump speech. When they actually do say something, china will release a solemn response about about trade wars, protectionism, hints at currency dumping, etc.
Some specifics to consider:
1. Why would you go from 15% (capital gains rate) to 60% (quadruple) taxes? A little over double seems closer to what general labor taxation.
2. it's wrong to assume 100% taxation of Mr. Moneybags income, rather assume taxation on the "small slice" of profit, since the other calculations of risk should be borne out in the ledger reckoning. Thus, even quadrupling the taxes should only affect the profit portion of the interest, and should be nowhere near 60% higher.
3. The financial world has regularly and repeatedly threatened us with slowing economies for attempting to do anything like reform. So far, it's been nothing but bluster as the very tiny amount of regulation and requirements on capital that have been instated have instead led to more profits for the banks. I predict a similar outcome with tax reform.
Of course, that's a pretty demanding spec, and would be nigh on impossible starting from scratch. However, the short term benefits of being able to handle the scenario you describe are at the distinct loss of data integrity, performance, and scalability. There shouldn't be need to create new database for all those data sources. They should already be in a database, and the database should have already enforced the data validation. Pulling the data out and performing calculations should be the bread and butter of your report writer, and he/she should have it done by noon.
Rather than your scenario of a mad rush to try and piece together information from a smattering of data repositories and silo'ed calculations, put in the work to host your data correctly, and you won't have the need to do these acrobatics to keep your business running. It probably won't be as bad as you think, technology has gotten pretty nimble.
Is there some way to stop people from seeing evolution as a threat?
I wish there were. In my discussions on this topic, it's a dealbreaker. Evolution -> no creation story -> no garden of eden -> no original sin -> no underpinnings for Christian theology. One can make a metaphorical argument to defend the tenants but it's apparently harder to swallow.
That may be a problem with the system, but it wasn't the cause of the collapse. The massive, massive fraud and collusion between ratings agencies and financial institutions was a more central issue. CDO's, derivatives, and other similarly complex and powerful financial instruments trading trillions on poorly valuated debt magnified problematic but recoverable issue into an economy crushing issue. Unfortunately, this contagion persists and the offending financial instruments are still largely unregulated. We'll see if the ratings agencies actually get their feet held to the fire in the upcoming trials.
I've never found that to be a compelling argument. If there were any legitimate scenario where forgoing earmarks would result in money back for _his_ district, that would be hypocrisy. Had he not fought for them, his district would have simply been funding the bloat of government to the benefit of everyone else, which is even further counter to his belief set. There are many legitimate reasons to criticize the guy, but this one rings hollow.
Your argument is merely on the sophistication of the algorithm in question. It may or may not pass a turing test but it's a damned sight more advanced than a dictionary lookup.
yes, they changed the operators when they added google plus, and it sucks. Their supposed replacement was to put single words in quotes to replace the + for a single word. Seems like the - operator still works? Until we get google "minus" anyway.
I'm fairly fond of Google, but I wouldn't hesitate to call what they do "reading" my email. Definition #1 on dictionary.com:
Read:
verb (used with object) 1.to look at carefully so as to understand the meaning of (something written, printed, etc.): to read a book; to read music.
I'd say that's pretty spot on with what Google is doing. I can only hope this fuels a desire for encrypted mail.
I think superiority is in the eye of the beholder. You value security over freedom. Not everyone shares your views.
Jefferson fought many battles against slavery. No doubt his ownership of slaves was wrong and hypocritical, but certainly worth noting that he did fight against it.
I haven't read much about the "raping" from Jefferson, are you referring to Sally Hemings?
If you're worried about freedom and democracy being taken away by armed aggressors, I don't think your fellow 2nd amendment defending citizens are the ones you need to be worried about.
I'd like to see some actual metrics. I try to pay with cash on most purchases, and it does seem faster the majority of the time. The lack of uniformity in interfaces and additional options (credit or debit? What's your pin? Cash back? Is this total correct?) with cards give me the impression it is slower.
Regardless, I just prefer the privacy of not having everything I buy tracked.
The irony of this being posted AC...