Yeah it's so simple. Who'd have thought that problems which have plagued major nations for decades would have been solved by someone on an Internet forum.
Kids were stronger and healthier in those days. Today's kids sit in air conditioned cars and suffer all manner of health problems.
I don't think spell-checkers are particularly helpful. If you don't know how to spell a word, looking it up in a dictionary will make it register in your brain more firmly than if you click on a squiggly line and it magically corrects.
An over-reliance on technology does make you lazier and weaker. It also makes you very exposed when that technology is taken away.
So what you're saying is, no-one should do anything at school that they're not going to do for a career?
Perhaps then when a child starts school at age seven they should have a job picked by a magic hat, and if for instance they're going to be a bricklayer they don't even need to be taught how to read and write.
Throughout the last few decades, union membership and power has declined. In that same period, wages have stagnated whilst a tiny mega-rich elite run away with all the proceeds of growth and increased productivity. Inequality is now as high as 1929, job security is non-existent, and social mobility has all but ground to a halt. The middle class is being eroded, leaving economies propped up solely by debt.
Yet all over the media and Internet, people will tell you that unions are the problem for trying to slow this decline.
What I'm wondering about these cables is if they were that sensitive, and had to be kept secret at all costs, why did they leak them so readily? Not only did they give the data to the military, they left it on a computer where some rank and file private could walk it and lift it all.
So you like regulations on the market, but only the ones that benefit you?
By the way, the purpose of regulations isn't to make the economy prosperous, it's to make the people prosperous. A successful economy isn't worth much if all the benefits accrue to the rich, and it comes at the expense of environmental and social destruction.
Yeah cos that's the problem with America these days, people just can't travel far enough and don't burn enough fuel. I for one won't be satisfied until the rich can commute a thousand miles to work powered by burning tyres.
Yeah because if history's taught us anything, it's that the free market really works. Especially with no regulation. Adam Smith told us this centuries ago.
When we reduce manual labor, remove some jobs that draw poor people to the US, increase profits and make our farms more competitive we win.
What exactly counts as 'we'? I'm not sure who this benefits other than the farm owners. It's not like the economy is overloaded with employment, everyone having to work two jobs just to fulfil all the vacancies.
Is there any actual evidence that the world needs these executives, or that they need to be paid what they are? The ratio between the pay of CEOs and their workers has sky-rocketed in recent decades, but in that same period the economy has stagnated and most people are worse off. They get paid what they do because they've convinced people that they're worth it, not for what they actually do.
There were operating systems before Bill Gates, his accumulated wealth is merely at the expense of everyone else. A failed executive can run his company into the ground, jeopardising the livelihoods of thousands of workers, and still walk away with more money than a normal, hard-working individual will make in several lifetimes.
I don't see how anyone not blinded by wealth-worship can possible justify these people.
Default is looking more like the only viable option. Ireland can't afford all this debt, their economy is too small. They'd have been better letter the banks go bust and making the Germany, Swiss and British investors take a haircut. This bailout is for them, after all.
Not that this has anything to do with shipping, but Ireland's broke because the government bailed out the banks that went bust after investing heavily in Ireland's property bubble. The German's get to pay for themselves heavily investing in Ireland.
That's assuming that the real estate he buys doesn't collapse as the credit dries up and the first-world middle-classes don't decline through global competition and depleting resources.
Of course, when some factory on the other side of the world pollutes your air and chokes you to death, you can just sue them! I wonder if you can collect payments in the afterlife...
If you own the air above your property, does that mean you can charge planes and birds for flying through it? And satellites and planets? If you own everything underneath it, does that mean you can sue any magma that trespasses?
If this is your argument, it's a good job laissez faire economics is totally discredited.
"I know a guy" isn't really a basis for any serious debate. I'd be interested in knowing the demographics of Ivy League students compared to the general population.
You're underestimating the short-term thinking of executives and investors. Even after all the speculative bubbles that have burst in the past, they still keep throwing money at new ones.
No, Economists rarely disagree about what a given policy will do.
I assume you said that without a hint of irony, even as economic 'experts' fail to agree whether governments should be cutting or increasing spending.
Economics is a hand-waving liberal art trying to pretend its a science. Just because it's proponents make a lot of money gaming the system doesn't mean it's anything more than voodoo and bullshit.
Yes, their spending exceeded tax revenue because they bought the bullshit of the Chicago boys and based their economy on whoring themselves out to multinational corporations, and speculation. Now they're having to be bailed out by high-taxed, highly-regulated European economies that based their economy on boring old-fashioned things like manufacturing and domestic-owned industries.
Let this be a lesson to the next country that tries to get rich quick by bending over and spreading their cheeks to greedy American executives.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah it's so simple. Who'd have thought that problems which have plagued major nations for decades would have been solved by someone on an Internet forum.
Kids were stronger and healthier in those days. Today's kids sit in air conditioned cars and suffer all manner of health problems.
I don't think spell-checkers are particularly helpful. If you don't know how to spell a word, looking it up in a dictionary will make it register in your brain more firmly than if you click on a squiggly line and it magically corrects.
An over-reliance on technology does make you lazier and weaker. It also makes you very exposed when that technology is taken away.
So what you're saying is, no-one should do anything at school that they're not going to do for a career?
Perhaps then when a child starts school at age seven they should have a job picked by a magic hat, and if for instance they're going to be a bricklayer they don't even need to be taught how to read and write.
Throughout the last few decades, union membership and power has declined. In that same period, wages have stagnated whilst a tiny mega-rich elite run away with all the proceeds of growth and increased productivity. Inequality is now as high as 1929, job security is non-existent, and social mobility has all but ground to a halt. The middle class is being eroded, leaving economies propped up solely by debt.
Yet all over the media and Internet, people will tell you that unions are the problem for trying to slow this decline.
What I'm wondering about these cables is if they were that sensitive, and had to be kept secret at all costs, why did they leak them so readily? Not only did they give the data to the military, they left it on a computer where some rank and file private could walk it and lift it all.
So you like regulations on the market, but only the ones that benefit you?
By the way, the purpose of regulations isn't to make the economy prosperous, it's to make the people prosperous. A successful economy isn't worth much if all the benefits accrue to the rich, and it comes at the expense of environmental and social destruction.
Yeah cos that's the problem with America these days, people just can't travel far enough and don't burn enough fuel. I for one won't be satisfied until the rich can commute a thousand miles to work powered by burning tyres.
Yeah because if history's taught us anything, it's that the free market really works. Especially with no regulation. Adam Smith told us this centuries ago.
What exactly counts as 'we'? I'm not sure who this benefits other than the farm owners. It's not like the economy is overloaded with employment, everyone having to work two jobs just to fulfil all the vacancies.
Ideas are ten a penny, it's the implementation that matters.
I wonder how they evaluate all those assets in this era of false credit ratings and toxic debts.
Competition law.
The government.
Sorry, I don't think for-profit corporations are exempt from the law. And you have a very naive view of market economics.
Is there any actual evidence that the world needs these executives, or that they need to be paid what they are? The ratio between the pay of CEOs and their workers has sky-rocketed in recent decades, but in that same period the economy has stagnated and most people are worse off. They get paid what they do because they've convinced people that they're worth it, not for what they actually do.
There were operating systems before Bill Gates, his accumulated wealth is merely at the expense of everyone else. A failed executive can run his company into the ground, jeopardising the livelihoods of thousands of workers, and still walk away with more money than a normal, hard-working individual will make in several lifetimes.
I don't see how anyone not blinded by wealth-worship can possible justify these people.
When has the US federal government ever defaulted, or missed a payment?
The inherent instability of free-market capitalism, which by its nature produces a continual series of booms and busts.
Default is looking more like the only viable option. Ireland can't afford all this debt, their economy is too small. They'd have been better letter the banks go bust and making the Germany, Swiss and British investors take a haircut. This bailout is for them, after all.
Government employees complaining about taxes?
Not that this has anything to do with shipping, but Ireland's broke because the government bailed out the banks that went bust after investing heavily in Ireland's property bubble. The German's get to pay for themselves heavily investing in Ireland.
Property law by definition is statist and authoritarian.
That's assuming that the real estate he buys doesn't collapse as the credit dries up and the first-world middle-classes don't decline through global competition and depleting resources.
Of course, when some factory on the other side of the world pollutes your air and chokes you to death, you can just sue them! I wonder if you can collect payments in the afterlife...
If you own the air above your property, does that mean you can charge planes and birds for flying through it? And satellites and planets? If you own everything underneath it, does that mean you can sue any magma that trespasses?
If this is your argument, it's a good job laissez faire economics is totally discredited.
"I know a guy" isn't really a basis for any serious debate. I'd be interested in knowing the demographics of Ivy League students compared to the general population.
You're underestimating the short-term thinking of executives and investors. Even after all the speculative bubbles that have burst in the past, they still keep throwing money at new ones.
I assume you said that without a hint of irony, even as economic 'experts' fail to agree whether governments should be cutting or increasing spending.
Economics is a hand-waving liberal art trying to pretend its a science. Just because it's proponents make a lot of money gaming the system doesn't mean it's anything more than voodoo and bullshit.
Yes, their spending exceeded tax revenue because they bought the bullshit of the Chicago boys and based their economy on whoring themselves out to multinational corporations, and speculation. Now they're having to be bailed out by high-taxed, highly-regulated European economies that based their economy on boring old-fashioned things like manufacturing and domestic-owned industries.
Let this be a lesson to the next country that tries to get rich quick by bending over and spreading their cheeks to greedy American executives.