As for the substance of your comment, just because some states did bad stuff means we should scrap the principles on which America was founded?
The principles on which America was founded were the ability to run a slave farm without having to pay taxes to Britain, and only allowing rich white men to vote. Maybe those principles weren't so great after all.
And I also have the right to say you're a stupid fucking cunt. Why the fuck would you read something you're sick of, other than to give yourself an excuse to whine and draw attention to yourself?
Good gods, please don't make up that word. We have enough annoying neologism verbs, there's no need for more.
Yes, language should just freeze in time and never evolve. I for one am going back to speaking Old English. Hwæt! w Gr-Dena in ger-dagum eod-cyninga, rym gefrunon hu ða æelingas ellen fremedon?
The Guardian, a paper that is further to the left than NPR, nevertheless manages to turn in a healthy profit. It may not be Fox News, but it does quite well for itself.
Who told you that? The Guardian is losing money hand over fist, and is gutting its profitable regional papers in order to plug the losses.
I don't see why people give so much credence to the opinions of the 'founding fathers'. These were ultra-wealthy politicians who lived in their own world. Of course they didn't want things done for the poor, then the poor wouldn't have to work from the age of five to death in the mills and factories for just enough money to keep themselves alive.
Yes, the people will rise up and overthrow their government to defend the right for multi-national corporations to break the law and screw everyone over.
As for step 2, you do realise how long it takes to discover and investigate these sorts of things?
And yes, the EU is looking out for its people. Maybe you're jealous.
It is true that the EU has levied fines against companies in the EU but the big fines are against US companies.
You do realise that the previous record was €896 million against a French company? Obviously the EU is anti-EU as well as anti-US.
There are a lot of tears in this thread, and the previous article, from Americans upset that one of their precious corporations has actually been punished for its transgressions.
That just sounds like a load of cheesy crap to me. To me, every TNG episode was just 40 minutes of one-dimensional schoolboy philosophy rammed down your throat.
I don't think fat neckbeards go to conventions dressed like Spock because they like the idea of humanity uniting as a species, they go because they like warp drives and photon torpedos and 7 of 9.
There's only room for one road outside my house, so where does this magical competition come in? It might work in the sticks where it's empty flatness for a thousand miles, but nowhere else.
What happens when these private roads need to cross one another? Or when one company decides to raise the limit to 200mph as a marketing stunt? It wouldn't be much fun being a pedestrian trying to get across.
Just look at Japan's railway growth since the late '80s whenever Japan privatized their railways. I'd much rather take a ride on a Shinkansen than an Amtrak train any day
Japanese trains are run by Japanese corporations. When US public transport was private, car companies bought up the trams and shut them down so they couldn't compete with the car.
Completely different mentality. Put the Japs in charge of Amtrak and you could privatise it, but not when Americans would be running it, they'd just run it into the ground.
Most people who read tabloids are manual workers who don't have access to computers to read the news at work. The Internet is largely killing the upper-middle class papers.
Being privatised or not has no bearing on whether you have to pay for it. There are self-sustaining public transport systems, and heavily-subsidised private systems. The problem with fully privatised systems is that they have a de-facto monopoly due to the barriers to entry.
And it's funny how you say private companies are always better when they're all failing.
That's all assuming you don't need a car to get to the train station in the first place. Then you have the cost of taxis to get to anywhere that isn't in your local public transport network.
What's unfair about not allowing the strong to prosper at the expense of every else? If you don't like society, fuck off to one of your 'gulches' or whatever you call them, and leave society to the adults who've grown out of the anarchist stage.
The BBC was around for decades before the commercial broadcasters. They knew the market they were getting into, and they knew the advantage the BBC had, so they can't really complain about it.
Hell, it was the BBC that created the market for the private competition in the first place so what do they have to be resentful for?
Then whichever one remained would have a captive market and make money hand over fist. Or we could make our own search engine, it's not like they're a particularly sophisiticated technology. Google doesn't even let you search for exact phrases or exclude words anymore, maybe if they pulled out it would leave a gap in the market for a better engine.
If they want to do business in the UK and take advantage of our first world economy, why shouldn't they pay their share to the upkeep of the public services which produce such a lucrative market?
Slashdot Mirror
The principles on which America was founded were the ability to run a slave farm without having to pay taxes to Britain, and only allowing rich white men to vote. Maybe those principles weren't so great after all.
What's annoying about buying and selling second hand games?
And I also have the right to say you're a stupid fucking cunt. Why the fuck would you read something you're sick of, other than to give yourself an excuse to whine and draw attention to yourself?
You hate it so much, you opened the article and took your time to comment on it. Maybe you just like the attention and some free mod points.
If you donate them, that's 3,000 fewer people to buy your other products.
Yes, language should just freeze in time and never evolve. I for one am going back to speaking Old English. Hwæt! w Gr-Dena in ger-dagum eod-cyninga, rym gefrunon hu ða æelingas ellen fremedon?
Who told you that? The Guardian is losing money hand over fist, and is gutting its profitable regional papers in order to plug the losses.
I don't see why people give so much credence to the opinions of the 'founding fathers'. These were ultra-wealthy politicians who lived in their own world. Of course they didn't want things done for the poor, then the poor wouldn't have to work from the age of five to death in the mills and factories for just enough money to keep themselves alive.
Yes, the people will rise up and overthrow their government to defend the right for multi-national corporations to break the law and screw everyone over.
As for step 2, you do realise how long it takes to discover and investigate these sorts of things?
And yes, the EU is looking out for its people. Maybe you're jealous.
You do realise that the previous record was €896 million against a French company? Obviously the EU is anti-EU as well as anti-US.
There are a lot of tears in this thread, and the previous article, from Americans upset that one of their precious corporations has actually been punished for its transgressions.
That just sounds like a load of cheesy crap to me. To me, every TNG episode was just 40 minutes of one-dimensional schoolboy philosophy rammed down your throat.
I don't think fat neckbeards go to conventions dressed like Spock because they like the idea of humanity uniting as a species, they go because they like warp drives and photon torpedos and 7 of 9.
I'd imagine we'll get them back when Vista gives us back image previews that actually work consistently.
I wouldn't object if they cancelled the Austrian School.
There's only room for one road outside my house, so where does this magical competition come in? It might work in the sticks where it's empty flatness for a thousand miles, but nowhere else.
What happens when these private roads need to cross one another? Or when one company decides to raise the limit to 200mph as a marketing stunt? It wouldn't be much fun being a pedestrian trying to get across.
Japanese trains are run by Japanese corporations. When US public transport was private, car companies bought up the trams and shut them down so they couldn't compete with the car.
Completely different mentality. Put the Japs in charge of Amtrak and you could privatise it, but not when Americans would be running it, they'd just run it into the ground.
That backfired, didn't it?
Most people who read tabloids are manual workers who don't have access to computers to read the news at work. The Internet is largely killing the upper-middle class papers.
How do you read a laptop stood up with one hand on the rail? Time in a car may be wasted, but so is waiting at a bus stop in the rain for an hour.
Being privatised or not has no bearing on whether you have to pay for it. There are self-sustaining public transport systems, and heavily-subsidised private systems. The problem with fully privatised systems is that they have a de-facto monopoly due to the barriers to entry.
And it's funny how you say private companies are always better when they're all failing.
Google maps doesn't have a public transit button. Doesn't on mine anyway.
That's all assuming you don't need a car to get to the train station in the first place. Then you have the cost of taxis to get to anywhere that isn't in your local public transport network.
Headline: THE PC BRIGADE HAVE BANNED ARE SPOONS
Inside: The menace of razor-sharp grapefruit spoons: why isn't Labour doing anything about it?
What's unfair about not allowing the strong to prosper at the expense of every else? If you don't like society, fuck off to one of your 'gulches' or whatever you call them, and leave society to the adults who've grown out of the anarchist stage.
The BBC was around for decades before the commercial broadcasters. They knew the market they were getting into, and they knew the advantage the BBC had, so they can't really complain about it.
Hell, it was the BBC that created the market for the private competition in the first place so what do they have to be resentful for?
Then whichever one remained would have a captive market and make money hand over fist. Or we could make our own search engine, it's not like they're a particularly sophisiticated technology. Google doesn't even let you search for exact phrases or exclude words anymore, maybe if they pulled out it would leave a gap in the market for a better engine.
If they want to do business in the UK and take advantage of our first world economy, why shouldn't they pay their share to the upkeep of the public services which produce such a lucrative market?