Well, that's bullshit to begin with, but what if we just went with a system of completely publicly funded universities? It would remove the incentive to soak students for all their parents are worth.
It takes a truly exceptional asshole to look at the current historically high levels and, more importantly, lengths of unemployment and turn around and imply that everyone who doesn't have a job and everyone who has a child that doesn't have a job is some sort of failure.
Right. Just like how the universities tell everyone how much better their lives will be, if we all just go $60,000 in debt and sign up for classes.
No university came beating down my door to try to get my money. Society at large already does a pretty good job of conditioning kids that "you gotta go to college; student loans are good debt."
Well the good news is that none of this will matter any more in the 2012 election, because of the CU ruling. There's no *need* to find a way to take donations anonymously, because anyone can spend as much money as they want on negative attack ads and not even have to sign their name to them.
KISS is fine, although their music mostly sucks. Gene Simmons, however, is a complete douche.
See if you can dig up his NPR interview from about a decade ago for a glimpse into this guy's mind. Among other things, he comes out and asserts that *every* musician is in it for the money and the pussy, and *none* of them care about the music.
Actually, the more educated libertarians (not the internet nut/strawmen type) do have better (or at least more developed) solutions to this problem then "take them to court in this system that is completely rigged in favor of the big companies." Mostly involving more highly developed property rights and protections. But it's a bit long to go into in slashdot comment.
It's fairly frustrating. Most of my political conversations, if I want to defend my point at all, risk turning into a lengthy lecture on libertarian theory. Because there *is* more to it than just "government bad", but if you haven't read the economic arguments it doesn't really work...
And the frustrating thing about debating libertarians is getting them to admit any flaws with the ideal. I'll grant that, for the most part, libertarian goals are something to strive for. However, I'll also acknowledge that in some cases, they aren't enough -- it's not a silver bullet that will solve everything.
We get that it's more than just "government bad" (though that's what most libertarians come across as). Unfortunately, the libertarian alternative to regulation is that everyone has to defend their property rights in court. When you tell me that it's better to not have a restrictive regulation that just says "don't dump shit in the water" and instead let individual people/entities battle it out in court when someone does dump shit in the water, I'm going to laugh at you. I like being able to buy meat and produce in the store and have a *reasonable* guarantee that it meets some minimum quality and safety standards. Not all regulation is automatically bad regulation.
And if you admit that we need government regulation for some things and not for others, well then what the fuck is the point of libertarianism to begin with? Can't we just agree that there are some cases where the free market does not, in fact, solve everything and that to there is some extent to which government intervention is useful, and that we perhaps disagree on where to draw the line?
Apples-to-oranges. The download is (or should be) a one-time install to waste your time. Disc vs. cart loading delays happen *every* time the game is run.
And another possibility is that I, as a driver who actually pays attention to people around me, will take special care if I spot some idiot talking on their cell phone.
And yet another possibility is that more drunken driving happens in the evening, when there are fewer people on the road in general, and fewer opportunities for accidents.
Now, obviously, a lot of people do talk on their cell phones regularly and we don't have some sort of carpocalypse happening, so it is certainly possible to do it without dying or killing anyone. However, if you're one of those people who thinks they're so fucking special that they can multitask better than anyone else, chances are you're just one of the idiots that actual responsible drivers watch out for and avoid. If you're driving impaired for any reason, you're just gambling that nothing will happen that you can't/don't react to quickly enough because you were drunk/distracted.
Here's my compromise to people who think that talking on a cell phone while driving is a reasonable thing to do: leave it perfectly legal. However, if you get in an accident and kill someone, it carries an automatic manslaughter charge. Take responsibility for your action if you're willing to put other people's lives at risk.
GE - huge supporter of Obama - pays no income taxes
Neither do a ton of other US corporations. Besides, taxes are bad and kill jobs, right? Keep your rhetoric straight, please.
Solyndra
Investment didn't work out. The extent to which it didn't work out is being sorted out, and people are looking for shenanigans, and the shills are all over it pointing fingers, but who is ultimately responsible isn't entirely clear. And there were lobbyists and campaign contributions involved -- just like there are lobbyists and campaign contributions involved in *everything*.
US Navy force to buy "green" fuel oil from huge Obama contributor for 4 times the going rate
Here's where you really go off the deep end. I found two sources, "Hyscience" and the "Institute for Energy Research," both very obviously biased. Even taken at face value, though, spending on biofuel to promote growth isn't automatically bad. Maybe you forgot (or never knew, most likely) that the only buyer for microprocessors at one time was the US government, and without the US government's involvement, research and the development of economies of scale for microprocessors would probably not have happened nearly as quickly as it did, if it did at all.
Anyway, you're an obvious partisan hack. Let's talk about some of the stuff that Obama has failed to do that actually matters instead.
One team is trying to extend payroll tax cuts to the 99%. The other team is holding those payroll tax cuts hostage until they get their pipeline grafted onto the bill. Go take your false equivalence somewhere else.
Not really much point in an offtopic response to such an obvious partisan hack, but...
Did you even read the story? He's talking about how when he was in 8th grade, he wasn't a good student precisely because he liked basketball more than anything else. He implies that ethics was, in fact, more important than basketball but because he wasn't a very good student he couldn't appreciate it at the time.
But whatever. Go on trashing him over stupid shit like this instead of his actual policies, because you know, it's *so* productive to bitch and moan about what our presidents used to do as students.
Not possible. The Republican talking heads are constantly reminding us how Democrats hate businesses. How could they simultaneously be in bed with some?
I think you meant to say that the Democrats push Greenpeace and PETA's agenda. Gotta keep that rhetoric straight.
The problem is that the device is not sharable (in the family).
Umm, which tablet currently available in the marketplace *does* sport an OS that is easily shared? I'll grant you the password protection for digital purchases, but the rest is par for the course for tablet devices.
It's funny that GP relates three factual stories (slight exaggerations, obviously, but based in fact nonetheless) with a humorous tone and two Apple fanbois (bonch and yourself) just can't handle being joked with at all.
You can overdose on water, too. Should water be illegal?
Scratch that; obvious exaggeration. You can overdose on any number of legally obtained substances and/or medications. Should we ban everything that can possibly be OD'd on?
Slashdot Mirror
Always amazes me.
I spy someone who's never dealt with a database vendor before.
--Jeremy
Well, that's bullshit to begin with, but what if we just went with a system of completely publicly funded universities? It would remove the incentive to soak students for all their parents are worth.
--Jeremy
It takes a truly exceptional asshole to look at the current historically high levels and, more importantly, lengths of unemployment and turn around and imply that everyone who doesn't have a job and everyone who has a child that doesn't have a job is some sort of failure.
Hats off to you; I knew you wouldn't disappoint.
--Jeremy
Cuts in state funding are responsible for most of the increases in tuition over the last 10 years, not 'outrageous' salaries.
Besides, if you want to look at outrageous salaries, the place to start is the football and/or basketball coaches.
--Jeremy
Right. Just like how the universities tell everyone how much better their lives will be, if we all just go $60,000 in debt and sign up for classes.
No university came beating down my door to try to get my money. Society at large already does a pretty good job of conditioning kids that "you gotta go to college; student loans are good debt."
--Jeremy
Well the good news is that none of this will matter any more in the 2012 election, because of the CU ruling. There's no *need* to find a way to take donations anonymously, because anyone can spend as much money as they want on negative attack ads and not even have to sign their name to them.
--Jeremy
KISS is fine, although their music mostly sucks. Gene Simmons, however, is a complete douche.
See if you can dig up his NPR interview from about a decade ago for a glimpse into this guy's mind. Among other things, he comes out and asserts that *every* musician is in it for the money and the pussy, and *none* of them care about the music.
Fuck Gene Simmons.
--Jeremy
Failing to stop something != explicitly allowing.
--Jeremy
The examples you mentioned from China were handled swiftly and severely
By the government.
What's your point, exactly? The US government should follow China's example and execute more people?
--Jeremy
Actually, the more educated libertarians (not the internet nut/strawmen type) do have better (or at least more developed) solutions to this problem then "take them to court in this system that is completely rigged in favor of the big companies." Mostly involving more highly developed property rights and protections. But it's a bit long to go into in slashdot comment.
It's fairly frustrating. Most of my political conversations, if I want to defend my point at all, risk turning into a lengthy lecture on libertarian theory. Because there *is* more to it than just "government bad", but if you haven't read the economic arguments it doesn't really work...
And the frustrating thing about debating libertarians is getting them to admit any flaws with the ideal. I'll grant that, for the most part, libertarian goals are something to strive for. However, I'll also acknowledge that in some cases, they aren't enough -- it's not a silver bullet that will solve everything.
We get that it's more than just "government bad" (though that's what most libertarians come across as). Unfortunately, the libertarian alternative to regulation is that everyone has to defend their property rights in court. When you tell me that it's better to not have a restrictive regulation that just says "don't dump shit in the water" and instead let individual people/entities battle it out in court when someone does dump shit in the water, I'm going to laugh at you. I like being able to buy meat and produce in the store and have a *reasonable* guarantee that it meets some minimum quality and safety standards. Not all regulation is automatically bad regulation.
And if you admit that we need government regulation for some things and not for others, well then what the fuck is the point of libertarianism to begin with? Can't we just agree that there are some cases where the free market does not, in fact, solve everything and that to there is some extent to which government intervention is useful, and that we perhaps disagree on where to draw the line?
--Jeremy
Don't forget, Sony hasn't done anything that would really piss off the general population.
Uhh, exposing all of their personal information and credit card numbers to hackers due to completely inept security might count.
Sadly, all that seemed to do is make people sorry for poor Sony in its fight against the *eeeevil* hackers.
--Jeremy
Apples-to-oranges. The download is (or should be) a one-time install to waste your time. Disc vs. cart loading delays happen *every* time the game is run.
--Jeremy
And another possibility is that I, as a driver who actually pays attention to people around me, will take special care if I spot some idiot talking on their cell phone.
And yet another possibility is that more drunken driving happens in the evening, when there are fewer people on the road in general, and fewer opportunities for accidents.
Now, obviously, a lot of people do talk on their cell phones regularly and we don't have some sort of carpocalypse happening, so it is certainly possible to do it without dying or killing anyone. However, if you're one of those people who thinks they're so fucking special that they can multitask better than anyone else, chances are you're just one of the idiots that actual responsible drivers watch out for and avoid. If you're driving impaired for any reason, you're just gambling that nothing will happen that you can't/don't react to quickly enough because you were drunk/distracted.
Here's my compromise to people who think that talking on a cell phone while driving is a reasonable thing to do: leave it perfectly legal. However, if you get in an accident and kill someone, it carries an automatic manslaughter charge. Take responsibility for your action if you're willing to put other people's lives at risk.
--Jeremy
GE - huge supporter of Obama - pays no income taxes
Neither do a ton of other US corporations. Besides, taxes are bad and kill jobs, right? Keep your rhetoric straight, please.
Solyndra
Investment didn't work out. The extent to which it didn't work out is being sorted out, and people are looking for shenanigans, and the shills are all over it pointing fingers, but who is ultimately responsible isn't entirely clear. And there were lobbyists and campaign contributions involved -- just like there are lobbyists and campaign contributions involved in *everything*.
US Navy force to buy "green" fuel oil from huge Obama contributor for 4 times the going rate
Here's where you really go off the deep end. I found two sources, "Hyscience" and the "Institute for Energy Research," both very obviously biased. Even taken at face value, though, spending on biofuel to promote growth isn't automatically bad. Maybe you forgot (or never knew, most likely) that the only buyer for microprocessors at one time was the US government, and without the US government's involvement, research and the development of economies of scale for microprocessors would probably not have happened nearly as quickly as it did, if it did at all.
Anyway, you're an obvious partisan hack. Let's talk about some of the stuff that Obama has failed to do that actually matters instead.
--Jeremy
One team is trying to extend payroll tax cuts to the 99%. The other team is holding those payroll tax cuts hostage until they get their pipeline grafted onto the bill. Go take your false equivalence somewhere else.
--Jeremy
Ahh, so obvious fraud is worse than subtle fraud. Gotcha.
And don't put words in my mouth claiming that I think it's OK for fraud to happen in Russia because it happened in the States.
--Jeremy
Not really much point in an offtopic response to such an obvious partisan hack, but...
Did you even read the story? He's talking about how when he was in 8th grade, he wasn't a good student precisely because he liked basketball more than anything else. He implies that ethics was, in fact, more important than basketball but because he wasn't a very good student he couldn't appreciate it at the time.
But whatever. Go on trashing him over stupid shit like this instead of his actual policies, because you know, it's *so* productive to bitch and moan about what our presidents used to do as students.
--Jeremy
Not possible. The Republican talking heads are constantly reminding us how Democrats hate businesses. How could they simultaneously be in bed with some?
I think you meant to say that the Democrats push Greenpeace and PETA's agenda. Gotta keep that rhetoric straight.
--Jeremy
And previously, they had been armed and chased the sheriff. They've already proven themselves to be dangerous; you approach them with caution.
--Jeremy
Welp, guys, bonch doesn't like the Kindle Fire. Guess we should all stick with approved iDevices.
--Jeremy
The problem is that the device is not sharable (in the family).
Umm, which tablet currently available in the marketplace *does* sport an OS that is easily shared? I'll grant you the password protection for digital purchases, but the rest is par for the course for tablet devices.
--Jeremy
It's funny that GP relates three factual stories (slight exaggerations, obviously, but based in fact nonetheless) with a humorous tone and two Apple fanbois (bonch and yourself) just can't handle being joked with at all.
--Jeremy
Praising a product is fine. Lying about a product's capabilities, lying about who invented what, and lying about the competition is what is flamebait.
See the link in your sig for an example.
--Jeremy
This is a perfect example of why the savings are never passed on to the customer.
--Jeremy
You can overdose on water, too. Should water be illegal?
Scratch that; obvious exaggeration. You can overdose on any number of legally obtained substances and/or medications. Should we ban everything that can possibly be OD'd on?
--Jeremy