Is this for real? The rich don't care about your SILLY little drug test, they are RICH, there are multiple multiple ways to evade drug testing, the rich have a lot more resources available... It's good that people are thinking about "equalizing" in a sense, but this idea is just stupid I'm sorry...
After all, this is America. If you can't use your wealth and power to break the rules with impunity, what's the point of being rich?
... if you're a capitalist.
If you accept you live in a purely capitalist society, then someone "bad at capitalism" is as a natural extension of that a "bad societal actor", or more concisely, a "bad citizen". It isn't hard to see how someone who views the world through a lens of "money is the all important" that someone without money or who is bad at managing it would be a criminal. It's wrong but I've known people who believe the abolition of debtor's prison was one of the single biggest blows to modern capitalism. Think about that. It's nuts.
That being said, making the rich take drug tests before receiving those tax breaks is about as likely as the rich actually paying their fair share of taxes.
Pure and utter drivel.
The basis of capitalism is not worship of money. The fact that some person you talked to favored debtor's prisons doesn't mean that everybody who believes in liberty worships money.
The basis of capitalism is that the free market is the most efficient and just way to distribute scarce resources.
The problem is, free markets don't really exist; they are all managed and regulated in some way. And the reason for that is that truly free markets lead to monopoly and rule by the wealthy, because the return on capital is higher than the return on labor. So the truth is that properly regulated markets are the most efficient way to distribute resources. But Capitalists don't like properly regulated markets, because that hinders their ability to maximize their profits. And, contrary to your assertion, profit is why Capitalists do what they do. If they weren't making money, they wouldn't be in business.
I'm from the UK, and I have to say that each time a US tax-orientated discussion comes up here on Slashdot or elsewhere, especially around US based "filing dates", I get the distinct impression that it doesn't matter how rich you are or how much your tax return is going to be, you *all* scrutinize your returns for as many deductions as you can possibly squeeze out of the system, with many of you suggesting to others to seek professional help to squeeze even more.
But that's just a foreigners impression gained from what US tax payers discuss online...
Yeah, that's about right. There is an aspect to the American character that leads people to feel that if they haven't squeezed out every last drop, even if they have to be an asshole to do it, they are suckers leaving money on the table. There is a certain amount of "I've got mine, fuck you" going on here.
If they do not want to be tested, they don't need to apply for the money.
If they do not want to eat, they don't need to apply for the money.
FTFY.
Well...I suppose they could do something radical and say, try to educate/better themselves and get a fucking JOB and pay their own way, no?
You could suppose that, but you'd be wrong. You think most poor people are poor because they just don't feel like getting a job? Beyond that, some people with jobs still have to go on public assistance because their job doesn't pay enough to live on. What do you think of raising the minimum wage?
Welfare, or SNAP, or whatever don't pay very much. It's not like these people are kicking back while the rest of us work. It's no fun to be poor, working or not.
How about I'll start treating you with respect when you earn your own money instead of taking mine?
How about I start treating you with respect when you get some compassion and start treating your fellow human being like human beings? Do you think poor people are poor simply because they don't feel like getting a job?
So let me get this straight....you want to drug test the people who are actually providing the money?
Seriously, this class envy has to stop.
It's not about envy. It's about pushing back on the criminalization of poverty, and the myth that the poor are poor because of their personal failings while the rich are rich because of their personal virtues. Rich people would never stand for being drug tested to take advantage of a government program, and rightly so. The only reason the poor have to do put up with it is because of their lack of political power.
High levels of black crime started with and were caused by Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society". Democrats encouraged black women with children to go on welfare programs, programs which required that there be no husband at home. Fatherless families strongly tend to produce criminal children.
Typical liberal program produces tragic results. It seems intentional.
And still, people bristle at the idea that perception is reality.
No, no. Remember your right-wing ideology. You have to socially elevate yourself until you're the one taking the money from the plebs. That comes from hard work and grit, son.
No no no, if you're not born with a silver spoon up your _ss (think President Shrub,) you're already f_cked for life.
It's okay, this is Slashdot. You can say things like "ass" and "fucked". It's one of the things I like about this site.
What we see is *it* as far as technology goes. We might get a few more generations of CPUs, but we'll still see the same airplanes, rockets, and cars as pretty much 50 years ago. We don't even have the Concorde anymore, or the SR-71, in some ways we've gone backwards.
Welp, might as well shut down all R we've invented and discovered everything! It didn't take too long, did it?
The radical Islamists want to establish a world wide caliphate where everyone either submits to their version of Islam or dies. Dialogue with these people is impossible because they absolutely refuse to renounce this goal and thus no permanent peace with them is possible. These people use peace only as a respite to prepare for their next war to expand the caliphate.
How do you know that? Have you spoken with these people? Or do you know what the media tell you? The media who support the policies of the United States government. The media who are always happy to parrot the official line. The media who sold you the Iraq war.
These days, a little epistemology goes a long way.
Snowden would get a fair trial, the problem is that he is actually guilty of the offenses with which he has been charged and the defense he wants to offer isn't legally available.
Too bad he didn't go to Congress instead of the People's Republic of China and Russia with the nearly two million documents he stole,
You're more naive than you look, or sound, or our best testing indicates.
CEO's have strict rules about when they are allowed to trade on the stocks of their company and it has to be declared at the time of trade. They can't go buying or selling stocks around times of announcements that have material impacts on the company. thousands get done every year for insider trading, you only hear about the big cases.
Did you learn nothing from the Panama Papers? There are ways around such restrictions.
Nah you gotta be Enron or Madoff before the SEC will even try.
And sometimes not even then. The SEC was warned about Madoff repeatedly. They did nothing, even though they had strong evidence of fraud. Madoff only got prosecuted because he reached the end of his rope and confessed.
Many people at the SEC either worked in the financial industry or hope to work in the financial industry. So aggressive prosecution isn't really on their priority list.
Yeah? Tell me how many real ones they missed. And once again, how many airplanes were hijacked? If you really want to make flying safe, get rid of the pilots.
How many planes were hijacked out if the US before the TSA existed? Not very many. Yes, four were hijacked on 9/11/01. But they were allegedly hijacked using only threats and box cutters. The hijackers themselves all passed security checks to get on the planes. Box cutters would today be let through security. So even current TSA rules would not have stopped the 9/11 hijackers. Others have mentioned that any hijackers are not going to be tolerated by passengers anyway. Hijacking has been rendered obsolete.
Seriously, "people have been put in prison and had their lives ruined" because they broke the law and got caught not because of a "misguided drug policy". I have no horse in this race, I don't care if they are legal or illegal as I value my mind in it's current state and so I would not engage in any activity specifically designed to alter it without a very compelling reason.
Ah, so the only question is one of legality? The propriety of laws doesn't enter into it? Whatever they want to make illegal is just fine by you? Or could there be misguided policies that should be corrected?
The entire pro pot rant is like the screeching of the same fucking retarded parrot to me. You want to get high? Get high. I won't stop you.
The pothead arguments bore me. I've heard all of them before and I hold this opinion. Surprise me. Tell me something I haven't heard before or confirm my bias.
You don't seem to acknowledge that pot prohibition results in millions of people being imprisoned for a relatively harmless activity. It ruins lives and falls disproportionately on Blacks and the poor. The people who want to get high are already getting high, laying bare the futility of the policy.
Drug legalization isn't about enabling people to get high. It's about not ruining people's lives needlessly. Is that an argument that bores you?
I was actually all for legalizing drugs. However, I don't use them, and it wasn't something that I considered to be an urgent issue at all. I figgered there were slightly more important things, like wars and economic meltdowns (this was before the bursting bubbles).
The thing is, many people have been put in prison and had their lives ruined because of misguided drug policy. For them it is a quite urgent and important issue. I assume you think that wars and economic meltdowns are important because of the effects they have on people's lives. Well, drug prohibition also has an effect on people's lives, has gotten us the highest incarceration rate in the developed world and ushered in such violations as "civil forfeiture" and no-knock warrants. So yeah, it's kind of an important and serious issue.
Slashdot Mirror
Is this for real? The rich don't care about your SILLY little drug test, they are RICH, there are multiple multiple ways to evade drug testing, the rich have a lot more resources available... It's good that people are thinking about "equalizing" in a sense, but this idea is just stupid I'm sorry...
After all, this is America. If you can't use your wealth and power to break the rules with impunity, what's the point of being rich?
... if you're a capitalist. If you accept you live in a purely capitalist society, then someone "bad at capitalism" is as a natural extension of that a "bad societal actor", or more concisely, a "bad citizen". It isn't hard to see how someone who views the world through a lens of "money is the all important" that someone without money or who is bad at managing it would be a criminal. It's wrong but I've known people who believe the abolition of debtor's prison was one of the single biggest blows to modern capitalism. Think about that. It's nuts. That being said, making the rich take drug tests before receiving those tax breaks is about as likely as the rich actually paying their fair share of taxes.
Pure and utter drivel. The basis of capitalism is not worship of money. The fact that some person you talked to favored debtor's prisons doesn't mean that everybody who believes in liberty worships money. The basis of capitalism is that the free market is the most efficient and just way to distribute scarce resources.
The problem is, free markets don't really exist; they are all managed and regulated in some way. And the reason for that is that truly free markets lead to monopoly and rule by the wealthy, because the return on capital is higher than the return on labor. So the truth is that properly regulated markets are the most efficient way to distribute resources. But Capitalists don't like properly regulated markets, because that hinders their ability to maximize their profits. And, contrary to your assertion, profit is why Capitalists do what they do. If they weren't making money, they wouldn't be in business.
I'm from the UK, and I have to say that each time a US tax-orientated discussion comes up here on Slashdot or elsewhere, especially around US based "filing dates", I get the distinct impression that it doesn't matter how rich you are or how much your tax return is going to be, you *all* scrutinize your returns for as many deductions as you can possibly squeeze out of the system, with many of you suggesting to others to seek professional help to squeeze even more.
But that's just a foreigners impression gained from what US tax payers discuss online...
Yeah, that's about right. There is an aspect to the American character that leads people to feel that if they haven't squeezed out every last drop, even if they have to be an asshole to do it, they are suckers leaving money on the table. There is a certain amount of "I've got mine, fuck you" going on here.
Well...I suppose they could do something radical and say, try to educate/better themselves and get a fucking JOB and pay their own way, no?
You could suppose that, but you'd be wrong. You think most poor people are poor because they just don't feel like getting a job? Beyond that, some people with jobs still have to go on public assistance because their job doesn't pay enough to live on. What do you think of raising the minimum wage?
Welfare, or SNAP, or whatever don't pay very much. It's not like these people are kicking back while the rest of us work. It's no fun to be poor, working or not.
Are you one of those people that thinks that it's not your money, it's the government's.
It actually belongs to the Federal Reserve. It says so right on the bill. It is owed back to them, with interest.
How about I'll start treating you with respect when you earn your own money instead of taking mine?
How about I start treating you with respect when you get some compassion and start treating your fellow human being like human beings? Do you think poor people are poor simply because they don't feel like getting a job?
So let me get this straight....you want to drug test the people who are actually providing the money?
Seriously, this class envy has to stop.
It's not about envy. It's about pushing back on the criminalization of poverty, and the myth that the poor are poor because of their personal failings while the rich are rich because of their personal virtues. Rich people would never stand for being drug tested to take advantage of a government program, and rightly so. The only reason the poor have to do put up with it is because of their lack of political power.
Slashdot does not hate gays. Slashdot does not have any problem with gays
The main problem in Slashdot is that Slashdot sides with the moslems
If you ever dare to post anything of the ugly truth about Islam or the the savegery of the moslems your message will be deleted
No, not modded down, but DELETED
In the matter of fact, this message is in danger of being deleted as well
Is that you, Taco Cowboy?
High levels of black crime started with and were caused by Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society". Democrats encouraged black women with children to go on welfare programs, programs which required that there be no husband at home. Fatherless families strongly tend to produce criminal children.
Typical liberal program produces tragic results. It seems intentional.
And still, people bristle at the idea that perception is reality.
No, no. Remember your right-wing ideology. You have to socially elevate yourself until you're the one taking the money from the plebs. That comes from hard work and grit, son.
No no no, if you're not born with a silver spoon up your _ss (think President Shrub,) you're already f_cked for life.
It's okay, this is Slashdot. You can say things like "ass" and "fucked". It's one of the things I like about this site.
The population is not informed or knowledgeable enough to form a relevant opinion anyway and it's best to sidestep mob rule.
Yes, you've made sure of that, haven't you?
That should say R & D...
What we see is *it* as far as technology goes. We might get a few more generations of CPUs, but we'll still see the same airplanes, rockets, and cars as pretty much 50 years ago. We don't even have the Concorde anymore, or the SR-71, in some ways we've gone backwards.
Welp, might as well shut down all R we've invented and discovered everything! It didn't take too long, did it?
Boy, that escalated quickly!
There's nothing preventing "45 year old wives" from knowing something about the machines they operate.
Really? Have you met many 45 year old wives?
The radical Islamists want to establish a world wide caliphate where everyone either submits to their version of Islam or dies. Dialogue with these people is impossible because they absolutely refuse to renounce this goal and thus no permanent peace with them is possible. These people use peace only as a respite to prepare for their next war to expand the caliphate.
How do you know that? Have you spoken with these people? Or do you know what the media tell you? The media who support the policies of the United States government. The media who are always happy to parrot the official line. The media who sold you the Iraq war.
These days, a little epistemology goes a long way.
Snowden would get a fair trial, the problem is that he is actually guilty of the offenses with which he has been charged and the defense he wants to offer isn't legally available.
Too bad he didn't go to Congress instead of the People's Republic of China and Russia with the nearly two million documents he stole,
You're more naive than you look, or sound, or our best testing indicates.
The US cannot seem to exist WITHOUT ENEMIES.
IMO, this is done for control of the populace's attitudes and opinions. People are compliant and acquiescent to authority when they feel threatened.
CEO's have strict rules about when they are allowed to trade on the stocks of their company and it has to be declared at the time of trade. They can't go buying or selling stocks around times of announcements that have material impacts on the company. thousands get done every year for insider trading, you only hear about the big cases.
Did you learn nothing from the Panama Papers? There are ways around such restrictions.
Nah you gotta be Enron or Madoff before the SEC will even try.
And sometimes not even then. The SEC was warned about Madoff repeatedly. They did nothing, even though they had strong evidence of fraud. Madoff only got prosecuted because he reached the end of his rope and confessed.
Many people at the SEC either worked in the financial industry or hope to work in the financial industry. So aggressive prosecution isn't really on their priority list.
Yeah? Tell me how many real ones they missed. And once again, how many airplanes were hijacked? If you really want to make flying safe, get rid of the pilots.
How many planes were hijacked out if the US before the TSA existed? Not very many. Yes, four were hijacked on 9/11/01. But they were allegedly hijacked using only threats and box cutters. The hijackers themselves all passed security checks to get on the planes. Box cutters would today be let through security. So even current TSA rules would not have stopped the 9/11 hijackers. Others have mentioned that any hijackers are not going to be tolerated by passengers anyway. Hijacking has been rendered obsolete.
So what are we really accomplishing here?
Ya, and killed over an Ice-Tea and skittles.
Seriously, "people have been put in prison and had their lives ruined" because they broke the law and got caught not because of a "misguided drug policy". I have no horse in this race, I don't care if they are legal or illegal as I value my mind in it's current state and so I would not engage in any activity specifically designed to alter it without a very compelling reason.
Ah, so the only question is one of legality? The propriety of laws doesn't enter into it? Whatever they want to make illegal is just fine by you? Or could there be misguided policies that should be corrected?
He has no choice ultimately. Science has disproven free will. His posting, as yours, was set at the moment of the creation of the universe.
There may not be true free will, but you are not accounting for choice.
The entire pro pot rant is like the screeching of the same fucking retarded parrot to me. You want to get high? Get high. I won't stop you.
The pothead arguments bore me. I've heard all of them before and I hold this opinion. Surprise me. Tell me something I haven't heard before or confirm my bias.
You don't seem to acknowledge that pot prohibition results in millions of people being imprisoned for a relatively harmless activity. It ruins lives and falls disproportionately on Blacks and the poor. The people who want to get high are already getting high, laying bare the futility of the policy.
Drug legalization isn't about enabling people to get high. It's about not ruining people's lives needlessly. Is that an argument that bores you?
I was actually all for legalizing drugs. However, I don't use them, and it wasn't something that I considered to be an urgent issue at all. I figgered there were slightly more important things, like wars and economic meltdowns (this was before the bursting bubbles).
The thing is, many people have been put in prison and had their lives ruined because of misguided drug policy. For them it is a quite urgent and important issue. I assume you think that wars and economic meltdowns are important because of the effects they have on people's lives. Well, drug prohibition also has an effect on people's lives, has gotten us the highest incarceration rate in the developed world and ushered in such violations as "civil forfeiture" and no-knock warrants. So yeah, it's kind of an important and serious issue.