Let's start with you. I have just decided you're rich. Please send 100% of your wealth to the Bureau of the Public Debt. Oh? You think I'm rich? I should just stand back and let the gov't take whatever jealous folks like you think I should pay?
Molon Labe to you, that's what I say.
Note that even if we all (US Citizens and others subject to US Income Tax) gave it our all, it would not solve the problem of the government SPENDING MORE THAN IT TAKES IN INCLUDING BORROWING!!!!!
I am reminded of the last tech bubble and all the companies that happily put all their investor money in Sun servers and Oracle databases and never actually delivered a working product.
Hah! that was fun. The best part was how much they paid the consultants, heheheh.
the real solution here is to stop spending more money as a state than we have. This state collects a historically high amount of tax money, and still wastes more money than we take in. The budget needs to be balanced, and it can't be balanced on the backs of the tax payer alone.
and there you have it. The rest is just activist obfuscation. Yet more refinement of the tax code is at best irrelevant, more likely it makes things worse. Apologists for tax increases should just be shunned, they are shills for tyranny. Witness how they make up mysterious "fairness" comparisons, e.g. pretending that gov't waste is good for the GDP.
People who want to be free will ultimately have to realize the TAXERS are the enemy, and treat them accordingly.
perhaps the next thing we need to criminalize is when elected and appointed government officials violate the US Constitution. Let's make that a felony.
with the death penalty. Think of it as evolution in action.
Besides, even if there is a reasonable doubt that AGW is happening, why not start working on reducing carbon dioxide emissions? The cost of doing so is expected to be less than the cause of dealing with the warming if the predictions turn out to be accurate.
The cost of doing so seems to be turning our freedom and technological progress over to a wise priesthood of all-knowing soothsayers who are sure the whole truth is known to them, and all we have to do is follow their prescription and everything will be wonderful. Any objection is decried as nonsense, regardless of it's source, and any who object are denounced as a "denialists" without examination of the objection. Wonderful credibility the AGW advocates are creating for themselves. If they are so concerned about carbon emissions they should just stop breathing first, in order to demonstrate their initiative in getting to work on it right away.
Guns don't make killing easier 'in some ways' - guns make killing easier period. It's the first killing weapon where you don't have to be within physical contact of your victim to kill them, and it's accurate.
Javelin, blowgun, slingshot, and let's not forget, longbow and crossbow.
Or the highly effective Atlatl, there's even a silencer for it...
I am not a police officer, not a vigilante, not in the military or any organized militia. I have used a firearm in self defense 4 times in my life (thankfully without having to fire a shot). I didn't bother reporting these incidents to the police.
I wish people would just realize gov't in the US has no power over the law-abiding and forget about trying to further their agenda through gov't control. There's already too many bad laws; bad law breeds disrespect for the rule of law and undermines civil society. For this reason some laws and authorities are banned outright in the US constitution, but somehow this doesn't act as a deterrent to would-be tyrants, because, well, they're not respectful of limits to power...
You know, you may think you can always retreat. But that would be wrong. When the big ugly bad guys have backed you into the corner, what do you want in your hand? A cellphone or a shotgun? You think you are safe if you just cooperate with the bad guys? Or if you scream your fool head off they'll just leave? You can't take comfort in the correlations, because the variance just might be your life.
When I travel, I always keep a loaded firearm next to the bed where I sleep, and I rehearse falling off the bed and grabbing my piece. You might perceive this as insane paranoia. Having been the victor of 1 home invasion and 2 hotel room break-ins (without firing a shot, thank god), I reserve the right to make my own decisions about self-defense planning, and I loudly decry the false authority of anyone who wants to take that right away from me, regardless of a suavity of their argument.
I recall reading an news article crowing over the successful impact of a new anti-gun proscription intended to reduce drive-by shootings; in the column next to it was a report on a stabbing incident where the attackers jumped from a moving car, stabbed the victim to death in one thrust, reentered the vehicle and escaped - a drive-by stabbing...so the attackers cared enough to use a knife instead of a gun - what a comfort....
Re:Was it a cause of his legal trouble?
on
Our Low-Tech Tax Code
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I'm pretty certain the Stack tragedy represents the outcome of some form of mental illness, not terrorism or a political statement. The jury is still out, but the rant seems kind of pointless.
OTOH, section 1706 has been a bone in my craw and the deep seat of a sincere grudge I hold very firmly. It was obviously a sop to IBM and when it emerged from reconciliation, also Cap Gemini and other large contracting organizations (at the time, AKA "body shops"). It was very obviously intended as an anti-competitive measure against people just like me. I have personally observed the negative influence of section 1706 on my business and career on more than a dozen occasions.
For the people who say "just work around it" - that's the point - it's another increment in the cost of doing business. Also it increases the risk to your customers - they have to verify you're not going to face them with an unforeseen tax liability. And so the whole market was modified to favor the large firms at the expense of entrepreneurship. And then there's the obvious begging hand of Congressional shakedown held out whenever someone tries to get the law changed to remove this double-dealing injustice.
Fucking Parasite Bastards. I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels this way. All these holier-than-thou pro-IRS bigots who holler "we're just following the law" or "We did our job fairly" need to consider the consequence of laying down to bed with tyranny. It isn't something which may be excused with happy talk and a smiley face!
If you think taxing the poor more then the rich is the right way to go
The "FAIR TAX" does not tax the poor more than the rich. It's a tax on first retail purchase of "new" items. It actually includes a basic welfare element in the form of a subsidy per citizen to offset tax paid up to a certain amount defined as the "poverty level", based on a citizen would pay in tax for "new" items if the citizen were poor and just subsisting (on "new" items). Any citizen may collect the subsidy on a monthly basis if they want - they just have to show up and register for it.
IIRC "new" probably covers food. Used cars and 2nd-hand clothing are not new. Old houses are not "new". Apartment buildings may be "new", we haven't worked this out yet.
The "FAIR TAX" is desirable because it puts a tremendous drag on the effective power of the federal government, power coveted by many in government. It makes it easier to see the difference between high-tax and low-tax jurisdictions. I see the fact of so many people actively and offhandedly spreading disinformation about the "FAIR TAX" as prima facie evidence of a sinister opposition.
Landis, you have no clothes. Did you review the CRU data dump? Did you find the fudge factors? The emails with evidence of collusion in the peer review? Or did you close your eyes to it as well? After all, there might have been more than one possible interpretation. Except there are way more interpretations which lead to a conclusion of dishonesty.
There is enough oddness about the AGW lobby to convince any skeptic to be, well, skeptical. And frankly, when scientists lobby for reform and dismiss legitimate skepticism as "denialism", they're not scientists anymore, they're preaching. When the IPCC asked us to take the summaries on faith, they abandoned all science and AGW became a religion.
Two servers, we'll call them A and B, having an argument (over punctuation, I think). The error channel is in-band:
A: "SEND: *" B: "INVALID COMMAND: *" A: "INVALID COMMAND: INVALID COMMAND: *" B: "INVALID COMMAND: INVALID COMMAND: INVALID COMMAND: *"...and so at a prodigious rate. I fell on the floor laughing as the systems involved fell over from mutual DOS.
Well, this is utterly bogus. The thing to remember is the effective use of the relational model allows for consistent queries. The RDBMS stores facts, and queries are propositions. It's logic programming. Programming. Programming. Not Stone.Normalization may be done by Normal people. It doesn't require godhood.
The theory of the immutable, pre-determined database schema makes the DBA an asshole. It's not necessary or correct. Typically the problem arises when the DBA is out of touch with the data. When the minimum granularity of new testing databases is all the data, you have hit this point.
Moral: Know the data. Track a baseline database to go with the schema. Always script the data as well as the schema, so as to be able to build a database to go with the schema. Sure, use a tool to identify schema changes. You Must Use version control on both or puke.
Don't be above the fray. Quit picking on developers.
yeah, I like the idea of extending mail to include an anti-spam or sender challenge protocol.
One side effect is it might extend to truly encompass the concept of "postage", i.e. people might be able to conveniently automate charging for sending or routing mail. Not that they can't presently, but presently such things are outside the scope of mail's interface.
Of course it would be difficult to send a "postage request" to an anonymous sender, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Let's start with you. I have just decided you're rich. Please send 100% of your wealth to the Bureau of the Public Debt. Oh? You think I'm rich? I should just stand back and let the gov't take whatever jealous folks like you think I should pay?
Molon Labe to you, that's what I say.
Note that even if we all (US Citizens and others subject to US Income Tax) gave it our all, it would not solve the problem of the government SPENDING MORE THAN IT TAKES IN INCLUDING BORROWING!!!!!
I am reminded of the last tech bubble and all the companies that happily put all their investor money in Sun servers and Oracle databases and never actually delivered a working product.
Hah! that was fun. The best part was how much they paid the consultants, heheheh.
the real solution here is to stop spending more money as a state than we have. This state collects a historically high amount of tax money, and still wastes more money than we take in. The budget needs to be balanced, and it can't be balanced on the backs of the tax payer alone.
and there you have it. The rest is just activist obfuscation. Yet more refinement of the tax code is at best irrelevant, more likely it makes things worse. Apologists for tax increases should just be shunned, they are shills for tyranny. Witness how they make up mysterious "fairness" comparisons, e.g. pretending that gov't waste is good for the GDP.
People who want to be free will ultimately have to realize the TAXERS are the enemy, and treat them accordingly.
perhaps the next thing we need to criminalize is when elected and appointed government officials violate the US Constitution. Let's make that a felony.
with the death penalty. Think of it as evolution in action.
Besides, even if there is a reasonable doubt that AGW is happening, why not start working on reducing carbon dioxide emissions? The cost of doing so is expected to be less than the cause of dealing with the warming if the predictions turn out to be accurate.
The cost of doing so seems to be turning our freedom and technological progress over to a wise priesthood of all-knowing soothsayers who are sure the whole truth is known to them, and all we have to do is follow their prescription and everything will be wonderful. Any objection is decried as nonsense, regardless of it's source, and any who object are denounced as a "denialists" without examination of the objection. Wonderful credibility the AGW advocates are creating for themselves. If they are so concerned about carbon emissions they should just stop breathing first, in order to demonstrate their initiative in getting to work on it right away.
Javelin, blowgun, slingshot, and let's not forget, longbow and crossbow.
Or the highly effective Atlatl, there's even a silencer for it...
I am not a police officer, not a vigilante, not in the military or any organized militia. I have used a firearm in self defense 4 times in my life (thankfully without having to fire a shot). I didn't bother reporting these incidents to the police.
I wish people would just realize gov't in the US has no power over the law-abiding and forget about trying to further their agenda through gov't control. There's already too many bad laws; bad law breeds disrespect for the rule of law and undermines civil society. For this reason some laws and authorities are banned outright in the US constitution, but somehow this doesn't act as a deterrent to would-be tyrants, because, well, they're not respectful of limits to power...
You know, you may think you can always retreat. But that would be wrong. When the big ugly bad guys have backed you into the corner, what do you want in your hand? A cellphone or a shotgun? You think you are safe if you just cooperate with the bad guys? Or if you scream your fool head off they'll just leave? You can't take comfort in the correlations, because the variance just might be your life.
When I travel, I always keep a loaded firearm next to the bed where I sleep, and I rehearse falling off the bed and grabbing my piece. You might perceive this as insane paranoia. Having been the victor of 1 home invasion and 2 hotel room break-ins (without firing a shot, thank god), I reserve the right to make my own decisions about self-defense planning, and I loudly decry the false authority of anyone who wants to take that right away from me, regardless of a suavity of their argument.
I recall reading an news article crowing over the successful impact of a new anti-gun proscription intended to reduce drive-by shootings; in the column next to it was a report on a stabbing incident where the attackers jumped from a moving car, stabbed the victim to death in one thrust, reentered the vehicle and escaped - a drive-by stabbing...so the attackers cared enough to use a knife instead of a gun - what a comfort....
I'm pretty certain the Stack tragedy represents the outcome of some form of mental illness, not terrorism or a political statement. The jury is still out, but the rant seems kind of pointless.
OTOH, section 1706 has been a bone in my craw and the deep seat of a sincere grudge I hold very firmly. It was obviously a sop to IBM and when it emerged from reconciliation, also Cap Gemini and other large contracting organizations (at the time, AKA "body shops"). It was very obviously intended as an anti-competitive measure against people just like me. I have personally observed the negative influence of section 1706 on my business and career on more than a dozen occasions.
For the people who say "just work around it" - that's the point - it's another increment in the cost of doing business. Also it increases the risk to your customers - they have to verify you're not going to face them with an unforeseen tax liability. And so the whole market was modified to favor the large firms at the expense of entrepreneurship. And then there's the obvious begging hand of Congressional shakedown held out whenever someone tries to get the law changed to remove this double-dealing injustice.
Fucking Parasite Bastards. I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels this way. All these holier-than-thou pro-IRS bigots who holler "we're just following the law" or "We did our job fairly" need to consider the consequence of laying down to bed with tyranny. It isn't something which may be excused with happy talk and a smiley face!
If you think taxing the poor more then the rich is the right way to go
The "FAIR TAX" does not tax the poor more than the rich. It's a tax on first retail purchase of "new" items. It actually includes a basic welfare element in the form of a subsidy per citizen to offset tax paid up to a certain amount defined as the "poverty level", based on a citizen would pay in tax for "new" items if the citizen were poor and just subsisting (on "new" items). Any citizen may collect the subsidy on a monthly basis if they want - they just have to show up and register for it.
IIRC "new" probably covers food. Used cars and 2nd-hand clothing are not new. Old houses are not "new". Apartment buildings may be "new", we haven't worked this out yet.
The "FAIR TAX" is desirable because it puts a tremendous drag on the effective power of the federal government, power coveted by many in government. It makes it easier to see the difference between high-tax and low-tax jurisdictions. I see the fact of so many people actively and offhandedly spreading disinformation about the "FAIR TAX" as prima facie evidence of a sinister opposition.
Landis, you have no clothes. Did you review the CRU data dump? Did you find the fudge factors? The emails with evidence of collusion in the peer review? Or did you close your eyes to it as well? After all, there might have been more than one possible interpretation. Except there are way more interpretations which lead to a conclusion of dishonesty. There is enough oddness about the AGW lobby to convince any skeptic to be, well, skeptical. And frankly, when scientists lobby for reform and dismiss legitimate skepticism as "denialism", they're not scientists anymore, they're preaching. When the IPCC asked us to take the summaries on faith, they abandoned all science and AGW became a religion.
3)The president is president of all the people[...]
Quibble - that should read
3)He (or she) is President of the Federal Government on behalf of all of the people[...]
The President can't order me around. He is not dictator. Sovereignty remains with the people.
Two servers, we'll call them A and B, having an argument (over punctuation, I think). The error channel is in-band:
...and so at a prodigious rate.
A: "SEND: *"
B: "INVALID COMMAND: *"
A: "INVALID COMMAND: INVALID COMMAND: *"
B: "INVALID COMMAND: INVALID COMMAND: INVALID COMMAND: *"
I fell on the floor laughing as the systems involved fell over from mutual DOS.
The theory of the immutable, pre-determined database schema makes the DBA an asshole. It's not necessary or correct. Typically the problem arises when the DBA is out of touch with the data. When the minimum granularity of new testing databases is all the data, you have hit this point.
Moral: Know the data. Track a baseline database to go with the schema. Always script the data as well as the schema, so as to be able to build a database to go with the schema. Sure, use a tool to identify schema changes. You Must Use version control on both or puke.
Don't be above the fray. Quit picking on developers.
Some annoying marketroid tried this on me once - "I've been taking karate and I can block any punch, try me-ooof!"
I already knew the punchline, my fist was moving as soon as he asked for it....
You hear this so often, you might think it's an urban legend, but noooo, it really happens.
One side effect is it might extend to truly encompass the concept of "postage", i.e. people might be able to conveniently automate charging for sending or routing mail. Not that they can't presently, but presently such things are outside the scope of mail's interface.
Of course it would be difficult to send a "postage request" to an anonymous sender, etc.