every vote for nader *ought* to tell the dems to move their asses back to the left
This assumes that they can get the Nader voters without losing any of their most centrist voters, which is wishful thinking (in the sense of being totally false).
Right, Hillary is considered to be a strong candidate in 2004 only if Gore loses. The logic is that if an incumbent is unpopular enough inside his own party to lose a primary challege, he's unpopular enough in general that the electorate will take it out on his entire party. In 1968 and 1980, the only recent times that the incumbent had a strong oppostion, the other party ended up winning. (Johnson pulled out early in 1968 after a strong showing from Eugene McCarthy in New Hampshire.)
You're right, though, that if Gore served 2 terms, Hillary would have a potential shot in 2008.
And why am I doing this? To make sure Nader gets his 5% and to be a part of the new permanent reform party that this country desperatly needs.
The result of the actual Reform party getting its matching funds is that the Buchanan forces took it over so they could get those funds. What makes you think the Greens will do any better?
If you don't believe in the canidates fill in None of the Above. If that wins all the canidates get thrown out and we get new ones.
Not where I live, and not where most people live either.
I have no problem with socialism when it is by consent of all those in the socialist society. The most common example of this is the family unit. It is socialist, but by consent of all in the family.
An odd example; most family units of more than one person include children, who don't give their consent and usually claim to wish they lived in a democracy (well, I was one of three kids...)
Nader didn't have an audience ticket; what he had was a ticket to what's called "Spin Alley", where the Dem and Repub flunkies are available for useless interviews where they tell how their guy obviously won.
Another way of looking at it is that the things that might be third parties in other countries are part of the two major parties in the US; whichever party can put together a winning coalition of these subgroups wins, so it comes out close to the same thing. For instance, the faction that was called "Reagan Democrats" for a while -- primarily lower-middle class urban Catholic voters, if I remember right -- was Democratic-allied for many years, Republican-allied in the 1980's, and I don't know where they stand now.
In general, the worry with 3-party parlimentary systems is that if the vote breaks 47/48/5 percent, the 5 can hold up the other 95 for whatever they can get in order to form the winning coalition. That's not obviously better than what we have now.
The poor in the united states are actually very well off relative to the parts of the world that subscribe to your economic theory. Yes, they may be poor relative to some of their fellow countrymen, but in an absolute sense they are not poor at all. Take a trip to parts of the former Soviet Union...
So, your argument that these people are not poor in an absolute sense is to show that they are well off, compared to someone else. Huh?
Same way with video stores. They can't run out to the local best buy, pick up a movie off the shelf, and then charge $3.00 to someone who wants to rent it. They pay extra money so that they can distribute this to multiple people.
Not so. Studios make their rental money by pricing VHS tapes at about $100 when they first come out, so that only the video stores will buy them. The difference between that case and the radio case is that they only rent the one tape to one person at a time, so it's not public performance.
I see it as coming from the other direction. Hacking is saying, "I've got these resources: now how can I use them creatively?" Or, as I say, "A nerd is someone who would rather solve a problem with technology than not have the problem in the first place."
I think you can have opposite sex identical twins. I don't think the word identical applies to sex.
No. Identical twins are genetically the same, including the X/Y chromosome involved in the M/F differnce. If they're different sexes, they're fraternal twins.
Totally off-topic, but...I've never heard the expression "chew them down" for bargaining. Is it possible this is a cleaned-up "Jew them down" (possibly without the knowledge of the original poster, who I don't want to accuse of nastiness)?
A small-faced, courtly man with a neat cap of gray hair, Hatch is a prolific composer whose Haven Hamilton-like songs have cracked the top 10 of the Christian charts.
Haven Hamilton is a sanctimonius country singer in Robert Altman's "Nashville", played by Henry Gibson. His opening song in the film is the bicentennial-themed "We Must Be Doing Something Right to Last Two Hundred Years", for instance. The film is finally getting a widescreen DVD release next month, the first good (or maybe even any) video release in any format.
Little nerd appeal here, but I liked the offhand Dennis-Miller-type reference, with its understated dig at Hatch.
Well, very noble of your music teachers -- but why didn't they go the final yard and have either you, or the school, buy that extra copy of the score for you to work with? (Does work with mean "practice" or "annotate the score", in the cases you're describing?)
OK: the base value that Minnesota uses for car valuation is ludicrously high. On the other hand, the percentage of that value that they use for determining the tax (or whatever) is completely arbitrary. You could spend the effort to get all the book valuations reduced to 25% of their current values; in order to maintain the income, they'll just quadruple the tax rate.
Since USERS buy their own phones now, there's no incentive to make them last. Quite the opposite. They WANT them to break so they can sell more.
That sounds good, but it doesn't explain why they don't also make more expensive, sturdier phones, and sell them for more for people who are willing to pay more for longevity. Perhaps the answer is that people don't want it enough to pay for it, and were paying for it before without knowing it because of the bundling of the phone price with the phone service.
I always thought casual Fridays appealed to the desire to say "I'm just in the office for a while before I head out to my summer place on Long Island." Or whatever local equivalent (area with expensive beachfront property and boating).
Pepsi and Coke are two of the biggest advertisers out there, but their ads don't ever get anybody to switch colas... people still drink the one they like. The real reason for these ads is to raise stock value. If a company seems to be omnipresent, investors get a warm, fuzzy feeling about buying shares in them.
So you're saying that when people buy soda for less than a dollar a can, they act as rational consumers, but when they buy stock -- and does this include professional money managers? -- they base that decision on warm, fuzzy feelings? Do you have any evidence for this suprising view?
Re:You've only got yourselves to blame
on
Copyrant
·
· Score: 1
>Now we have videos for $14.95, or $19.95. Is it really worth $14.95 to have two VCRs, a bunch of cables, and the wasted time of copying VHS cassettes? I think not.
>And now it's time for all of the music industry to follow suit. They need to lower prices. Piracy is a result of outrageous prices! If CDs costed $4.95 a piece, would we see as much piracy? NO!!!
If you approve of $15-20 for a VHS tape, why is $12-18 for a CD "outrageous"?
They would lose the sales of people who would rather buy a paperback, but are willing to buy the hardback if that's what it takes to get it right now. It's called price discrimination -- getting the people who *will* pay more to pay more.
Slashdot Mirror
every vote for nader *ought* to tell the dems to move their asses back to the left
This assumes that they can get the Nader voters without losing any of their most centrist voters, which is wishful thinking (in the sense of being totally false).
Right, Hillary is considered to be a strong candidate in 2004 only if Gore loses. The logic is that if an incumbent is unpopular enough inside his own party to lose a primary challege, he's unpopular enough in general that the electorate will take it out on his entire party. In 1968 and 1980, the only recent times that the incumbent had a strong oppostion, the other party ended up winning. (Johnson pulled out early in 1968 after a strong showing from Eugene McCarthy in New Hampshire.)
You're right, though, that if Gore served 2 terms, Hillary would have a potential shot in 2008.
And why am I doing this? To make sure Nader gets his 5% and to be a part of the new permanent reform party that this country desperatly needs.
The result of the actual Reform party getting its matching funds is that the Buchanan forces took it over so they could get those funds. What makes you think the Greens will do any better?
If you don't believe in the canidates fill in None of the Above. If that wins all the canidates get thrown out and we get new ones.
Not where I live, and not where most people live either.
I have no problem with socialism when it is by consent of all those in the socialist society. The most common example of this is the family unit. It is socialist, but by consent of all in the family.
An odd example; most family units of more than one person include children, who don't give their consent and usually claim to wish they lived in a democracy (well, I was one of three kids...)
Nader didn't have an audience ticket; what he had was a ticket to what's called "Spin Alley", where the Dem and Repub flunkies are available for useless interviews where they tell how their guy obviously won.
Another way of looking at it is that the things that might be third parties in other countries are part of the two major parties in the US; whichever party can put together a winning coalition of these subgroups wins, so it comes out close to the same thing. For instance, the faction that was called "Reagan Democrats" for a while -- primarily lower-middle class urban Catholic voters, if I remember right -- was Democratic-allied for many years, Republican-allied in the 1980's, and I don't know where they stand now.
In general, the worry with 3-party parlimentary systems is that if the vote breaks 47/48/5 percent, the 5 can hold up the other 95 for whatever they can get in order to form the winning coalition. That's not obviously better than what we have now.
The poor in the united states are actually very well off relative to the parts of the world that subscribe to your economic theory. Yes, they may be poor relative to some of their fellow countrymen, but in an absolute sense they are not poor at all. Take a trip to parts of the former Soviet Union...
So, your argument that these people are not poor in an absolute sense is to show that they are well off, compared to someone else. Huh?
Certainly, one can't expect the candidates to have heard of every bill, particularly considering that neither of them are currently in congress.
No, Lazio is a Congressman.
Same way with video stores. They can't run out to the local best buy, pick up a movie off the shelf, and then charge $3.00 to someone who wants to rent it. They pay extra money so that they can distribute this to multiple people.
Not so. Studios make their rental money by pricing VHS tapes at about $100 when they first come out, so that only the video stores will buy them. The difference between that case and the radio case is that they only rent the one tape to one person at a time, so it's not public performance.
I see it as coming from the other direction. Hacking is saying, "I've got these resources: now how can I use them creatively?" Or, as I say, "A nerd is someone who would rather solve a problem with technology than not have the problem in the first place."
I think you can have opposite sex identical twins. I don't think the word identical applies to sex.
No. Identical twins are genetically the same, including the X/Y chromosome involved in the M/F differnce. If they're different sexes, they're fraternal twins.
Totally off-topic, but...I've never heard the expression "chew them down" for bargaining. Is it possible this is a cleaned-up "Jew them down" (possibly without the knowledge of the original poster, who I don't want to accuse of nastiness)?
Doesn't do you a lot of good when the library's censorware blocks the voting page because one of the candidates is "David Sussex" :)
Or, in a perfectly ironic world, George "Bush".
I liked this sentence:
A small-faced, courtly man with a neat cap of gray hair, Hatch is a prolific composer whose Haven Hamilton-like songs have cracked the top 10 of the Christian charts.
Haven Hamilton is a sanctimonius country singer in Robert Altman's "Nashville", played by Henry Gibson. His opening song in the film is the bicentennial-themed "We Must Be Doing Something Right to Last Two Hundred Years", for instance. The film is finally getting a widescreen DVD release next month, the first good (or maybe even any) video release in any format.
Little nerd appeal here, but I liked the offhand Dennis-Miller-type reference, with its understated dig at Hatch.
Well, very noble of your music teachers -- but why didn't they go the final yard and have either you, or the school, buy that extra copy of the score for you to work with? (Does work with mean "practice" or "annotate the score", in the cases you're describing?)
OK: the base value that Minnesota uses for car valuation is ludicrously high. On the other hand, the percentage of that value that they use for determining the tax (or whatever) is completely arbitrary. You could spend the effort to get all the book valuations reduced to 25% of their current values; in order to maintain the income, they'll just quadruple the tax rate.
It was on ABC, for the record.
Since USERS buy their own phones now, there's no incentive to make them last. Quite the opposite. They WANT them to break so they can sell more.
That sounds good, but it doesn't explain why they don't also make more expensive, sturdier phones, and sell them for more for people who are willing to pay more for longevity. Perhaps the answer is that people don't want it enough to pay for it, and were paying for it before without knowing it because of the bundling of the phone price with the phone service.
Subject of a song by the Rubinoos, complete with sound effects allegedly from the actual machine.
Saturday Night Live did a fake commercial with real video of the bodies of the Heaven's Gate people, closeups of their Nikes, and the tag:
Reeboks. Worn by normal Christian people.
Or something like that.
I always thought casual Fridays appealed to the desire to say "I'm just in the office for a while before I head out to my summer place on Long Island." Or whatever local equivalent (area with expensive beachfront property and boating).
Pepsi and Coke are two of the biggest advertisers out there, but their ads don't ever get anybody to switch colas... people still drink the one they like. The real reason for these ads is to raise stock value. If a company seems to be omnipresent, investors get a warm, fuzzy feeling about buying shares in them.
So you're saying that when people buy soda for less than a dollar a can, they act as rational consumers, but when they buy stock -- and does this include professional money managers? -- they base that decision on warm, fuzzy feelings? Do you have any evidence for this suprising view?
...fake?
Damn. I feel so used.
>Now we have videos for $14.95, or $19.95. Is it really worth $14.95 to have two VCRs, a bunch of cables, and the wasted time of copying VHS cassettes? I think not.
>And now it's time for all of the music industry to follow suit. They need to lower prices. Piracy is a result of outrageous prices! If CDs costed $4.95 a piece, would we see as much piracy? NO!!!
If you approve of $15-20 for a VHS tape, why is $12-18 for a CD "outrageous"?
They would lose the sales of people who would rather buy a paperback, but are willing to buy the hardback if that's what it takes to get it right now. It's called price discrimination -- getting the people who *will* pay more to pay more.