It's not that I don't believe in evolution--but let's look at what the sticker says and what the constitution says.
1st Amendment: "...no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."
Sticker: "This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered."
I fail to see how viewing evolution as a theory establishes a state religion or prohibits the free exercise thereof. Furthermore, what about an atheist teacher who doesn't believe in evolution and tells his students that? Is he failing to separate church and state? What about the people that view evolution as a significant part of a religion? Sir Julian Huxley is quoted as calling "the most powerful and the most comprehensive idea that has ever arisen on earth." Does that mean that we should no longer teach evolution because it is part of some religion?
(Note: Since I do not actually have Julian Huxley's Essays of a Humanist, I grabbed that quote from a website I found through google. Disclaimer: that website was a very anti-evolution website and so if that quote is wrong, missing context, or whatever, please tell me, but realize it was an honest mistake.)
First of all, T-Bonds are--as their name implies-- bonds, not stocks, which means they pay interest. And bonds are very different from stock.
Secondly, unlike the stock market which has inherent risk, US government securities are as low risk as you can get and are considered by most finance people as "no-risk" securities. So that's a fundamental difference, especially in comparison with Enron.
Third, "where are you going to find someone who has a spare $500 billion per year?" The purchase parity GDP of the US is currently $11 trillion a year. That's where. Now I'm not suggesting that we should or will have to use 40% of our GDP to pay back our debt, but if we have to, we can.
Fourth, a falling US dollar is considered by some to occasionally be a good thing. It lowers trade deficits, and it also encourages people to....wait for it...invest in US currency! How? Many (if not all) people believe the US will strengthen again. By getting into US currency when it's low, when the dollar returns to highs, you've made a few extra Euros, Yen, whatever.
That's why you would buy T-Bills. So to answer your parent's question, yes you could keep issuing T-Bonds to pay off the others. Although, seeing as how the US government has stopped selling T-Bonds, they'll probably use T-Bills.
I would say that printing enough dollars to technically avoid bankruptcy is different than bankruptcy. Printing that much money would not only be an American disaster, it would create havoc throughout the world and probably completely destroy the people who own investments based in dollars. The threat of that alone seems like a pretty good reason for American debtors to, how shall we say, not "foreclose" on America.
I wouldn't say I was joking about it. I have family there too. I grew up there, and I have sheltered in place at home, at school. You can see one of the plants from my mother's office, so let's back off the "how dare you make light of something or somewhere you know nothing about," because I do know about it and I don't know a single person from Charleston that would be upset at my comments.
As I've stated before, I'm not necessarily for our gigantic national debt, but you have to realize three things 1.) Out debt--unlike many countries--cough--Argentina--is written 100% in US dollars. This means that technically, we never actually have to pay back the debt.
2.) Some economists consider debt during a recession a good thing (ala John Meynard Keynes during the 1930's).
3.) Giant debt started way before Reagan. And debt does not have to only be paid back after 30 years, only the principal does (for T-bonds). So we're paying the interest right now.
4.) As to your statement about the US defaulting in 5 to 10 years, even though Russia somehow managed to do it (economists are still working on that one), it is generally beleived that it is impossible for a government to default on debts written in its own currency.
Seriously, can't we find anyone with a clue lately? While you can argue against our debt (I'm personally against it) you have to at least understand how works before you can criticize it.
Some facts you should try to wrap your mind around:
1.) As long as this nation has existed, we've had a national debt. So, if we waited until there was no debt to pay for something, we would have no government. See the history: http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opd.htm#histor y
2.) We never actually have to pay back our debt! I'm not going to get into Econ 101 with you, but because our debt is written in US dollars, we can, effectively pay off our debt with even more debt forever. While you and I may not agree with this tactic, you have to at least acknowledge that it exists.
3.) The consequences of when China stops investing in us will be inconsequential. China has invested $177 billion in US debt, and while this makes them the second largest nation to invest in the US government, it also means that China holds less than 4% of US National Debt held by the public and less than 2.5% of the total US National Debt. US companies have invested hundreds of billions of dollars (and continue to do so) in China and the US serves as one of China's largest trading partners, primarily as a market for goods. If China were, for some bizarre reason (conspiracy theorists note this please) pull all of its meager investments in the US in some weird attempt to manipulate the US economy, the US could retaliate and cause catastrophic damage to China. Finally, the public debt works as a public auction in a free market system, if China were to stop investing in the US, there would likely be another country to pick up the slack without some much as a hiccup.
There are many valid arguments against a ballooning national debt, wild and inaccurate statements that include references to credit cards and China are not normally not some of them (the credit card analogy is particularly inaccurate for several reasons: there is no 3rd party creditor, we set the interest rates and terms, etc).
An incorporated entity does not pay taxes on salaries, even if it's a one person company. A company only pays taxes on retained earnings and disbursments to shareholders. So if you paid yourself an income, but no dividends, and paid out enough so that your company had very little money left in the bank at year's end, there essentially is no double taxation. You also cannot be personally sued and lose personal belongings if you're set up as a corporation (in most cases). Of course you then have to be careful about "purchases" made in the companies name (Why does a 1-person software company need an 56" plasma TV and copies of "Girls Gone Wild"?) But that's another story.
As for the patents, here it goes:
Can you get in trouble for selling software that has been patented by someone else? Yes. Have lots of software patents been issued? Yes. If you accidentally infringe on a patent, will the government kick down your door and kill your dog? Probably not. How can you tell if you're working on something that's already patented? Do a search.
1.) Proper searches are expensive because they're very hard. However, more often than not Google and/or a local college library can handle general searches.
2.) I recommend that anyone involved in things like software retain the services of a patent attorney. But you should know that the trickiest patents to find are going to be something that you think no one's ever done before, but an obscure IBM facility in the Alps perfected 5 years ago. If you're doing something that everyone already does (Linux, browsers, office applications, etc), something that's in the public domain, chances are you won't be sued (or else they would sue Mozilla, Open Office, etc).
Will I be sued? Probably not. Why not? Lawyers are expensive, you're not worth their time.
You should also realize that with the services of a very good attorney, someone not blatantly stealing ideas can probably fend off just about anyone. Also, most companies will send you cease and desist letters before they haul you to court.
I recall reading in the Wall Street Journal a few years back that Wal-Mart had been pressuring movie studios to drop the prices of DVD significantly. Apparently, Wal-Mart wanted to sell DVD's at the $3-$5 range because they felt that they could move a serious number of DVD's as "impulse buys" (just like the wonderful candy isle). I wonder if they're trying the same thing with CD's. Imagine it: you go to check out at Wal-Mart and instead of candy, there's a wall of $2 CD's and $4 DVD's to choose from.
Alas, the movie studios held out, at least partially (I seemed to have noticed quite a few $5.88 and $9.88 DVD bins in Wal-Mart since I read that article though).
it is collusion! normally collusion has to do with prices (and sometimes sales territory) rather than features such as this. But think of this like an economist: reducing features and charging the same price is essentially the same thing as raising the price (go with me on this one). If two companies agree to limit functionality and maintain their prices (or agree to similar prices, or even simply agree on price) then that really is price collusion.
Think about this: Ford and GM executives at one point never even spoke to each other for fear of collusion accusations!
I taught a class on introductory and intermediate C. The first day of class I gave the students the websites for Borland's Command line tools and GCC (which upset them because they wanted a GUI). The second day in class I gave them the website for Dev-C++.
Our rules in class were quite simple: We taught as class to ANSI C as I could get. They could use whatever they wanted to code in (my choice was a text editor), but it had to compile on GCC because in my opinion, that's the best and most versatile there is. I specifically told them that I didn't care for compilers that let them use "incorrect" or liberal syntax, but they were free to use them, as long as their code compiled on my machine.
Needless to say I had a few "hackers" who used Visual C++ to write their code. They did not do so well.
brothers, sisters, uncles, dads, etc = you can yell, assert authority, be blunt without too too much feedback (well, in some families)
mothers and girlfriends = assert you're authority and they'll probably laugh, do it again, they'll be pissed, do it thrise no more fresh cookies (from either )
From the discussions with our attorneys when the start up I worked for was bought out:
A company can only claim intellectual properties for stuff you do while: a.) doing your job, b.) working on their time, c.) with their equipment, or d.) following orders from a manager
As I understand it, the reason they put those clauses into your contract saying they own everything, is they're afraid you'll stumble onto a million-dollar idea while at work and they won't be able to get a piece of the action. I would talk to a lawyer friend of mine and talk to my manager and HR rep about it. Also, if the subject of non-compete agreements come up, those are basically worthless, so I wouldn't worry too much about that (A lawyer friend I know told me that they're basically unenforcable, they just use them to scare the crap out of any company trying to hire you).
He's right, the double-taxation only applies to dividends. One giant basic need for incorporation: it protects the owners from lawsuits and creates a separate entity that is the business.
What this means: Say you have an employee that works for you, there is a fire, they die. Their spouse sues your company for $2,000,000 and wins, but the company only has coverage for $1,000,000 and only $500,000 in the bank.
If you're incorporated: The company goes bankrupt, that sucks.
If you're not incorporated: The owners are required by law to come up with the money; the company goes bankrupt along with the owners, that is sucking in a most extreme form.
Additionally, if you ever want to do things like bring in investors, bring in partners, ESOPS (aka stock options for employees), do certain kinds of business with governments and other businesses, and have any sort of business exit strategy (except the strategy of leaving it all to your kids) you need to be incorporated.
So take some advice, visit an accountant and attorney have them draft the articles of incorporation in whatever state you want them to be in (Deleware is the most popular!).
Slashdot Mirror
Didn't Civ 3 use SDL?
It's not that I don't believe in evolution--but let's look at what the sticker says and what the constitution says.
1st Amendment:
"...no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."
Sticker:
"This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered."
I fail to see how viewing evolution as a theory establishes a state religion or prohibits the free exercise thereof. Furthermore, what about an atheist teacher who doesn't believe in evolution and tells his students that? Is he failing to separate church and state? What about the people that view evolution as a significant part of a religion? Sir Julian Huxley is quoted as calling "the most powerful and the most comprehensive idea that has ever arisen on earth." Does that mean that we should no longer teach evolution because it is part of some religion?
(Note: Since I do not actually have Julian Huxley's Essays of a Humanist, I grabbed that quote from a website I found through google. Disclaimer: that website was a very anti-evolution website and so if that quote is wrong, missing context, or whatever, please tell me, but realize it was an honest mistake.)
Yeah, I guess I got a little upset there, sorry about that. We WV got to stick together.
First of all, T-Bonds are--as their name implies-- bonds, not stocks, which means they pay interest. And bonds are very different from stock.
Secondly, unlike the stock market which has inherent risk, US government securities are as low risk as you can get and are considered by most finance people as "no-risk" securities. So that's a fundamental difference, especially in comparison with Enron.
Third, "where are you going to find someone who has a spare $500 billion per year?" The purchase parity GDP of the US is currently $11 trillion a year. That's where. Now I'm not suggesting that we should or will have to use 40% of our GDP to pay back our debt, but if we have to, we can.
Fourth, a falling US dollar is considered by some to occasionally be a good thing. It lowers trade deficits, and it also encourages people to....wait for it...invest in US currency! How? Many (if not all) people believe the US will strengthen again. By getting into US currency when it's low, when the dollar returns to highs, you've made a few extra Euros, Yen, whatever.
That's why you would buy T-Bills. So to answer your parent's question, yes you could keep issuing T-Bonds to pay off the others. Although, seeing as how the US government has stopped selling T-Bonds, they'll probably use T-Bills.
I would say that printing enough dollars to technically avoid bankruptcy is different than bankruptcy. Printing that much money would not only be an American disaster, it would create havoc throughout the world and probably completely destroy the people who own investments based in dollars. The threat of that alone seems like a pretty good reason for American debtors to, how shall we say, not "foreclose" on America.
okay, I should edit before I post, I meant to say realize 4 things.
I wouldn't say I was joking about it. I have family there too. I grew up there, and I have sheltered in place at home, at school. You can see one of the plants from my mother's office, so let's back off the "how dare you make light of something or somewhere you know nothing about," because I do know about it and I don't know a single person from Charleston that would be upset at my comments.
2.) Some economists consider debt during a recession a good thing (ala John Meynard Keynes during the 1930's).
3.) Giant debt started way before Reagan. And debt does not have to only be paid back after 30 years, only the principal does (for T-bonds). So we're paying the interest right now.
4.) As to your statement about the US defaulting in 5 to 10 years, even though Russia somehow managed to do it (economists are still working on that one), it is generally beleived that it is impossible for a government to default on debts written in its own currency.
Some facts you should try to wrap your mind around:r y
1.) As long as this nation has existed, we've had a national debt. So, if we waited until there was no debt to pay for something, we would have no government. See the history: http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opd.htm#histo
2.) We never actually have to pay back our debt! I'm not going to get into Econ 101 with you, but because our debt is written in US dollars, we can, effectively pay off our debt with even more debt forever. While you and I may not agree with this tactic, you have to at least acknowledge that it exists.
3.) The consequences of when China stops investing in us will be inconsequential. China has invested $177 billion in US debt, and while this makes them the second largest nation to invest in the US government, it also means that China holds less than 4% of US National Debt held by the public and less than 2.5% of the total US National Debt. US companies have invested hundreds of billions of dollars (and continue to do so) in China and the US serves as one of China's largest trading partners, primarily as a market for goods. If China were, for some bizarre reason (conspiracy theorists note this please) pull all of its meager investments in the US in some weird attempt to manipulate the US economy, the US could retaliate and cause catastrophic damage to China. Finally, the public debt works as a public auction in a free market system, if China were to stop investing in the US, there would likely be another country to pick up the slack without some much as a hiccup.
There are many valid arguments against a ballooning national debt, wild and inaccurate statements that include references to credit cards and China are not normally not some of them (the credit card analogy is particularly inaccurate for several reasons: there is no 3rd party creditor, we set the interest rates and terms, etc).
They now make all those wonderful chemicals in Charleston, WV.
An incorporated entity does not pay taxes on salaries, even if it's a one person company. A company only pays taxes on retained earnings and disbursments to shareholders. So if you paid yourself an income, but no dividends, and paid out enough so that your company had very little money left in the bank at year's end, there essentially is no double taxation. You also cannot be personally sued and lose personal belongings if you're set up as a corporation (in most cases). Of course you then have to be careful about "purchases" made in the companies name (Why does a 1-person software company need an 56" plasma TV and copies of "Girls Gone Wild"?) But that's another story.
/or a local college library can handle general searches.
As for the patents, here it goes:
Can you get in trouble for selling software that has been patented by someone else? Yes. Have lots of software patents been issued? Yes. If you accidentally infringe on a patent, will the government kick down your door and kill your dog? Probably not. How can you tell if you're working on something that's already patented? Do a search.
1.) Proper searches are expensive because they're very hard. However, more often than not Google and
2.) I recommend that anyone involved in things like software retain the services of a patent attorney. But you should know that the trickiest patents to find are going to be something that you think no one's ever done before, but an obscure IBM facility in the Alps perfected 5 years ago. If you're doing something that everyone already does (Linux, browsers, office applications, etc), something that's in the public domain, chances are you won't be sued (or else they would sue Mozilla, Open Office, etc).
Will I be sued? Probably not. Why not? Lawyers are expensive, you're not worth their time.
You should also realize that with the services of a very good attorney, someone not blatantly stealing ideas can probably fend off just about anyone. Also, most companies will send you cease and desist letters before they haul you to court.
A few seconds to search http://www.uspto.gov/patft/index.html the USPTO will probably do you some good.
If you're doing something that no one has ever done before, you just might want a patent (here's a tip, get an attorney for that one).
Don't be afraid, as crazy as it sounds, patents exists to encourage development and even protect small businesses!
I recall reading in the Wall Street Journal a few years back that Wal-Mart had been pressuring movie studios to drop the prices of DVD significantly. Apparently, Wal-Mart wanted to sell DVD's at the $3-$5 range because they felt that they could move a serious number of DVD's as "impulse buys" (just like the wonderful candy isle). I wonder if they're trying the same thing with CD's. Imagine it: you go to check out at Wal-Mart and instead of candy, there's a wall of $2 CD's and $4 DVD's to choose from.
Alas, the movie studios held out, at least partially (I seemed to have noticed quite a few $5.88 and $9.88 DVD bins in Wal-Mart since I read that article though).
NRO (National Review Online) is a conservative weblog and normally considered one of the best of any political leaning
it is collusion! normally collusion has to do with prices (and sometimes sales territory) rather than features such as this.
But think of this like an economist: reducing features and charging the same price is essentially the same thing as raising the price (go with me on this one). If two companies agree to limit functionality and maintain their prices (or agree to similar prices, or even simply agree on price) then that really is price collusion.
Think about this: Ford and GM executives at one point never even spoke to each other for fear of collusion accusations!
ahhhh....nothing beats the evidence and reason based, eloquent style that our founding fathers instilled in the great debate of American politics.
I'm sure this is proof the system is working.
I wouldn't call DDoS'ing a web site civil disobedience
nothing proves you beleive in the freedom of speech and the freedom of information like DDoS'ing your opponents in silence
West Virginia University's done this for a few years.
in this particular order... 1. firfox 2. thunderbird 4. Emacs 5. JDK 6. Eclipse 7. openOffice 8. Gaim 9. (iTunes | XMMS) 10. the WVU Deskmate
Our rules in class were quite simple: We taught as class to ANSI C as I could get. They could use whatever they wanted to code in (my choice was a text editor), but it had to compile on GCC because in my opinion, that's the best and most versatile there is. I specifically told them that I didn't care for compilers that let them use "incorrect" or liberal syntax, but they were free to use them, as long as their code compiled on my machine.
Needless to say I had a few "hackers" who used Visual C++ to write their code. They did not do so well.
brothers, sisters, uncles, dads, etc = you can yell, assert authority, be blunt without too too much feedback (well, in some families) mothers and girlfriends = assert you're authority and they'll probably laugh, do it again, they'll be pissed, do it thrise no more fresh cookies (from either )
From the discussions with our attorneys when the start up I worked for was bought out: A company can only claim intellectual properties for stuff you do while: a.) doing your job, b.) working on their time, c.) with their equipment, or d.) following orders from a manager As I understand it, the reason they put those clauses into your contract saying they own everything, is they're afraid you'll stumble onto a million-dollar idea while at work and they won't be able to get a piece of the action. I would talk to a lawyer friend of mine and talk to my manager and HR rep about it. Also, if the subject of non-compete agreements come up, those are basically worthless, so I wouldn't worry too much about that (A lawyer friend I know told me that they're basically unenforcable, they just use them to scare the crap out of any company trying to hire you).
He's right, the double-taxation only applies to dividends. One giant basic need for incorporation: it protects the owners from lawsuits and creates a separate entity that is the business. What this means: Say you have an employee that works for you, there is a fire, they die. Their spouse sues your company for $2,000,000 and wins, but the company only has coverage for $1,000,000 and only $500,000 in the bank. If you're incorporated: The company goes bankrupt, that sucks. If you're not incorporated: The owners are required by law to come up with the money; the company goes bankrupt along with the owners, that is sucking in a most extreme form. Additionally, if you ever want to do things like bring in investors, bring in partners, ESOPS (aka stock options for employees), do certain kinds of business with governments and other businesses, and have any sort of business exit strategy (except the strategy of leaving it all to your kids) you need to be incorporated. So take some advice, visit an accountant and attorney have them draft the articles of incorporation in whatever state you want them to be in (Deleware is the most popular!).
but I keep reading slashdot and getting distracted!