Actually, If somebody borrows your car and gets into an accident, the claim goes on your insurance because it is your car. It is your responsibility to make sure your property is being used properly.
Wrong. The only scenario where Gore came out in front is if all undervote and overvotes were counted in all of the Florida counties. The AP predicted that in this scenario, Gore would have won with a margin of 42 - 171 votes.
All other scenarios had Bush as the leader, including counting all overvotes and undervotes in only 6 counties, which is what Gore was asking the Supreme Court to do.
- Millions of 'ordinary' famalies (including my own) lost homes and small businesses such thanks to 'trickle down' economics
Wrong. Here is the real Reagan economic record. During the Reagan years, 88.5% of the households in the poorest quantile were in a higher income quantile when Reagan left office. Blacks and Minorities saw the biggest gain in real income (11%) during the Reagan years. In fact, all income groups saw an income increase during the Reagan years of Trickle down/supply side economics. So much for the liberal "zero sum" theory.
- Star Wars (a massive waste)
Star Wars drove the soviets into the ground and was a major contribution to the end of the cold war.
- Iran hostage crisis
How can you blame Reagan for something that happened before he even took office?
- The (lost and wasteful) war on drugs
We are spending 40 times as much money on the War on Drugs today that we were when Reagan was in office, thanks to Bill Clinton.
Why else would one of the biggest tax breaks ever go to the top 1% and not the middle class and poor
Maybe because the middle class and poor don't pay any taxes in the first place. 96.1% of the federal tax base is paid by the richest 50% of the country. [Source]. Guess what that means? The poorest half of this country do not pay any taxes. In fact, the richest 1% pay 37% of the taxes even though they only make 20.8% of the money. The richest 5% pay 57% of all taxes even though their income only accounts for 35% in the country. Over half of all our taxes are paid by only 5% of the country. If you give a tax cut, why wouldn't you give it to the segment of the population that is burdened the most by the tax structure?
There is nothing wrong with the printer industry selling ink for a price that the public is apparently willing to pay. The only thing that is going to change the price of ink is the market. Once people decide that they don't want to spend that much and stop buying it, it will force the industry to drop the price on ink.
Re:Learned Professionals?
on
Working Hard?
·
· Score: 1
Ok. We have a link that shockingly reveals that rich people have more wealth than poor people. Boy, I hope that "David Chandler" doesn't quit his job at the community college.
What this doesn't explain is how this is remotely related to the parents (excellent) job of refuting the claim that the rich "pay less tax per dollar earned" than the poor. I guess linking to solid information from the IRS themselves should qualify him as a "flake".
Re:Learned Professionals?
on
Working Hard?
·
· Score: 1
Hardly, by capita is proportional to the population. One of the biggest myth's in north america is the fud your spewing
You have no idea what you are talking about. According to the IRS, 96% of all the taxes paid in the US are paid by the richest 50%. In simple terms, that means that half of this country doesn't pay any taxes and are supported by the other (richer) half.
What the hell are you talking about? You are "allowed" to do whatever the hell you want with it. What you are asking is for Microsoft to support you in doing it.
Which does not mean that they have to support everything you want to do on it. If you want to spend $200 to rip it apart, load new software on it and turn it into a dishwasher, you are free to give it a try (its your hardware). You just can't expect Microsoft to help you do it.
Its like complaining that Ford made it too hard to change your Expedition into an airplane.
Good hell. We are talking about music here, not your civil rights. The fact the music that you want happens to be controlled by a multi-national conglomerate does not give you the right to not have to pay for it. If you refuse to pay for this music, then you also refuse your right to listen to it.
Nextel is a great example of marketing a technically inferior product as superior
PTT is the most technically advanced call routing available on a wireless network. With Nextel, you can connect to any other phone in the country in a fraction of a second, compared to 15, 20, or even more than 30 seconds for the other carriers. There is nothing inferior about PTT.
Sure, Netflix provides a new and rather unique system of DVD Rentals, but it isn't really a NEW Idea. There has been years upon years of renting things for a period of time Fortunately Netflix didn't apply for a patent on "renting things". They applied for a patent on a unique and specific method of renting things. They came up with a new system of renting out movies that had never been done before and they executed on it to make it successful. Why shouldn't they be granted a patent for this idea?
And I don't know how you managed to bring apartments and car leases into a discussion about DVD rentals.
but allowing any bright idea to be patented is just idiotic
No, thinking that a bright idea shouldn't be patented is just idiotic. Being first to the market and name recognition does you no good if somebody else can some along and steal your idea and put you out of business.
I'm not sure what software was used as it was a campus-wide proxy. As far as how strict the filters were, this was a religious university that has very strict policy against surfing porn. In fact, anybody caught surfing porn or trying to circumvent the proxy filter stands a good chance of being expelled, even on the first offense. I would imagine that you would have a pretty difficult time getting around the filters if you were actually looking for some smut.
This young woman's inability to do objective research has nothing to do with the fact she has an STD, and to try to place blame on those "evil filters" for her condition is ridiculous.
Having gone to a private University with very strict internet filters in place, I can say without reserve that you are full of crap. Not once was I denied access to information that I could not easily find an alternate source to, either online or in print. If I was denied access to a legitimate web site (very rare), it was as simple as hitting the back button and clicking on the next search engine result. If for some reason I really needed access to the blocked site, a simple email to the proxy admins would clear it up in less than a day (although this never happened to me).
In fact, I don't know of a single person who was denied access to a web site that they needed, and this includes nursing majors (with those tricky term papers on anatomy, the reproductive system, and STD's), and psychology majors (who did work on things like pedophilia and abnormal sexual psychology).
You can (and probably will) continue to blame problems like your fictitious young women on CIPA, but the plain and simple fact is that your argument is without merit or reason and has nothing to do with reality.
Well, if we ban fast forwarding, we also need a strict ban on the pause button. No more pausing a movie to grab a snack, and going to the bathroom is out of the question. After all, the director definately didn't intend for you to stare at your bathroom tile in the middle of his movie. That is clearly out of his artistic intent.
Excuse me but I would prefer not to live in a world without entertainment
Then you prefer to live in a world with DRM. The only way you can legally get entertainment is to get it directly from the entertainment and content providers, and the only way the entertainment and content providers will provide entertainment is if they know they are going to get paid for it.
First, America is converting from a Democracy to a Capitalistic state. The difference between the two is in a Democracy the government is of, by, and for the people. In a Capitalistic state the government is out to make as much money as it can, however it can. Even if it has to trample over all of your rights.
Where did you come up with this? Capitalism and democracy are not mutually exclusive ideologies, nor are they even related. Capitalism has nothing to do with the "government out to make as much money as it can". It is quite the opposite -- the government gets out of the way and allows the people to make as much money as they can.
Second, in an international economy (the One World economy bs) you do not matter at all so long as everything is evenly divided up among all of the countries around the world. Thus, it is no longer what is good for America is good enough for the world - it becomes what country X says is what everyone has to do. Look at Iraq to see what happens when you don't do what you are told.
This is unintelligible babbling. Iraq's violation of 17 UN security counsel resolutions banning weapons of mass destruction has nothing to do with the international economy. And since when have all countries around the world evenly divided up anything??
We in America are also moving towards a police state. If you don't believe me just look at the Patriot Act.
Typical Slashdot rhetoric about the Patriot act. Name one significant, noticeable right that you have been denied from as a direct result of the Patriot Act. You might want to pick up a history book and see what it really is like to live in a "police state". Now, I'm all for limiting the rights of the Government, but I'm also for limiting a crazy mans ability to hijack a plan and fly it into a heavily populated building.
Here in my own state (the president's home state) all of the democratic reps left the state because of what the republicans were doing.
What the Republicans were doing was a completely legal and appropriate redistricting plan, something that the Democrats did a few years back when they had control of the state legislature.
Justice is blind but Americans are bound hand and foot by arbitrary laws put in place by companies, corporations, and international interests so they can profit and we, the people, can lose. Before the multi-billion dollar corporations were around things were sane, balanced, and easy to understand. Now they are not.
Things have never been "sane, balanced, and easy to understand". Are you kidding me? Life will always be challenging regardless of how many multi-billion dollar companies there are. Cain didn't kill Abel because he was interested in his stock in a billion dollar company.
Sleep if you will, but the time for sleep is past. Hide if you will, but you will be found. Aren't you done with being afraid?
What is your solution? Don't you get tired of complaining all the time? You just wrote several paragraphs complaining about everything you don't like, but didn't offer a single suggestion or alternative. What do you suggest? Do you want to make it illegal for companies to make money? That would work really well. Do you want everybody with money to have to give it to the poor? Hmmm. That sounds like an incentive to succeed. What do you suggest?
It is far too easy to sit back and point out everything you think is wrong. It takes real intelligence and leadership to actually do something about it.
Yeah, and companies (and shareholders) just love throwing billions of dollars every year into advertising that they know is "obviously inefficient". I mean, why else would they spend the money?
Choicepoint was commissioned in 1998 by the Florida director of elections, Ethel Baxtor, a Democrat.
The NAACP settlement with the state of Florida was quick to point out that there were no allegations of fraud or discrimination. The state of Florida already changed the proceedure of removing felons from voter registration rolls, which is what the NAACP was suing for.
Voting precincts are administered by local county election officials (not Jeb Bush or Catherine Harris). If African Americans could not vote because "polling sites that did not have adequate resources to confirm voting eligibility status", it is the fault of the local county election officials that they voted into office.
thousands of minority voters were deemed unqualified to vote because a corrupted registration system declared them to be felons
This ignorant assertion only proves that you really will believe anything you are told. If you took a minute to review the actual facts, this is what you would find about this non-story:
The 1998 Florida Election audit found a large number of unregistered and invalid votes cast. State Elections supervisor Ethel Baxter (a Democrat) ordered a list compiled containing names of registered voters who should not be allowed to vote. This list included deceased people who voted in 1998 as well as convicted felons, who are not allowed to vote in Florida.
This list was distributed to local county election officials, who had the option of using the list to ban people from voting. Many counties opted not to use the list.
Local county election officials notified everybody on the list at least 30 days before the election that they would not be allowed to vote, and gave procedures to dispute their inclusion on the list.
Only 5 people officially complained that they were incorrectly included on the list. When the Federal Election Commission held hearings on the matter, NOBODY came forward to claim they were denied the right to vote.
The NAACP sued and Florida settled out of court because the proceedure changes had already been implemented.
This was such a non-story that the only "journalist" who deemed this newsworthy was British reporter Greg Palast. 5 seconds on his web site completely removes any credibility he may have had as he appears to be dedicated to discrediting the Bush presidency. This is a non-story.
1)Linux is not preinstalled on 99% of desktop pc's
2)KDE is not the only desktop environment
3)The KDE team is not a monopoly illegally using that status to force their way into another market.
1) So if Linux was installed on 99% of all Desktop PC's would you be fighting against them? I don't think so
2) Windows is not the only desktop environment (duh!)
3) So when Microsoft does it you automatically cry foul (Blah blah blah MONOPOLY blah blah blah BORG blah blah blah), but when those nice linux open source guys do the exact same thing you immediately side with them? Makes sense.
Slashdot Mirror
Reagan didn't get into office until 1981, not 1980.
Actually, If somebody borrows your car and gets into an accident, the claim goes on your insurance because it is your car. It is your responsibility to make sure your property is being used properly.
Wrong. The only scenario where Gore came out in front is if all undervote and overvotes were counted in all of the Florida counties. The AP predicted that in this scenario, Gore would have won with a margin of 42 - 171 votes.
All other scenarios had Bush as the leader, including counting all overvotes and undervotes in only 6 counties, which is what Gore was asking the Supreme Court to do.
You mean like this rich, white dentist who just got 20 years?
- Millions of 'ordinary' famalies (including my own) lost homes and small businesses such thanks to 'trickle down' economics
Wrong. Here is the real Reagan economic record. During the Reagan years, 88.5% of the households in the poorest quantile were in a higher income quantile when Reagan left office. Blacks and Minorities saw the biggest gain in real income (11%) during the Reagan years. In fact, all income groups saw an income increase during the Reagan years of Trickle down/supply side economics. So much for the liberal "zero sum" theory.
- Star Wars (a massive waste)
Star Wars drove the soviets into the ground and was a major contribution to the end of the cold war.
- Iran hostage crisis
How can you blame Reagan for something that happened before he even took office?
- The (lost and wasteful) war on drugs
We are spending 40 times as much money on the War on Drugs today that we were when Reagan was in office, thanks to Bill Clinton.
- The biggest deficit in U.S. history
Actually, the national debt as a percentage to GDP was much higher under Clinton than it was under Reagan.
Why else would one of the biggest tax breaks ever go to the top 1% and not the middle class and poor
Maybe because the middle class and poor don't pay any taxes in the first place. 96.1% of the federal tax base is paid by the richest 50% of the country. [Source]. Guess what that means? The poorest half of this country do not pay any taxes. In fact, the richest 1% pay 37% of the taxes even though they only make 20.8% of the money. The richest 5% pay 57% of all taxes even though their income only accounts for 35% in the country. Over half of all our taxes are paid by only 5% of the country. If you give a tax cut, why wouldn't you give it to the segment of the population that is burdened the most by the tax structure?
There is nothing wrong with the printer industry selling ink for a price that the public is apparently willing to pay. The only thing that is going to change the price of ink is the market. Once people decide that they don't want to spend that much and stop buying it, it will force the industry to drop the price on ink.
Ok. We have a link that shockingly reveals that rich people have more wealth than poor people. Boy, I hope that "David Chandler" doesn't quit his job at the community college.
What this doesn't explain is how this is remotely related to the parents (excellent) job of refuting the claim that the rich "pay less tax per dollar earned" than the poor. I guess linking to solid information from the IRS themselves should qualify him as a "flake".
Hardly, by capita is proportional to the population. One of the biggest myth's in north america is the fud your spewing
You have no idea what you are talking about. According to the IRS, 96% of all the taxes paid in the US are paid by the richest 50%. In simple terms, that means that half of this country doesn't pay any taxes and are supported by the other (richer) half.
What the hell are you talking about? You are "allowed" to do whatever the hell you want with it. What you are asking is for Microsoft to support you in doing it.
XBox == Hardware, which means it's mine
Which does not mean that they have to support everything you want to do on it. If you want to spend $200 to rip it apart, load new software on it and turn it into a dishwasher, you are free to give it a try (its your hardware). You just can't expect Microsoft to help you do it.
Its like complaining that Ford made it too hard to change your Expedition into an airplane.
Guess what? Murder and rape are illegal, and just because people still get murdered and raped doesn't mean we need to make it legal.
Good hell. We are talking about music here, not your civil rights. The fact the music that you want happens to be controlled by a multi-national conglomerate does not give you the right to not have to pay for it. If you refuse to pay for this music, then you also refuse your right to listen to it.
Nextel is a great example of marketing a technically inferior product as superior
PTT is the most technically advanced call routing available on a wireless network. With Nextel, you can connect to any other phone in the country in a fraction of a second, compared to 15, 20, or even more than 30 seconds for the other carriers. There is nothing inferior about PTT.
Sure, Netflix provides a new and rather unique system of DVD Rentals, but it isn't really a NEW Idea. There has been years upon years of renting things for a period of time
Fortunately Netflix didn't apply for a patent on "renting things". They applied for a patent on a unique and specific method of renting things. They came up with a new system of renting out movies that had never been done before and they executed on it to make it successful. Why shouldn't they be granted a patent for this idea?
And I don't know how you managed to bring apartments and car leases into a discussion about DVD rentals.
but allowing any bright idea to be patented is just idiotic
No, thinking that a bright idea shouldn't be patented is just idiotic. Being first to the market and name recognition does you no good if somebody else can some along and steal your idea and put you out of business.
I'm not sure what software was used as it was a campus-wide proxy. As far as how strict the filters were, this was a religious university that has very strict policy against surfing porn. In fact, anybody caught surfing porn or trying to circumvent the proxy filter stands a good chance of being expelled, even on the first offense. I would imagine that you would have a pretty difficult time getting around the filters if you were actually looking for some smut.
This young woman's inability to do objective research has nothing to do with the fact she has an STD, and to try to place blame on those "evil filters" for her condition is ridiculous.
Having gone to a private University with very strict internet filters in place, I can say without reserve that you are full of crap. Not once was I denied access to information that I could not easily find an alternate source to, either online or in print. If I was denied access to a legitimate web site (very rare), it was as simple as hitting the back button and clicking on the next search engine result. If for some reason I really needed access to the blocked site, a simple email to the proxy admins would clear it up in less than a day (although this never happened to me).
In fact, I don't know of a single person who was denied access to a web site that they needed, and this includes nursing majors (with those tricky term papers on anatomy, the reproductive system, and STD's), and psychology majors (who did work on things like pedophilia and abnormal sexual psychology).
You can (and probably will) continue to blame problems like your fictitious young women on CIPA, but the plain and simple fact is that your argument is without merit or reason and has nothing to do with reality.
Well, if we ban fast forwarding, we also need a strict ban on the pause button. No more pausing a movie to grab a snack, and going to the bathroom is out of the question. After all, the director definately didn't intend for you to stare at your bathroom tile in the middle of his movie. That is clearly out of his artistic intent.
Excuse me but I would prefer not to live in a world without entertainment
Then you prefer to live in a world with DRM. The only way you can legally get entertainment is to get it directly from the entertainment and content providers, and the only way the entertainment and content providers will provide entertainment is if they know they are going to get paid for it.
First, America is converting from a Democracy to a Capitalistic state. The difference between the two is in a Democracy the government is of, by, and for the people. In a Capitalistic state the government is out to make as much money as it can, however it can. Even if it has to trample over all of your rights.
Where did you come up with this? Capitalism and democracy are not mutually exclusive ideologies, nor are they even related. Capitalism has nothing to do with the "government out to make as much money as it can". It is quite the opposite -- the government gets out of the way and allows the people to make as much money as they can.
Second, in an international economy (the One World economy bs) you do not matter at all so long as everything is evenly divided up among all of the countries around the world. Thus, it is no longer what is good for America is good enough for the world - it becomes what country X says is what everyone has to do. Look at Iraq to see what happens when you don't do what you are told.
This is unintelligible babbling. Iraq's violation of 17 UN security counsel resolutions banning weapons of mass destruction has nothing to do with the international economy. And since when have all countries around the world evenly divided up anything??
We in America are also moving towards a police state. If you don't believe me just look at the Patriot Act.
Typical Slashdot rhetoric about the Patriot act. Name one significant, noticeable right that you have been denied from as a direct result of the Patriot Act. You might want to pick up a history book and see what it really is like to live in a "police state". Now, I'm all for limiting the rights of the Government, but I'm also for limiting a crazy mans ability to hijack a plan and fly it into a heavily populated building.
Here in my own state (the president's home state) all of the democratic reps left the state because of what the republicans were doing.
What the Republicans were doing was a completely legal and appropriate redistricting plan, something that the Democrats did a few years back when they had control of the state legislature.
Justice is blind but Americans are bound hand and foot by arbitrary laws put in place by companies, corporations, and international interests so they can profit and we, the people, can lose. Before the multi-billion dollar corporations were around things were sane, balanced, and easy to understand. Now they are not.
Things have never been "sane, balanced, and easy to understand". Are you kidding me? Life will always be challenging regardless of how many multi-billion dollar companies there are. Cain didn't kill Abel because he was interested in his stock in a billion dollar company.
Sleep if you will, but the time for sleep is past. Hide if you will, but you will be found. Aren't you done with being afraid?
What is your solution? Don't you get tired of complaining all the time? You just wrote several paragraphs complaining about everything you don't like, but didn't offer a single suggestion or alternative. What do you suggest? Do you want to make it illegal for companies to make money? That would work really well. Do you want everybody with money to have to give it to the poor? Hmmm. That sounds like an incentive to succeed. What do you suggest?
It is far too easy to sit back and point out everything you think is wrong. It takes real intelligence and leadership to actually do something about it.
Yeah, and companies (and shareholders) just love throwing billions of dollars every year into advertising that they know is "obviously inefficient". I mean, why else would they spend the money?
You are acting like you can actually play a decent game on Linux. HINT: Some freeking penguin on a sled doesn't count as a decent game.
Choicepoint was commissioned in 1998 by the Florida director of elections, Ethel Baxtor, a Democrat.
The NAACP settlement with the state of Florida was quick to point out that there were no allegations of fraud or discrimination. The state of Florida already changed the proceedure of removing felons from voter registration rolls, which is what the NAACP was suing for.
Voting precincts are administered by local county election officials (not Jeb Bush or Catherine Harris). If African Americans could not vote because "polling sites that did not have adequate resources to confirm voting eligibility status", it is the fault of the local county election officials that they voted into office.
This ignorant assertion only proves that you really will believe anything you are told. If you took a minute to review the actual facts, this is what you would find about this non-story:
The 1998 Florida Election audit found a large number of unregistered and invalid votes cast. State Elections supervisor Ethel Baxter (a Democrat) ordered a list compiled containing names of registered voters who should not be allowed to vote. This list included deceased people who voted in 1998 as well as convicted felons, who are not allowed to vote in Florida.
This list was distributed to local county election officials, who had the option of using the list to ban people from voting. Many counties opted not to use the list.
Local county election officials notified everybody on the list at least 30 days before the election that they would not be allowed to vote, and gave procedures to dispute their inclusion on the list.
Only 5 people officially complained that they were incorrectly included on the list. When the Federal Election Commission held hearings on the matter, NOBODY came forward to claim they were denied the right to vote.
The NAACP sued and Florida settled out of court because the proceedure changes had already been implemented.
This was such a non-story that the only "journalist" who deemed this newsworthy was British reporter Greg Palast. 5 seconds on his web site completely removes any credibility he may have had as he appears to be dedicated to discrediting the Bush presidency. This is a non-story.
1)Linux is not preinstalled on 99% of desktop pc's
2)KDE is not the only desktop environment
3)The KDE team is not a monopoly illegally using that status to force their way into another market.
1) So if Linux was installed on 99% of all Desktop PC's would you be fighting against them? I don't think so
2) Windows is not the only desktop environment (duh!)
3) So when Microsoft does it you automatically cry foul (Blah blah blah MONOPOLY blah blah blah BORG blah blah blah), but when those nice linux open source guys do the exact same thing you immediately side with them? Makes sense.