That would be diabolical - like people who claim that "New Coke" was just marketing. They can sell Win 7 and Win 8 at the same time, get a bunch of pent up demand for 9, and then release something usable to rave reviews and have a blockbuster quarter.:)
I get that, but at the same time it is not exactly a secret that there is a shooting war going on there. Why the heck even enter the airspace?
And there is no denying that people completely over-react to air incidents. Look at the overemphasis we put on security (due to the overemphasis people place on bringing planes down).
We also seem to get really wound up about passenger ships. Buses, cars, and such can go on killing hundreds of thousands each year, though:)
- U.S. Vice President Joe Biden said Thursday that Ukraine's president accepted an offer of U.S. experts to investigate the crash of a Malaysia Airlines jetliner there, adding "they will be on their way rapidly to see if we can get to the bottom of this."
Without some kind of inside information, it certainly is hard to see how European states like Germany could go along with policies which risk turning off the heat and otherwise messing with their healthy trade to Russia.
more people than that are dieing daily under where that plane was flying.
For some reason, people almost universally completely freak out about airplane crashes. From a political standpoint, it will matter a lot more than the deaths on the ground.
I share your hope but not your optimism. Disappearing over the Ukrainian/Russian border would be a remarkable coincidence. Then again, a remarkable coincidence started WWI, so...
What a horrible tragedy, and one that changes the political climate considerably. Obama will face much less resistance from Europe if Russia turns out to be responsible. It also gives the Ukraine a reason to call in US "specialists" for help with the investigation.
The difference is that those deeds just codify something that is fairly easy to implement with or without a government: "mine". My kids had "mine" mastered by the time they were 2. You can see it at work in places where government has collapsed and people turn to privateers for protection of their stuff. Certain libertarian types (not me) will even lump property protection in there with the other 3 fundamental rights.
I think we would probably survive if limited liability were rolled back just a tad. Sure, I'll admit that there probably is some benefit to having corporations with protected stockholders - in particular people who only buy or sell the stock and have little to no influence in the business. I don't see any reason to shield executives, board, or activist investors.
While government certainly does enable giant chain corporations, I think you are overlooking the more obvious culprit: limited liability. Without the invention of "the corporation" - and the limited liability aspect in particular - nothing like Walmart would have ever scaled to that size. Hell, if all that was holding Walmart back was a common currency, we'd all be using "Wally Bucks" right now.
The other other point of view is that a uniform means of economic exchange with no additional cost is public service that the government should be doing.
I agree that a common currency is a core government concern. I wasn't advocating that the government should be out of the currency business, just positing that cash usage probably has some correlation to government's interaction with your daily life. There are some pretty large cash payments taking place to avoid taxes, or because the government makes sure it is hard to use credit cards for your illegal transaction.
The other point of view is that cash is needed because the government is still all in our business. Get the government out of the morality game and the cash will more or less disappear on its own. In that way, cash usage is a proxy for government oppression.
Slashdot Mirror
Off the top of my head: Nissan, Honda, Chrysler, Toyota, Hyundai/Kia.
I have one, and the pickup line at school/camp is almost entirely minivan or minivan "crossovers" marketed as SUVs.
My 2008 Sienna has a "conversation mirror", so I'm not sure why the submitter seems to think they are new.
86 bombings EVER makes the risk EFFECTIVELY ZERO.
Of course, we've had fairly tight security for about 30-40 years. You could read your math as a big pat on the back for the effectiveness of security.
Probably because I'm old and spent most of my life calling it that.
That would be diabolical - like people who claim that "New Coke" was just marketing. They can sell Win 7 and Win 8 at the same time, get a bunch of pent up demand for 9, and then release something usable to rave reviews and have a blockbuster quarter. :)
I get that, but at the same time it is not exactly a secret that there is a shooting war going on there. Why the heck even enter the airspace?
And there is no denying that people completely over-react to air incidents. Look at the overemphasis we put on security (due to the overemphasis people place on bringing planes down).
We also seem to get really wound up about passenger ships. Buses, cars, and such can go on killing hundreds of thousands each year, though :)
Well, the Americans are already on their way in.
Ukraine being part of the Russian federation
Russia only has annexed Crimea. You are getting ahead of yourself.
Pretty much, yeah. The "sanctions" imposed by the US and Europe so far are more directed at prestige than anything else.
"Unilateral" isn't really Obama's thing, and US sanctions would have little on Russian in any event.
Latest from CNN.com:
- U.S. Vice President Joe Biden said Thursday that Ukraine's president accepted an offer of U.S. experts to investigate the crash of a Malaysia Airlines jetliner there, adding "they will be on their way rapidly to see if we can get to the bottom of this."
Without some kind of inside information, it certainly is hard to see how European states like Germany could go along with policies which risk turning off the heat and otherwise messing with their healthy trade to Russia.
more people than that are dieing daily under where that plane was flying.
For some reason, people almost universally completely freak out about airplane crashes. From a political standpoint, it will matter a lot more than the deaths on the ground.
I'm not sure who it would benefit, but it is possible that dragging more parties into the conflict could be perceived as a benefit to the Ukraine.
I share your hope but not your optimism. Disappearing over the Ukrainian/Russian border would be a remarkable coincidence. Then again, a remarkable coincidence started WWI, so...
What a horrible tragedy, and one that changes the political climate considerably. Obama will face much less resistance from Europe if Russia turns out to be responsible. It also gives the Ukraine a reason to call in US "specialists" for help with the investigation.
Agreed - the East India company, in some ways much like modern corporations, was simply an extension of the British Establishment.
That's why I follow the Pope on Twitter.
The difference is that those deeds just codify something that is fairly easy to implement with or without a government: "mine". My kids had "mine" mastered by the time they were 2. You can see it at work in places where government has collapsed and people turn to privateers for protection of their stuff. Certain libertarian types (not me) will even lump property protection in there with the other 3 fundamental rights.
Yes, I'm fairly dim and even I predicted this would happen.
Touche!
Nonsense. A company is a totally fictitious entity. The government created it and the government can make it do whatever they want.
(As it turns out, the corporation is also able to control the government, but that's another topic.)
I think we would probably survive if limited liability were rolled back just a tad. Sure, I'll admit that there probably is some benefit to having corporations with protected stockholders - in particular people who only buy or sell the stock and have little to no influence in the business. I don't see any reason to shield executives, board, or activist investors.
The really, really black stuff from yesterday is made with nanotubes.
While government certainly does enable giant chain corporations, I think you are overlooking the more obvious culprit: limited liability. Without the invention of "the corporation" - and the limited liability aspect in particular - nothing like Walmart would have ever scaled to that size. Hell, if all that was holding Walmart back was a common currency, we'd all be using "Wally Bucks" right now.
The other other point of view is that a uniform means of economic exchange with no additional cost is public service that the government should be doing.
I agree that a common currency is a core government concern. I wasn't advocating that the government should be out of the currency business, just positing that cash usage probably has some correlation to government's interaction with your daily life. There are some pretty large cash payments taking place to avoid taxes, or because the government makes sure it is hard to use credit cards for your illegal transaction.
The other point of view is that cash is needed because the government is still all in our business. Get the government out of the morality game and the cash will more or less disappear on its own. In that way, cash usage is a proxy for government oppression.