Yup. The problem is the same for all types of government.
It's just that here, it's a goal - Here in the good ol' USofA, not only do we admire the rich, we have been convinced that to be poor is to be inferior. To follow your dreams instead of money is stupid, and following money instead of your dreams is the sacrifice you need to make in order to be a worthwhile person.
And Ahhh! Those who dream of money, pursue money for it's own sake and crush those with less money so they can stand on the bodies and so be higher than all else? Why THOSE are our gods. Why else would sabotaging a baseline of support for widows and orphans, seniors and unemployed, the disabled and the sick - all the while granting far more PERSONAL wealth and power to the elite few - be considered populism?
But that's OK. Why would you want to be a scientist here anyway, when political dogma trumps expert opinion - every single damned time? When there is NO respect, NO money, NO recognition (except maybe over other poor damned scientific souls in academia) save as a 'geek' a 'nerd' or some other kind of damaged goods?
Sue the cops. Their bosses. They are individuals, and can be sued. If cops hurt you, hurt them back, if you can. Legally. Loudly. Embarrassingly. Those individuals (and they ARE individuals, not just the faceless police, or some government machine) CHOSE what they do. They CHOSE how they do it.
Show them what their choices bring. They are NOT immune to the law because they serve the government. Not yet.
It looked pretty obvious to me: don't look to the 'Free Marketeers & R'Publicnan' to swoop in and bail you out of this mess! They are the ones holding you at sword-point!
*chuckle* Freedom and non-aggression IS the Libertarian utopia!
"ideally perfect state; especially in its social and political and moral aspects"
Since Libertarians seem to want an ideally perfect state where all are free and aggression (or violence, as it is often described) is no longer a tool, I don't see the problem. And while I agree that one man's utopia is another's hell, that's why the limiting qualifier is there... Still, I'll try and refrain for the purposes of this discussion.
Yes, it does.. NAT adding nothing to privacy is not the issue, either. The issue is that the original, loudly proclaimed, IP6 reduced privacy, everything was to be traceable, end-to-end. IP6ers have tried to undo the damage ever since. *chuckle* Like you just tried. Problem is, IP6 as originally depicted, left a bad impression - and initial impressions are IMPORTANT.
"Regulatory agencies are universally taken over by industry" - Yah why bother with the middle step? Just give all regulatory authority to industry at the start. After all, industry always subscribe to enlightened self-interest, and industry that abuses workers, market position, or the environment never have the ability to crush competition. They only way 'crushing' things short term would not happen, is if all goods and services were luxuries, and all transactions reversible.
"State-created monopolies are no doubt bad" Why yes they are, when unregulated. However, since competition means eliminating the competition, monopolies are what you get with your 'system', despite libertarian dogma. "Monopolies in a free society can only exist at the permission of their customers. In other words, a company can claim a "monopoly" simply because their products are so good, no one can compete. If a better product arises, their monopoly disappears" - except, of course, that competition means crushing the competition. Since labor, resources and markets to sell to are in fact NOT infinite, that means that said monopolies are free to create barriers to entry that are impossible to overcome. Unless the proto-competitors are immortal and need no profits or customers to survive until the monopoly gets it's chance.
"Fines don't work without the threat of violence" So no regulation in your utopia then. Libs sure have gotten more trusting, eh? Used to be the function of government would be for defense and enforcement of contracts, nothing more. No fines? No trusting contracts then. How do you enforce taxation? No taxes? Well then, defence must be privately contracted; read: mercenaries. Hmm - private armies? Well, I suppose giving that responsibility into your corporate state would be all right. One Army, One corporation. They would NEVER fight for dominance in a nation where there is no regulation.
Your libertarian utopia requires only a few things:
All markets, including labor, to be infinite. All goods to be luxuries (demand curves go all to hell when survival depends on a good or service, had you noticed?). All people to be immortal so that the market has time to adjust. All transactions to be reversible so that markets CAN adjust.
And let's talk about that 'invisible hand' that adjusts markets, while we're at it. Your views (at least in any nominally representative government) require that regulations are arbitrary; that they NEVER are the result of the demands of the people to correct market abuses via legal recourse.
That's right, regulations (again, in any nominally representative government) ARE the 'invisible hand of Adam Weishaupt'.
You guys are incredibly naive. I guess that's a requirement for your utopia too? Naivete?
"IMHO, if the IPv6 spec drops the Interface ID requirement, then IPv6 use may change. I don't think that anyone is particularly jumping for joy to have their machine uniquely identified on the net."
There's a workaround - but it's too late. The proponents of IP6 shouted loud, far and wide that the great thing about it was traceability.
And then they found that that wasn't a feature that anybody (except for corporate security, government surveillance, and marketing folks) wanted after about 10 minutes thought - even if one of the benefits was making the fight against spam easier.
And so the IP4 workaround (NAT) is still preferred. So much for the 'you have no privacy, get over it' folks.
You made the claim with no basis, as an assertion. Now I have to prove you wrong? As if an AC spouting racism should be considered an authority on anything? So prove your extraordinary assertion with extraordinary and unassailable data. Show that any links to education or intelligence in the third world is based on genetics and NOT levels of health, as _I_ asserted. Used independent and verifiable data.
Hint: It ain't race. It's health that has a giant effect on intelligence. With an economy being sold off piecemeal for the benefit of the most wealthy, no-one but them will be able to afford healthcare. Without healthcare, why, many, many more people will be just like you!
Typical. The poor want big brother to tend them? More of the right's obsession with wealth, those with wealth want to believe that they are by and large 'better' than the poor. Poverty usually happens by some moral fault, in the dogma of the right. And if they start poor, and are moral, they will become wealthy! And the working poor on the right buy this, and follow their sainted rich and do what they say in hopes that they will 'deserve' wealth themselves. Suckers.
Looking at the post I was replying to I see I was trolled, if unintentionally. Hell I'm still irritated. From a content free post that wasn't directed at me.
And - you know, I re-read the thread - you know from where I joined in? - and realized why MindSlap or whoever's post annoyed me - it was a content-free attack, and based on neobagger dogma - dogma that is destroying the is destroying the US economy, damaging the ability of the US to compete. A real hot-button.
I admit it - I was successfully trolled.
So. Thanks for making me re-read, and sorry for the hostility of my initial reply.
Vulgarities? And where might they be? *shakes head* I can only assume you were speaking to the fellow I was responding to. Or do you too believe that corporations determine prices arbitrarily, that they make no profits to tax, and that tax breaks don't count somehow? Think before you answer now *grin*
So when prices are set by 'demand', that doesn't mean demand for the product, but the price that the corporations fix, err, demand! And after all, corps don't make any profits to tax... Now I know all pricing power belonging to big corporations is a neo-tea-republican wet-dream, but we aren't QUITE there yet, bubby, despite your best effort to distort the markets in favor of large corps over consumers. You haven't QUITE destroyed the consumer market in the US in your quest for US workers in as much desperation as third-world-workers. Not. Quite. Yet.
ROFL. You guys crack me up. Your inability to think past a sound bite, your love-hate relationship with authority, your rampant venality and your lack of any kind of feeling of civic duty towards the country you shout jingoistic slogans about make you guys cartoon-like. If your policies weren't going to kill poor women, children and seniors I'd just watch and laugh, laugh, laugh.
Off the cuff, I would say to maximize the area of each individual mirror exposed to the sun over the course of the day. The higher the tower the better in that case.
Nope. Don't see it. You'd have to be an idiot to get anything more than community college or trade school certification; IT will not cover education costs otherwise.
Anymore, you do the job in IT because you love IT, not for the money. Exec management will bite at low salary over any higher level of skill 99% of the time.
The lament that the US does not have the expertise (accompanied by crocodile tears) is a self fulfilling prophecy.
Slashdot Mirror
Yup. The problem is the same for all types of government.
It's just that here, it's a goal - Here in the good ol' USofA, not only do we admire the rich, we have been convinced that to be poor is to be inferior. To follow your dreams instead of money is stupid, and following money instead of your dreams is the sacrifice you need to make in order to be a worthwhile person.
And Ahhh! Those who dream of money, pursue money for it's own sake and crush those with less money so they can stand on the bodies and so be higher than all else? Why THOSE are our gods. Why else would sabotaging a baseline of support for widows and orphans, seniors and unemployed, the disabled and the sick - all the while granting far more PERSONAL wealth and power to the elite few - be considered populism?
But that's OK. Why would you want to be a scientist here anyway, when political dogma trumps expert opinion - every single damned time? When there is NO respect, NO money, NO recognition (except maybe over other poor damned scientific souls in academia) save as a 'geek' a 'nerd' or some other kind of damaged goods?
So don't sue the government.
Sue the cops. Their bosses. They are individuals, and can be sued. If cops hurt you, hurt them back, if you can. Legally. Loudly. Embarrassingly. Those individuals (and they ARE individuals, not just the faceless police, or some government machine) CHOSE what they do. They CHOSE how they do it.
Show them what their choices bring. They are NOT immune to the law because they serve the government. Not yet.
Projection. Simple projection.
During inspection / emissions testing, maybe?
It looked pretty obvious to me: don't look to the 'Free Marketeers & R'Publicnan' to swoop in and bail you out of this mess! They are the ones holding you at sword-point!
*chuckle* Freedom and non-aggression IS the Libertarian utopia!
"ideally perfect state; especially in its social and political and moral aspects"
Since Libertarians seem to want an ideally perfect state where all are free and aggression (or violence, as it is often described) is no longer a tool, I don't see the problem. And while I agree that one man's utopia is another's hell, that's why the limiting qualifier is there... Still, I'll try and refrain for the purposes of this discussion.
Yes, it does.. NAT adding nothing to privacy is not the issue, either. The issue is that the original, loudly proclaimed, IP6 reduced privacy, everything was to be traceable, end-to-end. IP6ers have tried to undo the damage ever since. *chuckle* Like you just tried. Problem is, IP6 as originally depicted, left a bad impression - and initial impressions are IMPORTANT.
Waaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy up!
Odd that your observation in no way contradicts the parent's statement. I'm sure you think it does on some subtle level, but no.
Hahaha.
"Regulatory agencies are universally taken over by industry" - Yah why bother with the middle step? Just give all regulatory authority to industry at the start. After all, industry always subscribe to enlightened self-interest, and industry that abuses workers, market position, or the environment never have the ability to crush competition. They only way 'crushing' things short term would not happen, is if all goods and services were luxuries, and all transactions reversible.
"State-created monopolies are no doubt bad" Why yes they are, when unregulated. However, since competition means eliminating the competition, monopolies are what you get with your 'system', despite libertarian dogma. "Monopolies in a free society can only exist at the permission of their customers. In other words, a company can claim a "monopoly" simply because their products are so good, no one can compete. If a better product arises, their monopoly disappears" - except, of course, that competition means crushing the competition. Since labor, resources and markets to sell to are in fact NOT infinite, that means that said monopolies are free to create barriers to entry that are impossible to overcome. Unless the proto-competitors are immortal and need no profits or customers to survive until the monopoly gets it's chance.
"Fines don't work without the threat of violence" So no regulation in your utopia then. Libs sure have gotten more trusting, eh? Used to be the function of government would be for defense and enforcement of contracts, nothing more. No fines? No trusting contracts then. How do you enforce taxation? No taxes? Well then, defence must be privately contracted; read: mercenaries. Hmm - private armies? Well, I suppose giving that responsibility into your corporate state would be all right. One Army, One corporation. They would NEVER fight for dominance in a nation where there is no regulation.
Your libertarian utopia requires only a few things:
All markets, including labor, to be infinite.
All goods to be luxuries (demand curves go all to hell when survival depends on a good or service, had you noticed?).
All people to be immortal so that the market has time to adjust.
All transactions to be reversible so that markets CAN adjust.
And let's talk about that 'invisible hand' that adjusts markets, while we're at it. Your views (at least in any nominally representative government) require that regulations are arbitrary; that they NEVER are the result of the demands of the people to correct market abuses via legal recourse.
That's right, regulations (again, in any nominally representative government) ARE the 'invisible hand of Adam Weishaupt'.
You guys are incredibly naive. I guess that's a requirement for your utopia too? Naivete?
"IMHO, if the IPv6 spec drops the Interface ID requirement, then IPv6 use may change. I don't think that anyone is particularly jumping for joy to have their machine uniquely identified on the net."
There's a workaround - but it's too late. The proponents of IP6 shouted loud, far and wide that the great thing about it was traceability.
And then they found that that wasn't a feature that anybody (except for corporate security, government surveillance, and marketing folks) wanted after about 10 minutes thought - even if one of the benefits was making the fight against spam easier.
And so the IP4 workaround (NAT) is still preferred. So much for the 'you have no privacy, get over it' folks.
My YOU have a high opinion of your own stuffed shirt, don't you?
Yup, David.
You made the claim with no basis, as an assertion. Now I have to prove you wrong? As if an AC spouting racism should be considered an authority on anything? So prove your extraordinary assertion with extraordinary and unassailable data. Show that any links to education or intelligence in the third world is based on genetics and NOT levels of health, as _I_ asserted. Used independent and verifiable data.
Uh huh.
Didn't think so.
Hint: It ain't race. It's health that has a giant effect on intelligence. With an economy being sold off piecemeal for the benefit of the most wealthy, no-one but them will be able to afford healthcare. Without healthcare, why, many, many more people will be just like you!
Typical. The poor want big brother to tend them? More of the right's obsession with wealth, those with wealth want to believe that they are by and large 'better' than the poor. Poverty usually happens by some moral fault, in the dogma of the right. And if they start poor, and are moral, they will become wealthy! And the working poor on the right buy this, and follow their sainted rich and do what they say in hopes that they will 'deserve' wealth themselves. Suckers.
Looking at the post I was replying to I see I was trolled, if unintentionally. Hell I'm still irritated. From a content free post that wasn't directed at me.
Sorry for the hostility in my previous post.
And - you know, I re-read the thread - you know from where I joined in? - and realized why MindSlap or whoever's post annoyed me - it was a content-free attack, and based on neobagger dogma - dogma that is destroying the is destroying the US economy, damaging the ability of the US to compete. A real hot-button.
I admit it - I was successfully trolled.
So. Thanks for making me re-read, and sorry for the hostility of my initial reply.
So - 'it isn't true' if there is no competition.
Vulgarities? And where might they be? *shakes head* I can only assume you were speaking to the fellow I was responding to. Or do you too believe that corporations determine prices arbitrarily, that they make no profits to tax, and that tax breaks don't count somehow? Think before you answer now *grin*
Bwahahah! Goofy little guy, aren't you?
So when prices are set by 'demand', that doesn't mean demand for the product, but the price that the corporations fix, err, demand! And after all, corps don't make any profits to tax... Now I know all pricing power belonging to big corporations is a neo-tea-republican wet-dream, but we aren't QUITE there yet, bubby, despite your best effort to distort the markets in favor of large corps over consumers. You haven't QUITE destroyed the consumer market in the US in your quest for US workers in as much desperation as third-world-workers. Not. Quite. Yet.
ROFL. You guys crack me up. Your inability to think past a sound bite, your love-hate relationship with authority, your rampant venality and your lack of any kind of feeling of civic duty towards the country you shout jingoistic slogans about make you guys cartoon-like. If your policies weren't going to kill poor women, children and seniors I'd just watch and laugh, laugh, laugh.
So - corporations normally don't pay taxes, eh? People who have allowed themselves to be hoodwinked that badly are why we are IN this mess.
And: let me guess... you think that giving wealthy individuals tax breaks will generate jobs, too.
Man the neocons really screwed with your head, didn't they?
Off the cuff, I would say to maximize the area of each individual mirror exposed to the sun over the course of the day. The higher the tower the better in that case.
Nope. Don't see it. You'd have to be an idiot to get anything more than community college or trade school certification; IT will not cover education costs otherwise.
Anymore, you do the job in IT because you love IT, not for the money. Exec management will bite at low salary over any higher level of skill 99% of the time.
The lament that the US does not have the expertise (accompanied by crocodile tears) is a self fulfilling prophecy.
Just wait until most voters lose the right to vote because of these recorded crimes.
Of course, only the privileged will be able to afford PRIVATE crime.
Kick out the JAMS!