When did school stop being about learning and start being a nursery to drop your kids off at so you can shed responsibility for the better part of the day?
When it became necessary for both parents to work 40+ hours just to survive, which meant they didn't have enough time to take care of the kids, nor enough money to hire a private babysitter.
Thing is, both parents (and single parents) already have a full time job, and sometimes even more than that (witness the increasing number of people required to work 50+ hours a week).
You want parents to be involved with their kids? Push for economic justice, so parents don't have to work every waking hour just to feed their kids.
Seems to me that if the execs are claiming one thing in public and changing things around in the contract, they would be engaging in false advertising.
(Pure) Communism will always fail, because it assumes people behave in ways they do not behave in reality. Similarly with (pure) capitalism. Which is why few nations have anything that is even close to either extreme.
What works best is a mixed economy, like nearly all Western countries have, including the US. A capitalist market structures combined with a good social safety net gives the best results for everyone.
Pure capitalism is what we got after 12 years of CLC leadership, and it resulted in the Great Depression. The tide of unemployment was not stemmed until FDR came into office and pushed through a number of "socialist" policies.
FDR was no man of the people - he was old money. He saw what was happening, the massive poverty caused by companies run amok, and he believed the only way to save capitalism (more of the same could very well have caused a communist revolution at that point), he would have to make a better brand of capitalism.
Should we fight for fairness? Yes, of course. We should fight to ensure that minorities have an equal shot at jobs as everyone else. We should ensure that the disadvantaged have health care. Should we ensure that no one ever has to get fired because "it's not fair?" Of course not.
Sometimes the economy sucks. Sometimes people are legitimately bad employees. And sometimes a company just wants to make more money. That's life. Suck it up.
So we should fight for fairness... but only regarding things you approve of. We can't fight to enforce penalties against criminal corporations, or to try to make the economy a little smoother and a bit less harsh on large numbers of people. Got it.
There are very good arguments against applying the death penalty so capriciously or frequently, that work for people like you who think compassion is bad and societally enforced revenge is good.
Simply, when you have someone who has committed one of the crimes you have said are worthy of death, what happens when the cops try to arrest this guy? If he has any sense at all, he'll try to get away, mostly likely by shooting at the cops. After all, what's he got to lose? They'll kill him anyway.
So, by advocating such frequent use of the death penalty, you are putting our police force in greater danger. Why do you hate them so much?
I doubt it's a matter of them being too stupid to realize it. I'm sure it's been pointed out to them several times. The problem is a game theory one: individually, each corporation's effect on the overall economy won't hurt them and will benefit them, but if everybody does it, then things decline quickly. Similar circumstances apply to voting, or shopping at Walmart.
Evolution still works, it's just that the environment is different. The traits that will increase your chances of passing on your genes in US society are different from those in the jungle.
And apparently, being of low income and not learning how to use birth control are traits that are being selected for.
And I do think that one of the biggest problems is that when people talk about "religion", they lump everybody together - the snake handlers and the rational people. There's a lot of religious people who don't feel the need to force everyone to conform to their beliefs, and it should be made clear that they are not the ones we have a problem with.
A couple friends of mine in college played EverQuest incessantly. They told me how, even though you couldn't directly kill other players, some people would lure high level monsters over to newbies, resulting in a very quick death for said newbie.
There's always going to be people who find and abuse little loopholes like that.
Generally, this is true. As long as you make sure to restrict your religion to yourself and those who consent to being affected by your relgion, do what you want.
However, the snake handlers can't accept this. They want to force their beliefs on everyone else. As soon as they do that, it becomes a public matter.
For instance, a great many people have decided to support Bush because he's outwardly religious. *BAM*, public matter, we get to criticize their religion and their application of it.
So here's how things are: if you and your religion can't take even the slightest criticism, I'd suggest you keep it private.
In response to the various people saying this isn't "theft": technically, they may be right. However, I'm pretty sure that unauthorized access of a computer system is an appropriate charge. I think that by now that could get him labelled a terrorist and given a one-way ticket to Gitmo.
They're not lying, they just left a part out. It should read, "Due to copyright laws, (the home office has made a policy saying) we cannot accept returns of opened software or music."
Yes, and the government should make no effort to change that.
You got mugged? Life is unfair. Why should you expect the cops to do anything?
Your company decides not to pay you for your last two weeks of work? Life is unfair. Why should you expect the courts to hold them liable?
The police decide to confiscate your car because you resemble someone suspected of dealing drugs. Life is unfair. Why should the government stop irresponsible cops?
Just because you've got a slave mentality doesn't mean the rest of us do.
The most amazing part is what we choose to censor. South Park shows a hamster being insterted into and traveling through a man's colon but bleeps the word "fuck". I don't fucking get it. We are prudes and nasty fuckers all in the same show.
I've read that they do it as a matter of policy for the show, not for decency's sake, but because it's funnier.
I'd also like to point out that 1) a significant fraction of bonds are owned by foreign interests, not U.S. citizens
And here's another interesting bit of information. George Bush himself owns some $10 million in treasury bonds. Seems a bit like a conflict of interest to me...
Slashdot Mirror
Wanna change it? Support labor rights.
I think he's referring to prostitution.
Thing is, both parents (and single parents) already have a full time job, and sometimes even more than that (witness the increasing number of people required to work 50+ hours a week).
You want parents to be involved with their kids? Push for economic justice, so parents don't have to work every waking hour just to feed their kids.
No, public figures also have to prove malice on the part of the publisher. Simple falsehood isn't enough.
Seems to me that if the execs are claiming one thing in public and changing things around in the contract, they would be engaging in false advertising.
(Pure) Communism will always fail, because it assumes people behave in ways they do not behave in reality. Similarly with (pure) capitalism. Which is why few nations have anything that is even close to either extreme.
What works best is a mixed economy, like nearly all Western countries have, including the US. A capitalist market structures combined with a good social safety net gives the best results for everyone.
Pure capitalism is what we got after 12 years of CLC leadership, and it resulted in the Great Depression. The tide of unemployment was not stemmed until FDR came into office and pushed through a number of "socialist" policies.
FDR was no man of the people - he was old money. He saw what was happening, the massive poverty caused by companies run amok, and he believed the only way to save capitalism (more of the same could very well have caused a communist revolution at that point), he would have to make a better brand of capitalism.
There are very good arguments against applying the death penalty so capriciously or frequently, that work for people like you who think compassion is bad and societally enforced revenge is good.
Simply, when you have someone who has committed one of the crimes you have said are worthy of death, what happens when the cops try to arrest this guy? If he has any sense at all, he'll try to get away, mostly likely by shooting at the cops. After all, what's he got to lose? They'll kill him anyway.
So, by advocating such frequent use of the death penalty, you are putting our police force in greater danger. Why do you hate them so much?
I doubt it's a matter of them being too stupid to realize it. I'm sure it's been pointed out to them several times. The problem is a game theory one: individually, each corporation's effect on the overall economy won't hurt them and will benefit them, but if everybody does it, then things decline quickly. Similar circumstances apply to voting, or shopping at Walmart.
And guess how fast employers would cut people's salaries. I mean, they could survive before - they can survive without that 12.4% windfall.
Or they could just let inflation eat away at that extra revenue for them.
Either way, they'd quite easily turn your tax cut into their labor cost reduction.
Evolution still works, it's just that the environment is different. The traits that will increase your chances of passing on your genes in US society are different from those in the jungle.
And apparently, being of low income and not learning how to use birth control are traits that are being selected for.
Better to have power in the hands of many smaller companies than one large one.
Good for you.
And I do think that one of the biggest problems is that when people talk about "religion", they lump everybody together - the snake handlers and the rational people. There's a lot of religious people who don't feel the need to force everyone to conform to their beliefs, and it should be made clear that they are not the ones we have a problem with.
A couple friends of mine in college played EverQuest incessantly. They told me how, even though you couldn't directly kill other players, some people would lure high level monsters over to newbies, resulting in a very quick death for said newbie.
There's always going to be people who find and abuse little loopholes like that.
However, the snake handlers can't accept this. They want to force their beliefs on everyone else. As soon as they do that, it becomes a public matter.
For instance, a great many people have decided to support Bush because he's outwardly religious. *BAM*, public matter, we get to criticize their religion and their application of it.
So here's how things are: if you and your religion can't take even the slightest criticism, I'd suggest you keep it private.
In response to the various people saying this isn't "theft": technically, they may be right. However, I'm pretty sure that unauthorized access of a computer system is an appropriate charge. I think that by now that could get him labelled a terrorist and given a one-way ticket to Gitmo.
I think, according to some EULAs, you couldn't legally give the software as a gift.
They're not lying, they just left a part out. It should read, "Due to copyright laws, (the home office has made a policy saying) we cannot accept returns of opened software or music."
Maybe they can't. Maybe they're under a gag order.
Wrong. They have a responsibility to society too. We gave them the privilege of incorporating, and we have the right to take it away.
Yes, and the government should make no effort to change that.
You got mugged? Life is unfair. Why should you expect the cops to do anything?
Your company decides not to pay you for your last two weeks of work? Life is unfair. Why should you expect the courts to hold them liable?
The police decide to confiscate your car because you resemble someone suspected of dealing drugs. Life is unfair. Why should the government stop irresponsible cops?
Just because you've got a slave mentality doesn't mean the rest of us do.