$110 a month saved over a couple years could go a significant ways to paying for tuition at a community college or trade school. Although it's unlikely that you could cut the phone bill entirely. And the cost of college has been sky rocketing the last decade or so.
Such are the "joys" of living in a society where education is only open to those with money, where the poor have almost zero possibility of earning a degree that they could use to expand the number of jobs available to them. The elite likes this very much, it keeps the poors down in the muck where they belong, right?
I didn't have to pay for my education. In fact I was paid while I received my education. It's brilliant, even people with no money at all have the possibility of being taught valuable skills that they can use to apply for more jobs and thereby further their station in life. It's called being part of a society that doesn't actively shit on you on a daily basis.
But oh no, that's socalism and we don't want none of that, no siree! U.S.A.! U.S.A.!
No, people in cars hit other people in cars all the time. The vehicle of choice is not the problem, it's the distracted dumbass driving it.
We need to stomp out this kind of idiotic "it's his own fault that he dies because I plowed into him, he was driving a vehicle that is less safe in a collision than mine" mentality.
People need to learn that it is completely unacceptable to drive drunk or distracted or otherwise impaired. Cell phone usage is a major factor in this, as is the mentality that driving is a right instead of the privilege that it is.
You fucked up in traffic and hurt people or put them in great danger? You lose your license and your vehicle. Fuck you, you are not fit to drive in a responsible manner.
(This is not an endorsement of "socialism" or "communism" or anything like that, or even a criticism of competition. It's just a note that we tend to focus too much on little-picture, selfish goals instead of big-picture ones. Compete to make the best thing, rather than compete to kill the competition.)
Well, you may not want to endorse socialism, but I sure as hell will.
Marxism and Socialism and Communism should not be treated as dirty words. They are valid, well thought out and highly viable ways to run a country and an economy.
There is a hell of a lot or knee-jerk reactions whenever either of those three words are used, which tends to derail any discussion into an irrational mess of name-calling and idiocy.
Everyone should read Das Kapital (the Penguin classics edition is what I have, it's very nice). Karl Marx was a visionary and a hero to workers everywhere. It is such a shame that his philosophies have been appropriated by power-hungry tyrants and twisted into something Marx never intended.
While it is true that the human body can convert other macro-nutrients into carbohydrates (as it it the only fuel our muscles can run on), but it takes a significant amount of energy. Not exactly ideal, but it works reasonably well in a modern society, due to our over-abundance of food.
Ingesting carbohydrates gives your muscles the energy they need directly, in the most energy-efficient way. This is why sports drinks contain carbs, they're meant to give you renewed energy during periods of hard physical work, without negatively impacting your energy needed for said physical work.
The problem lies not with carbohydrates as such, but rather with the sheer amount of refined carbohydrates in everything and our collective tendency to over-indulge in them. This gives our body a large surplus of energy and it deals with that in the only way it knows to: storing it as fat for later use in times when food is scarce. But food is never scarce in the western world, hence people just put on more and more fat.
It is possible that I could have directed my funds "better" or at least differently than the current direction of taxpayer funds.
But paying them in the form of taxes ensures that various initiatives that may be unpopular or not very glamorous are still supported. It is not a popularity contest to decide who gets funding and who doesn't. A purely charity-based approach would skew that enormously.
I work for the leading company in our field and am among the forerunners on a national level within my particular field of expertise. I earn more than enough to be in the highest tax bracket.
In US dollars, I earn six figures a year. So no, not particularly shitty circumstances. But I am also aware that not everyone can have the same opportunities that I have had. Hence the reason I support our world-class publicly funded education system.
So paying taxes = being a slave, do I understand you correctly? In that case, you have a very twisted definition of being a slave.
I fail to see how I am a slave. There are two things that are for certain where I live. The law and taxes. I obviously cannot do anything that is illegal, that is the rule of any organized society. And I must pay my taxes, to contribute back to the society that has enabled me to earn my wages, through education etc.
Is that slavery? I can quit my job and start over on another line of education, or start my own company, or take my savings and explore the world. I am free to explore my ideas and ambitions, safety encourages creativity and thinking outside of the box.
Being able to break the social heritage and be successful on your own in spite of where you came from in life is the cornerstone of the American dream, yet America is one of the hardest countries to actually do this in, always has been.
Tell me, oh oracle of the free market, how have I chosen to not be free? I have precisely two obligations in life, the law and taxes. These are the only (mild) limitations put upon me and apart from them, I am free to do whatever I like. How is that being non-free?
You tout the free market as some sort of panacea to every ill that plagues the world. Yet when the market is truly free, self-styled monarchs and rulers will spontaneously pop up. Without checks and balances in place to prevent the exploitation of their fellow man, human suffering increases exponentially.
Ah yes, the prosperous times when there was no government meddling and you were free to work your wage slaves to death.
Does it not occur to you that that particular time in the US had the absolute highest inequality of any time period? That while a select few enjoyed ridiculously extravagant lifestyle, children were dying of hunger in the streets, homeless because their family could not sustain an existence on the meager droppings from the fat cats' tables?
Great things were done, but at a terrible cost in human suffering. Never again.
Be a dear and read on through the thread. Alternatively you can sort through roman_mir's posting history and see why that is the only form of argumentation that will penetrate his thick libertarian skull.
The best way to run a successful country? That obviously depends on how you define "successful".
Can we agree that a successful country is one where each person has the best possibilities to break their social heritage? One where each person has the best possibilities to rise up and create their own wealth? One where education is equally accessible by all and not a road to financial ruin for the unlucky? One where equality between all people, no matter sex, religion or sexual orientation etc. is a priority? One where even the poorest people can live a decent, well-fed existence?
If we can agree on this, and I believe we can, you really should study the Nordic Model, or "capitalism with a human face" as it's also called. Sure, I would love for my country to move further left. It works well right now, notwithstanding the idiotic policies of the previous 10 years of populistic, lowest-common-denominator right-wing politics that sought to dismantle our world-leading welfare model.
Please, do tell me what is wrong with my education? I work for an industry-leading company, among the top people in my country within my field of expertise and I am paid handsomely. I comfortably within the top tax bracket and pay my taxes with pride in exchange for the society that helped me get to where I am today.
Is it because nothing publicly funded can ever be effective, good or admirable, in your mind? You deride the idea of public education as "pathetic", yet you present no arguments.
I never mentioned my father, but now that you did, he also attended the same public education system that I later enjoyed the benefits of. Today, he is a successful business owner and has been for over 20 years.
I'm sorry, but I completely fail to see your points, both in the discussion to this article and in the post of your own writing that you linked to as "documentation" for your wild theories on the subject of income tax being illegal.
The fact that you call it "the correct solution" is very telling. As if it is the only single way to run a country, but I'm afraid the tendency to grossly over-simplify things is a common trait in all libertarians I have encountered.
And please do not hold me up as an example of the failures of your US publicly financed education system. Your education system has failed due to religious pressure, infighting and almost complete lack of funding.
None of this has affected my education, I live and was educated on the other side of the Atlantic, first in a public school, then a private school. My further education took place in my country's world-leading publicly financed system of higher educated, which is free and open for all to attend, with no regard to social class or income bracket. THAT is freedom.
So what you're really saying is that you refuse to contribute financially to the society which helped you achieve your current station in life.
I'm assuming that you live a relatively comfortable, perhaps even wealthy lifestyle. Yet you refuse to pay taxes and contribute, like the scum-sucking libertarian festering leech-like boil on society that you are.
Aaand we have the T-word, favored by quacks and proponents of alternative "medicine" everywhere. Let me give you a hint. Carbohydrates are not and will never be a "toxin" to humans. It is the primary fuel for muscle activity. They are necessary for biological life as we know it. Toxins, my hat.
3/4 of the population can't handle bread or similar carbs? Are you off your rocker? Keep in mind that we're not talking refined carbs here, but whole wheat and brown rice etc.
Get off the alternative medicine soap box, your crazy is showing and it ain't pretty, son.
In a sort of way, I did buy my car based on the nationality of its brand.
I like Italian cars a lot, from the high-end ridiculous supercars and in particular all the way down to their basic, characterful people's cars, like the original Fiat 500. But we have owned a number of Fiats in my family and I know all to well about the reliability and rust problems that have always plagued them.
So when I saw they had started building cars in Poland, I took notice. Contrary to popular belief, Poland is a proud, hard-working, honest and straight-forward nation with a history of solid (if unsophisticated) engineering. It was only during WW2 and the Cold War that Poland took a serious nosedive, but they've certainly been doing everything they can to get themselves out of the shadow of combined Nazi+Soviet oppression.
I have been driving my Polish-built Fiat for nearly 5 years now and I have not had a single problem with it. Mechanically, electrically etc. it has been completely flawless.
So yes, I bought my Italian car because it was built in Poland.
While there are advantages to a diesel engine, there are also disadvantages.
I tool around in my little 1.3L turbodiesel hatchback, rarely straying above 2000rpm, getting about 54mpg with hardly any effort. The greater torque compared to a similar-sized gasoline engine is very nice for daily driving, it makes overtaking less stressful and let's me drive along in town at ~35 in 4th gear at 1500-1600 rpms or so. Bigger diesels can even drive around town in 5th or 6th gear, no problem.
Now, drawbacks. There are a few. First off, diesel engines just aren't sporty and fun to drive full-on, like at a track day. If that's a priority for you, go gasoline. Sluggish throttle response, low rev limit etc. make it completely unsuited for such usage. Secondly, it takes ages to warm up during the winter months, because of the high volumetric efficiency there just isn't much waste heat. Turbo lag, oh boy is there turbo lag.
But you learn to live with the drawbacks. My car has to be practical, efficient and cheap to run. I have other vehicles for recreation.
I drive a turbodiesel car. It doesn't have a particulate filter. I drive 20.000+ km/year in it.
I also ride a motorcycle. It's old and air-cooled and has no catalytic converter. It reeks of unburnt fuel when started with the choke on and scoffs at every emissions standard ever designed. I ride 10.000+ km/year on it.
Slashdot Mirror
$110 a month saved over a couple years could go a significant ways to paying for tuition at a community college or trade school. Although it's unlikely that you could cut the phone bill entirely. And the cost of college has been sky rocketing the last decade or so.
Such are the "joys" of living in a society where education is only open to those with money, where the poor have almost zero possibility of earning a degree that they could use to expand the number of jobs available to them. The elite likes this very much, it keeps the poors down in the muck where they belong, right?
I didn't have to pay for my education. In fact I was paid while I received my education. It's brilliant, even people with no money at all have the possibility of being taught valuable skills that they can use to apply for more jobs and thereby further their station in life. It's called being part of a society that doesn't actively shit on you on a daily basis.
But oh no, that's socalism and we don't want none of that, no siree! U.S.A.! U.S.A.!
Blind as bats, the lot of you.
No, people in cars hit other people in cars all the time. The vehicle of choice is not the problem, it's the distracted dumbass driving it.
We need to stomp out this kind of idiotic "it's his own fault that he dies because I plowed into him, he was driving a vehicle that is less safe in a collision than mine" mentality.
People need to learn that it is completely unacceptable to drive drunk or distracted or otherwise impaired. Cell phone usage is a major factor in this, as is the mentality that driving is a right instead of the privilege that it is.
You fucked up in traffic and hurt people or put them in great danger? You lose your license and your vehicle. Fuck you, you are not fit to drive in a responsible manner.
(This is not an endorsement of "socialism" or "communism" or anything like that, or even a criticism of competition. It's just a note that we tend to focus too much on little-picture, selfish goals instead of big-picture ones. Compete to make the best thing, rather than compete to kill the competition.)
Well, you may not want to endorse socialism, but I sure as hell will.
Marxism and Socialism and Communism should not be treated as dirty words. They are valid, well thought out and highly viable ways to run a country and an economy.
There is a hell of a lot or knee-jerk reactions whenever either of those three words are used, which tends to derail any discussion into an irrational mess of name-calling and idiocy.
Everyone should read Das Kapital (the Penguin classics edition is what I have, it's very nice). Karl Marx was a visionary and a hero to workers everywhere. It is such a shame that his philosophies have been appropriated by power-hungry tyrants and twisted into something Marx never intended.
While it is true that the human body can convert other macro-nutrients into carbohydrates (as it it the only fuel our muscles can run on), but it takes a significant amount of energy. Not exactly ideal, but it works reasonably well in a modern society, due to our over-abundance of food.
Ingesting carbohydrates gives your muscles the energy they need directly, in the most energy-efficient way. This is why sports drinks contain carbs, they're meant to give you renewed energy during periods of hard physical work, without negatively impacting your energy needed for said physical work.
The problem lies not with carbohydrates as such, but rather with the sheer amount of refined carbohydrates in everything and our collective tendency to over-indulge in them. This gives our body a large surplus of energy and it deals with that in the only way it knows to: storing it as fat for later use in times when food is scarce. But food is never scarce in the western world, hence people just put on more and more fat.
I thought mine didn't have any buttons as well, but it turned out to have touch buttons, barely indicated with low-contrast markings.
It is possible that I could have directed my funds "better" or at least differently than the current direction of taxpayer funds.
But paying them in the form of taxes ensures that various initiatives that may be unpopular or not very glamorous are still supported. It is not a popularity contest to decide who gets funding and who doesn't. A purely charity-based approach would skew that enormously.
No, and that is precisely why I do it. To help those who are less fortunate.
Please continue to believe that hard work is the only important factor in achieving wealth, success in life and the ability to live out your dreams.
That way, you keep working yourself to bits for meager scraps while the elite reap the benefits of your hard work.
No matter what you do outside of a one in a billion chance, you will never be part of the elite. The current elite will see to that.
My shitty circumstances?
I work for the leading company in our field and am among the forerunners on a national level within my particular field of expertise. I earn more than enough to be in the highest tax bracket.
In US dollars, I earn six figures a year. So no, not particularly shitty circumstances. But I am also aware that not everyone can have the same opportunities that I have had. Hence the reason I support our world-class publicly funded education system.
So paying taxes = being a slave, do I understand you correctly? In that case, you have a very twisted definition of being a slave.
I fail to see how I am a slave. There are two things that are for certain where I live. The law and taxes. I obviously cannot do anything that is illegal, that is the rule of any organized society. And I must pay my taxes, to contribute back to the society that has enabled me to earn my wages, through education etc.
Is that slavery? I can quit my job and start over on another line of education, or start my own company, or take my savings and explore the world. I am free to explore my ideas and ambitions, safety encourages creativity and thinking outside of the box.
Being able to break the social heritage and be successful on your own in spite of where you came from in life is the cornerstone of the American dream, yet America is one of the hardest countries to actually do this in, always has been.
Tell me, oh oracle of the free market, how have I chosen to not be free? I have precisely two obligations in life, the law and taxes. These are the only (mild) limitations put upon me and apart from them, I am free to do whatever I like. How is that being non-free?
You tout the free market as some sort of panacea to every ill that plagues the world. Yet when the market is truly free, self-styled monarchs and rulers will spontaneously pop up. Without checks and balances in place to prevent the exploitation of their fellow man, human suffering increases exponentially.
I am not in the US. Not a day goes by where I am not thankful for this one fact.
Ah yes, the prosperous times when there was no government meddling and you were free to work your wage slaves to death.
Does it not occur to you that that particular time in the US had the absolute highest inequality of any time period? That while a select few enjoyed ridiculously extravagant lifestyle, children were dying of hunger in the streets, homeless because their family could not sustain an existence on the meager droppings from the fat cats' tables?
Great things were done, but at a terrible cost in human suffering. Never again.
I pay all of my taxes in full. I am easily within the highest tax bracket, so it's more than you think, ca. 50% on average of everything I earn.
I also do volunteer work, donate and give up my seat on the bus for old ladies.
I pay my fair share without hesitation. Do you?
So in other words, you got incredibly lucky and you don't care about the others, the ones with shittier luck.
Got it. Every man for himself and all that.
Be a dear and read on through the thread. Alternatively you can sort through roman_mir's posting history and see why that is the only form of argumentation that will penetrate his thick libertarian skull.
No, I had to reduce a couple of things to simpler arguments so the libertarians could understand them without making their heads hurt.
Are you completely sure that is not the total spending of all the government agencies in 2011?
Because according to the 2012 budget, the total outlay will be around $1.3 trillion discretionary and $2.3 trillion mandatory.
Of this, the DOD+Overseas Contingency Operations is around $690 billion and Department of Education is $100 billion, about a 7th.
You spend 7 times as much on murdering brown people as you do educating your children.
The best way to run a successful country? That obviously depends on how you define "successful".
Can we agree that a successful country is one where each person has the best possibilities to break their social heritage? One where each person has the best possibilities to rise up and create their own wealth? One where education is equally accessible by all and not a road to financial ruin for the unlucky? One where equality between all people, no matter sex, religion or sexual orientation etc. is a priority? One where even the poorest people can live a decent, well-fed existence?
If we can agree on this, and I believe we can, you really should study the Nordic Model, or "capitalism with a human face" as it's also called. Sure, I would love for my country to move further left. It works well right now, notwithstanding the idiotic policies of the previous 10 years of populistic, lowest-common-denominator right-wing politics that sought to dismantle our world-leading welfare model.
Please, do tell me what is wrong with my education? I work for an industry-leading company, among the top people in my country within my field of expertise and I am paid handsomely. I comfortably within the top tax bracket and pay my taxes with pride in exchange for the society that helped me get to where I am today.
Is it because nothing publicly funded can ever be effective, good or admirable, in your mind? You deride the idea of public education as "pathetic", yet you present no arguments.
I never mentioned my father, but now that you did, he also attended the same public education system that I later enjoyed the benefits of. Today, he is a successful business owner and has been for over 20 years.
I'm sorry, but I completely fail to see your points, both in the discussion to this article and in the post of your own writing that you linked to as "documentation" for your wild theories on the subject of income tax being illegal.
The fact that you call it "the correct solution" is very telling. As if it is the only single way to run a country, but I'm afraid the tendency to grossly over-simplify things is a common trait in all libertarians I have encountered.
And please do not hold me up as an example of the failures of your US publicly financed education system. Your education system has failed due to religious pressure, infighting and almost complete lack of funding.
None of this has affected my education, I live and was educated on the other side of the Atlantic, first in a public school, then a private school. My further education took place in my country's world-leading publicly financed system of higher educated, which is free and open for all to attend, with no regard to social class or income bracket. THAT is freedom.
So what you're really saying is that you refuse to contribute financially to the society which helped you achieve your current station in life.
I'm assuming that you live a relatively comfortable, perhaps even wealthy lifestyle. Yet you refuse to pay taxes and contribute, like the scum-sucking libertarian festering leech-like boil on society that you are.
Got it.
Aaand we have the T-word, favored by quacks and proponents of alternative "medicine" everywhere. Let me give you a hint. Carbohydrates are not and will never be a "toxin" to humans. It is the primary fuel for muscle activity. They are necessary for biological life as we know it. Toxins, my hat.
3/4 of the population can't handle bread or similar carbs? Are you off your rocker? Keep in mind that we're not talking refined carbs here, but whole wheat and brown rice etc.
Get off the alternative medicine soap box, your crazy is showing and it ain't pretty, son.
In a sort of way, I did buy my car based on the nationality of its brand.
I like Italian cars a lot, from the high-end ridiculous supercars and in particular all the way down to their basic, characterful people's cars, like the original Fiat 500. But we have owned a number of Fiats in my family and I know all to well about the reliability and rust problems that have always plagued them.
So when I saw they had started building cars in Poland, I took notice. Contrary to popular belief, Poland is a proud, hard-working, honest and straight-forward nation with a history of solid (if unsophisticated) engineering. It was only during WW2 and the Cold War that Poland took a serious nosedive, but they've certainly been doing everything they can to get themselves out of the shadow of combined Nazi+Soviet oppression.
I have been driving my Polish-built Fiat for nearly 5 years now and I have not had a single problem with it. Mechanically, electrically etc. it has been completely flawless.
So yes, I bought my Italian car because it was built in Poland.
While there are advantages to a diesel engine, there are also disadvantages.
I tool around in my little 1.3L turbodiesel hatchback, rarely straying above 2000rpm, getting about 54mpg with hardly any effort. The greater torque compared to a similar-sized gasoline engine is very nice for daily driving, it makes overtaking less stressful and let's me drive along in town at ~35 in 4th gear at 1500-1600 rpms or so. Bigger diesels can even drive around town in 5th or 6th gear, no problem.
Now, drawbacks. There are a few. First off, diesel engines just aren't sporty and fun to drive full-on, like at a track day. If that's a priority for you, go gasoline. Sluggish throttle response, low rev limit etc. make it completely unsuited for such usage. Secondly, it takes ages to warm up during the winter months, because of the high volumetric efficiency there just isn't much waste heat. Turbo lag, oh boy is there turbo lag.
But you learn to live with the drawbacks. My car has to be practical, efficient and cheap to run. I have other vehicles for recreation.
Hi
I drive a turbodiesel car. It doesn't have a particulate filter. I drive 20.000+ km/year in it.
I also ride a motorcycle. It's old and air-cooled and has no catalytic converter. It reeks of unburnt fuel when started with the choke on and scoffs at every emissions standard ever designed. I ride 10.000+ km/year on it.
Let's be friends :-)
Some filters have to be replaced, but most regularly run through a "filter regeneration" phase where the particles are burned off.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_particulate_filter