1. There is a measure of the valuable of the labor's contribution to the production. They're called wages, buddy.
2. Economists include opportunity cost when drawing cost curves, which is most definitely non-monetary.
3. Marginal cost is not zero for software. That's the basis for Levine and Boldrin's theories about why intellectual monopoly isn't necessary. Check it at http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/general/intellectual/against.htm
It's ridiculous that the legislation allows customers to opt out within the first thirty days. Sure, you have to be careful when shopping for a two year cell phone contract, but one of the reason that companies offer good deals is because they're selling two year contracts.
The state once again interferes with the ability of private parties to set their own contract terms.
That's why people advocate liberal democracy, where the will of the majority is checked by guaranteed rights, as opposed to pure democracy, which is majoritarian authoritarianism.
I agree that the current state of trade isn't promoting democracy as much as real free trade would, but it's still making progress.
Typically, in free trade discussions, the "race to the bottom" refers to the fear that companies will move to countries that have the lowest environmental standards and devastate those places. Of course, it hasn't been proven to actually occur very much.
I think your post probably proves that humanity is not yet worthy of colonizing other planets or systems. What makes our species so great that its continued existence is such a valuable goal?
The nuclear weapons stop any conventional conflict from escalating very much, so unless you've located your business in Kashmir, I think you should be okay.
of course, you could have done this before, just establishing your own computer-to-computer network. You would have to hope that they would join the network out of curiousity.
"if you're making 100K a year, and you're taxed at 15%, you're paying 15K a year in taxes. Now your tax rate drops to 10%. You're paying 10K a year in taxes. That puts 5K a year into the economy that wasn't there before. So whoever you give that money to instead pays 10% taxes on it, resulting in -- low and behold! -- an additional 500 in tax income, for a total difference in tax revenue of -4500."
And this statement is true as long as we ignore the fact that whoever you paid the 5k to now has $4500 to spend. Which is taxable.
Well, they might not want India to be flexing its muscles, because this is what triggers reactions from Pakistan. It's called an arms race. See the close timing of nuclear detonations in 1998? Once India showed that it had a nuclear device, Pakistan had to respond (and up the ante, by detonating one more nuke than India did).
Pakistan will only be the nuclear armed state in the area if 1. India somehow loses all of its nukes 2. China disappears off the map. Your reply doesn't make much sense. Additionally, Pakistan doesn't want to expand its territory besides Kashmir, so why is it such a threat? (and theoretically, refusing to export crap to India forces them to be "self-sufficient").
P.S. I'd call Pakistan a (not Islamic) military dictatorship. The extremists don't really control Musharaff much.
Slashdot Mirror
1. There is a measure of the valuable of the labor's contribution to the production. They're called wages, buddy.
l /against.htm
2. Economists include opportunity cost when drawing cost curves, which is most definitely non-monetary.
3. Marginal cost is not zero for software. That's the basis for Levine and Boldrin's theories about why intellectual monopoly isn't necessary. Check it at http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/general/intellectua
It's ridiculous that the legislation allows customers to opt out within the first thirty days. Sure, you have to be careful when shopping for a two year cell phone contract, but one of the reason that companies offer good deals is because they're selling two year contracts. The state once again interferes with the ability of private parties to set their own contract terms.
That's why people advocate liberal democracy, where the will of the majority is checked by guaranteed rights, as opposed to pure democracy, which is majoritarian authoritarianism. I agree that the current state of trade isn't promoting democracy as much as real free trade would, but it's still making progress.
Typically, in free trade discussions, the "race to the bottom" refers to the fear that companies will move to countries that have the lowest environmental standards and devastate those places. Of course, it hasn't been proven to actually occur very much.
So why did iTunes 4 shift to a crappy font and not give us the ability to change it in the preferences? Anyone got a suggestion as to how to fix it?
Putting an apostrophe in "pics" is incorrect. As a general rule, people overuse apostrophes....
I think your post probably proves that humanity is not yet worthy of colonizing other planets or systems. What makes our species so great that its continued existence is such a valuable goal?
The nuclear weapons stop any conventional conflict from escalating very much, so unless you've located your business in Kashmir, I think you should be okay.
of course, you could have done this before, just establishing your own computer-to-computer network. You would have to hope that they would join the network out of curiousity.
"if you're making 100K a year, and you're taxed at 15%, you're paying 15K a year in taxes. Now your tax rate drops to 10%. You're paying 10K a year in taxes. That puts 5K a year into the economy that wasn't there before. So whoever you give that money to instead pays 10% taxes on it, resulting in -- low and behold! -- an additional 500 in tax income, for a total difference in tax revenue of -4500."
And this statement is true as long as we ignore the fact that whoever you paid the 5k to now has $4500 to spend. Which is taxable.
Well, they might not want India to be flexing its muscles, because this is what triggers reactions from Pakistan. It's called an arms race. See the close timing of nuclear detonations in 1998? Once India showed that it had a nuclear device, Pakistan had to respond (and up the ante, by detonating one more nuke than India did).
Pakistan will only be the nuclear armed state in the area if 1. India somehow loses all of its nukes 2. China disappears off the map. Your reply doesn't make much sense. Additionally, Pakistan doesn't want to expand its territory besides Kashmir, so why is it such a threat? (and theoretically, refusing to export crap to India forces them to be "self-sufficient").
P.S. I'd call Pakistan a (not Islamic) military dictatorship. The extremists don't really control Musharaff much.
I'm not sure why you think Acid Techno is dead, but try finding a tune from an artist called "The Junk Project."