Re:Easy Solution to All Our IRS Problems
on
No EZ Fix For The IRS
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I have always liked that plan myself. Punish the pissing away of money instead of people's hard work. Some might say that this will cause people to sit on money instead of spending it and stimulating the economy, but I don't think so. People do not have self restraint. You could double the price of all luxury items and people will still buy. They'll buy shit that they don't need even if they have to skimp on the kid's vitamins or school clothes. The simplified tax collecting will save a ton of money, and I say just give it to the ex-IRS workers as a severance or use it to pay for something that helps the country instead of all of the blood sucking. Tax attorneys and accounts can help the new small businesses that will be started. The lack of income tax bureaucracy will probably make small business startups more affordable. Whatever the downside is, it can't be as bad as the current system.
Great post, but I'm afraid that the problem with this situation is that when it happens to an individual or their loved one, most folks are going to feel that the needs of the few or the one outweigh the needs of the many. It's a damned tough decision. Personally, I agree with the take that society should help those who help themselves, and if a major (expensive) medical procedure can give a child a real life, then do it. On the other hand, if an operation is going to cost millions and only temporarily prolong an already painful life, that money can be used to help those who can be helped. A triage of sorts.
They can SELL their albums at concerts. I personally have never ever had a problem buying directly from the artist. And not just because it's less expensive to cut out the middle men, just on principle.
I would pay for an overpriced deadtree version of Webmonkey. And the CD, for easy searching. I guess I can make my own for free (free for me, not my employer, heh). It would save me a lot of trouble if they'd just publish it or leave the site up as is, for reference, indefinitely.
I'd like to add to that that not many Americans have been killed by foreign terrorists. The bulk of those were probably in 9-11. How many innocent people have been the victim of abuse of power by individuals in law enforcement? I'll bet it adds up to quite a lot more. I don't have a problem with law enforcement having power to stop bad people, but they should always be watched by and answerable to someone else to make sure that there are no individuals with this power doing the wrong thing. My biggest fear is that their power will grow to a point that they will be able to disappear folks. Not much you can do if you get disappeared.
I must have misunderstood the situation. If the product was delivered as promised, and the problems came from the military or government bureaucrat, they they should be fired. For that much wasted money, someone should be fired.
I shot down several attempts to convince me to buy Cyrix processors because I thought that they would suck. I finally had a chance to try Cyrix 166+ chip in a box with NT4 Server (at someone elses expense). I was highly impressed. It seemed to outperform its Intel (classic p166) and AMD counterparts. The guy I built it for commented on the speed too. It was very low latency when navigating the interface and opening apps, so it may have been mostly perception. I didn't have a chance to game on it or anything and that might have been the weakness, but considering how much less it probably cost, it was probably well worth the price.
It seems to me that they should have been fired for failing to produce an acceptable product. Where's the accountability? I don't know anything about making helicopters, and maybe they were asked to engineer something that was that damned difficult, but as a tax payer I feel ripped off.
That AC probably got modded down for pimping his company and being lame. I bit anyway because I have never been to musicrebellion.com It actually seems a lot closer to what I am looking for than any other model I have heard of. They have some sort of demand driven pricing scheme, and they really do have songs for 5 cents or 30 cents. Apparently if the demand goes up, the price goes up (to reward more popular artists). I find that interesting. It could be annoying if the price goes to high for a song/artists that you were looking at, but naturally the demand will drop once it approaches conventional rates. Their independant music is mostly.mp3 and their label music is mostly.wma I still don't like having limitations on music that I purchase. This seems a little flexible, but this still isn't what I want to see. (from their FAQ)
What are the limitations on the music files I download?
99% of the music files are able to be burned to a CD and transportable to a portable MP3 player. WMA files are burnable at least 10 times, but the exact amount will not be displayed until the song has been purchased. There are no restrictions on the amount of times you can transfer a song to a portable device. There are no limitations on the MP3 files.
I still don't like gimmicks controlling how I use the music. This seems to be somewhat flexible, but if I can't listen to it where I want, on the type of player I want to listen to it on, then I can't see paying for it. As for the pricing model, I find it hard to complain about demand driven pricing. I would prefer a low, flat rate. I would like to build a library of thousands of songs (mostly older stuff), but it's not going to happen if it costs thousands of dollars. If it were only going to cost hundreds of dollars, I would reallocate money set aside for other forms of entertainment to the music library fund.
Creating a fermi condensate of a small cluster of potassium atoms in a goddamn vacuum chamber cannot be extrapolated to maglevs and room temperature superconductors.
But how do you know that this kind of research will not lead to the discovery of something that can be extrapolated to maglevs and room temperature superconductors? Any time they add to our total knowledge of science, there is a chance that some new connection will be made.
Ok then, they can take the x% of your taxes that go to NASA and apply it to something that you feel is more worthy, as long as they let me redirect x% of my taxes from some program that I think sucks towards NASA's budget. Then we'll both be happier.
Unless you are a blind party liner, conservatives do not like to have their rights trampled either. Who does? Only people who are afraid and don't know what to do are willing to allow the government to have too much power. Power hungry politicians have used terrorism to grab power. This isn't a liberal conservative thing. The people in power have seized more because they can and they want it. I think the Dems would have responded pretty much the same way, only you wouldn't like it then. Where I grew up in one of the most conservative places in the U.S. and no one there wanted the government to have any more power. "Those who would trade safety for freedom deserve neither." --Thomas Jefferson
They need to make the songs cheap and skip the DRM. If songs are cheap enough, but there is still a legal threat to people sharing those files publicly, the risk-reward ratio will favor the legit downloading of songs and not sharing. When they are overcharging, downloading and sharing are worth the risk (to some), but fuck the cheap bastard who doesn't want to get off his wallet when the songs come down to the right price.
Sorry, I had you figured wrong. So, would Jesus favor air pollution over profits when we know that it causes respitory illness in children and the elderly? I say that materialism and worldly concern over our high standard of living is the forceful removal of God from our lives. I never feel closer to God than when I am in the country surrounded by God's works, and further away when I am in the city surrounded by fruits of man's labor.
I can understand taking extreme environmentalists claims with a grain of salt, but then you turn around after trying to establish yourself as a moderate and make some wacky claims yourself. I too love to hunt and fish. You make the assertion that every thing that we need to do to save the environment requires us to lower our standard of living. Maybe in your opinion. In my opinion, our standard of living is lowered when there are less fish to catch or woods that I used to hunt in have been clear-cut for cypress mulch or development. Those aren't obscure scientific theories, I KNOW that the fishing isn't as good as it once was, and that those forests are no longer there. And what's this about not caring if a species dies off? That's foolish. We can learn a lot from those species. In some cases, we might be able to directly exploit them to increase our standard of living. One of the damn things might have the cure for cancer! They might be good eatin', or just fun to look at, but you can't do any of those things if you slash and burn their environment just so you can have strip malls or shitty burgers from McDonalds. To me, loss of the natural world, and pristine environments is a loss of standard of living. I do my share of damage, but at least I acknowledge that we need to change and I'm willing to work towards improvement. Ecology can be a win - win situation. There have been a number of profitable ventures that have been good for the environment. It doesn't always have to be one or the other. The onus is ours to prove that we aren't hosing the environment that we are living in, not on nature to prove that we are. The planet doesn't care, it was here before us and it'll be here long after us. By the time we figure out that we have pushed too hard in one direction, we have probably already fucked ourselves.
Pigeons will get confused and fly into buildings!
Pigeons already fly into my building at an alarming rate. One week last year we could hear them wack the glass everyday at around 5:30pm.
It looks like the humor is real dry and subtle. Like "here, have some light balls" as they are firing quantum torpedoes at the enemy vessel. Not exactly rolling on the floor type material. It's mildly amusing if you think about how an outsider, non fan might perceive it.
Slashdot Mirror
I have always liked that plan myself. Punish the pissing away of money instead of people's hard work. Some might say that this will cause people to sit on money instead of spending it and stimulating the economy, but I don't think so. People do not have self restraint. You could double the price of all luxury items and people will still buy. They'll buy shit that they don't need even if they have to skimp on the kid's vitamins or school clothes. The simplified tax collecting will save a ton of money, and I say just give it to the ex-IRS workers as a severance or use it to pay for something that helps the country instead of all of the blood sucking. Tax attorneys and accounts can help the new small businesses that will be started. The lack of income tax bureaucracy will probably make small business startups more affordable. Whatever the downside is, it can't be as bad as the current system.
Great post, but I'm afraid that the problem with this situation is that when it happens to an individual or their loved one, most folks are going to feel that the needs of the few or the one outweigh the needs of the many. It's a damned tough decision. Personally, I agree with the take that society should help those who help themselves, and if a major (expensive) medical procedure can give a child a real life, then do it. On the other hand, if an operation is going to cost millions and only temporarily prolong an already painful life, that money can be used to help those who can be helped. A triage of sorts.
They can SELL their albums at concerts. I personally have never ever had a problem buying directly from the artist. And not just because it's less expensive to cut out the middle men, just on principle.
I would pay for an overpriced deadtree version of Webmonkey. And the CD, for easy searching. I guess I can make my own for free (free for me, not my employer, heh). It would save me a lot of trouble if they'd just publish it or leave the site up as is, for reference, indefinitely.
Myth: Democracy elected Hitler to power. Fact: Hitler used backroom deals, not votes, to come to power.
I see. But we don't have to worry about that in America, because we voters elect our President.
I'd like to add to that that not many Americans have been killed by foreign terrorists. The bulk of those were probably in 9-11. How many innocent people have been the victim of abuse of power by individuals in law enforcement? I'll bet it adds up to quite a lot more. I don't have a problem with law enforcement having power to stop bad people, but they should always be watched by and answerable to someone else to make sure that there are no individuals with this power doing the wrong thing. My biggest fear is that their power will grow to a point that they will be able to disappear folks. Not much you can do if you get disappeared.
I must have misunderstood the situation. If the product was delivered as promised, and the problems came from the military or government bureaucrat, they they should be fired. For that much wasted money, someone should be fired.
I shot down several attempts to convince me to buy Cyrix processors because I thought that they would suck. I finally had a chance to try Cyrix 166+ chip in a box with NT4 Server (at someone elses expense). I was highly impressed. It seemed to outperform its Intel (classic p166) and AMD counterparts. The guy I built it for commented on the speed too. It was very low latency when navigating the interface and opening apps, so it may have been mostly perception. I didn't have a chance to game on it or anything and that might have been the weakness, but considering how much less it probably cost, it was probably well worth the price.
It seems to me that they should have been fired for failing to produce an acceptable product. Where's the accountability? I don't know anything about making helicopters, and maybe they were asked to engineer something that was that damned difficult, but as a tax payer I feel ripped off.
I still don't like gimmicks controlling how I use the music. This seems to be somewhat flexible, but if I can't listen to it where I want, on the type of player I want to listen to it on, then I can't see paying for it. As for the pricing model, I find it hard to complain about demand driven pricing. I would prefer a low, flat rate. I would like to build a library of thousands of songs (mostly older stuff), but it's not going to happen if it costs thousands of dollars. If it were only going to cost hundreds of dollars, I would reallocate money set aside for other forms of entertainment to the music library fund.
Creating a fermi condensate of a small cluster of potassium atoms in a goddamn vacuum chamber cannot be extrapolated to maglevs and room temperature superconductors.
But how do you know that this kind of research will not lead to the discovery of something that can be extrapolated to maglevs and room temperature superconductors? Any time they add to our total knowledge of science, there is a chance that some new connection will be made.
Ok then, they can take the x% of your taxes that go to NASA and apply it to something that you feel is more worthy, as long as they let me redirect x% of my taxes from some program that I think sucks towards NASA's budget. Then we'll both be happier.
Apparently the German patent office looks diligently for prior art (or used to). TechRepublic Geek Trivia
Unless you are a blind party liner, conservatives do not like to have their rights trampled either. Who does? Only people who are afraid and don't know what to do are willing to allow the government to have too much power. Power hungry politicians have used terrorism to grab power. This isn't a liberal conservative thing. The people in power have seized more because they can and they want it. I think the Dems would have responded pretty much the same way, only you wouldn't like it then. Where I grew up in one of the most conservative places in the U.S. and no one there wanted the government to have any more power. "Those who would trade safety for freedom deserve neither." --Thomas Jefferson
For all of those who say that they will exchange it, Best Buy wouldn't exchange one for me that was defective. I ended up burning a copy.
Well I could put a stop to this whole thing right now, if I wanted. If I bought SCOX it would drop like an anvil and stay down until I sold.
gud point:)
They need to make the songs cheap and skip the DRM. If songs are cheap enough, but there is still a legal threat to people sharing those files publicly, the risk-reward ratio will favor the legit downloading of songs and not sharing. When they are overcharging, downloading and sharing are worth the risk (to some), but fuck the cheap bastard who doesn't want to get off his wallet when the songs come down to the right price.
Very true, but they still seem to be controlling the price. A buck is far to much for a downloaded song that I can't use who I want.
Sorry, I had you figured wrong. So, would Jesus favor air pollution over profits when we know that it causes respitory illness in children and the elderly? I say that materialism and worldly concern over our high standard of living is the forceful removal of God from our lives. I never feel closer to God than when I am in the country surrounded by God's works, and further away when I am in the city surrounded by fruits of man's labor.
I can understand taking extreme environmentalists claims with a grain of salt, but then you turn around after trying to establish yourself as a moderate and make some wacky claims yourself. I too love to hunt and fish. You make the assertion that every thing that we need to do to save the environment requires us to lower our standard of living. Maybe in your opinion. In my opinion, our standard of living is lowered when there are less fish to catch or woods that I used to hunt in have been clear-cut for cypress mulch or development. Those aren't obscure scientific theories, I KNOW that the fishing isn't as good as it once was, and that those forests are no longer there. And what's this about not caring if a species dies off? That's foolish. We can learn a lot from those species. In some cases, we might be able to directly exploit them to increase our standard of living. One of the damn things might have the cure for cancer! They might be good eatin', or just fun to look at, but you can't do any of those things if you slash and burn their environment just so you can have strip malls or shitty burgers from McDonalds. To me, loss of the natural world, and pristine environments is a loss of standard of living. I do my share of damage, but at least I acknowledge that we need to change and I'm willing to work towards improvement. Ecology can be a win - win situation. There have been a number of profitable ventures that have been good for the environment. It doesn't always have to be one or the other. The onus is ours to prove that we aren't hosing the environment that we are living in, not on nature to prove that we are. The planet doesn't care, it was here before us and it'll be here long after us. By the time we figure out that we have pushed too hard in one direction, we have probably already fucked ourselves.
Perhaps what we consider unethical is changing, as a society. It does happen.
Pigeons will get confused and fly into buildings!
Pigeons already fly into my building at an alarming rate. One week last year we could hear them wack the glass everyday at around 5:30pm.
This must be a marketing ploy. Now I must have an uncensored version of this game, and this is the first time I've ever heard of it.
It looks like the humor is real dry and subtle. Like "here, have some light balls" as they are firing quantum torpedoes at the enemy vessel. Not exactly rolling on the floor type material. It's mildly amusing if you think about how an outsider, non fan might perceive it.