The Democrats solution will invariably be to throw more money at the problem.
Riiiight. Try naming a single Socialist, much less a Democrat, who tries to solve problems simply by throwing money at them. I wont hold my breath.
Once you move past the old, pathetic conservative talking points (but I repeat myself), you might run into the reality that good facilities and professionals...cost...money. Low taxes didn't build us the Interstate Highway system. We didn't put a man on the moon with supply side economics.
Ever hear the expression "you get what you pay for"? Just how do you expect to get the cream of the crop by offering starting salaries of $27k per year to people with masters degrees and $50,000+ in student loan debts?
I do find it interesting that many private schools have an annual tuition that's less than the average amount we are paying per student for public schools and manage to turn out higher test scores and better educated/adjusted students.
Bullshit.
My Libertarian leanings would prefer to see less Governmental influence in education.
Then it would get far worse, not better, because large parts of the country just wouldn't give a shit. The welfare states that get far more tax money in than they pay out (you know, the ones that reliably vote for tax cutting Republicans) would be third world countries without federal mandates and federal spending.
Libertarianism might be just fine for an isolate Amish hamlet with a population of 500 people. But trying to apply it to national problems would be like drinking Drano to alleviate an ulcer.
This has nothing to do with God, it is all about money and power. Guess who has it, not the parents.
What a gigantic load of crap. Nothing get's one more politically motivated and involved than having kids - nothing. In between your anti-government rants, did it ever occur to you that there is a reason why those faux "think of the children" tactics work so well?
I really don't understand this phenomenon of the "Defender of the Strong"
It's become part of the culture of the United States - anti-union attitudes, anti-lawsuit attitudes, and of course being morally opposed to billionaire CEO's paying a higher tax rate than you yourself do.
Sure, sure, cost. But why take the shows in the first place, instead of cranking out more cheap reality TV and crap sitcoms? Why invest in an expensive program like Firefly if you're going to deliberately kill it halfway through the first season? Unless, as TFA suggests, Fox only does it to hurt the competition.
Yeah, because Apple losing a potential sale of $79 when the company has gotten $30,000 from me over the course of my lifetime is really going to keep me up at night.
Says the person who owns a mac....yeah, the Macbook Pro I got for a good deal that stomps any Dell into the ground at that price point. Any more questions?
Any why do you say he's talking piffle, and then confirm what he said?
Because Best Buy's price gouging was twice as bad in my case. Duh.
When my sister wanted a new HDMI cable for the new blue ray player I convinced her the $60 that BB wanted wasn't worth it. She ordered the exact model from amazon for $20, passing up on other even less expensive versions.
Piffle. I wanted a DVI to HDMI cable for my new Macbook Pro. Worst Buy wanted $60 for the pleasure. Went online and found one for less than $6 with $4 for shipping.
Worst Buy is okay for sales on big items, but never, ever, ever buy cables from them unless you like paying for ocean front property in Arizona.
I never said it wasn't normal legislative procedure.
Then why bring it up in terms of an oligarchical abuse of power.
The bill was not released to congress days and weeks beforehand.
Because it was evolving legislation. Again, pretending that normal legislative procedure is something out of the ordinary.
I assume by "you guys" you mean Republicans, conservatives, Hooverites, right-wingers et al. To assume that I am one of those (or any part for that matter) when I am definitely not just proves your overwhelming bias against anything that doesn't fit in your world view.
Except of course that your use of "leftist media" outs you as a combination of the above, Mr. Pot.
Yes, there is a portion of the media that panders to the left. Just as there is a segment that panders to the right.
Ah, I see we've moved on to the false equivalency part of the equation. When Republicans controlled all three branches of government, they made up the majority of media appearances. This was justified that the GOP was the party in power. But now that the Democrats are in charge...the media still features 2 Republicans for every Democrat.
But of course someone who believes that government is the only answer (the most disheartening part of your reply)
But of course you're attacking a straw man in a rather pathetic fashion. No Democrat, no liberal, no progressive, nor even an out-and-out socialist has ever said that "government is the only answer". The point is that less government for the sake of less government is as asinine as more government for the sake of more government.
GDP = consumption + gross investment + government spending + (exports - imports)
Government spending (infrastructure, research, etc) increases demand for labor and resources - which means...drumroll...jobs.
It will create bigger government, and at the expense of personal liberty.
Yawn. Why don't you go join one of those militias that are popping up again, after taking a nap through 8 years of Republican wiretapping & torture, you hack.
I think it's still pretty niche because you have to append that group to "wants all of the above AND OS X."
Not really, as Apple has been heavily pushing consumer media for a long time now. Garageband recordings, HD home videos, HD TV shows, large music collections and high res photos take up a lot of space. Throw in Time Machine for backups and you'll find yourself needing a lot of storage.
Apple could make ZFS as easy as Time Machine - plug in an internal hard drive, and the OS asks you if you want to make it a part of your storage pool.
Forget upping firewire... what the hell is wrong with eSATA?
Because without daisy chaining, there's not much point with going with eSATA over Firewire.
Hmm, I thought they were treated as new machines in every other respect. If not, I don't have too many moral qualms about grabbing a torrent if I just gave them over a thousand dollars. iLife updates would probably be free anyway if they weren't several gigabytes in size.
On the contrary, the facts of reality back it up perfectly.
Only if you're rooming on Endorphin with Chewbaca.
Is this your "evidence" - a bunch of free-floating notions, with no connection to actual events?
You mean connections like a whistleblower trying to warn the FTC for ten years but was completely ignored? Or Allen Stanford, the hedge fund manager that fled authorities for one day, turned in identical tax returns two years in a row without investigation?
The problem began with the Fed's move to artificially lower interest rates in the name of "affordable housing". Combine that with the implicit government backing of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, which turned toxic assets into pure "gold" that could be traded as "securities", again in the name of "affordable housing". Combine that with community reinvestment plans from local/state and federal governments, which forced banks to accept loans from high risk individuals, again in the name of "affordable housing". These all came together to create a bubble that burst once interest rates went back up.
Typical wingnut misdirection. Our mess was caused by greed, by Fannie Maye, not by Freddie Mac, nor by minorities:
Federal Reserve Board data show that:
* More than 84 percent of the subprime mortgages in 2006 were issued by private lending institutions.
* Private firms made nearly 83 percent of the subprime loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers that year.
* Only one of the top 25 subprime lenders in 2006 was directly subject to the housing law that's being lambasted by conservative critics.
And, once again since you ignored it the first time, maybe you'd like to explain how a 30 year old law turned a few hundred billion in mortgages blew up to over $60 trillion dollars in swap markets - more than the planet's entire GDP.
This reminds me of an assertion that George W Bush made in one of the debates with Al Gore, that he [Bush] got the legislation passed on Patients Bill of Rights as governor of TX. However, the truth is that he vetoed that bill, the legislation then overrode his veto, and then he claimed credit for signing it.
Nevermind that scientific decisions were placed in the hands of corporate and religious ideologues, not scientists. Nevermind the pushing of failed strategies (abstinence only sex education) over proven successes (promoting condom use). Nevermind the appointments of right wing judges and administrative policies that favored big business at every turn.
Right, except the people you think were doing this weren't the ones doing it. It was the people pushing for embryonic stem cell research and the SSC who were doing it.
This reminds me of an assertion that George W Bush made in one of the debates with Al Gore, that he [Bush] got the legislation passed on Patients Bill of Rights as governor of TX. However, the truth is that he vetoed that bill, the legislation then overrode his veto, and then he claimed credit for signing it.
Too bad the Washington Press Corpse was too busy making shit up about Al Gore (inventing the Internet, Love Story, Love Canal, etc) to notice this mother-of-all-flip-flops.
You're sort of conflating a somewhat reasonable funding ban (whichI disagree with) with the stupidity of playing bureaucratic games with Federal funding.
No, he's not.
Having two of everything to technically qualify for funding is bureaucratic stupidity.
No, that's a consequence of a federal funding ban. You're confusing cause with effect.
And in other news, Chewbaca has just moved his family to the forest moon of Endor...
It works if the government is always 1 step ahead of the market. But the government is never 1 step ahead of anything, let alone people who have huge financial motivation to find loopholes in regulation.
Why bother having criminal prosecutors, since the murders/thefts/assaults already took place? Your logic is Not Scottish.
taken from people some of whom strongly disagree with this choice of spending
Some people also strongly disagree with organ transplants and blood donations. Too. God. Damned. Bad. For. Them.
should be poured into this morally dubious endeavor before we say
These embryos, if not used for research, will simply end up in the trash. The moral issue is in not using them to save the lives of real humans, with real emotions, real families, and real memories.
People complain already about how unjust it was to invade Iraq and stop oppression and persecution there.
Good thing you aren't Catholic or Baptist, or you might be struck by lightning for violating the 8th Commandment against lying through your teeth. Iraq wasn't invaded for humanitarian reasons, but because Bush and Cheney and Powell lied about WMD's and Iraq being an imminent threat to the U.S. That's what people have a problem with.
Pro-choice'ers are the ones that think that teenage pregnancy is an unjust punishment.
Um...because it is? The days of a majority of the population being able to earn a middle class lifestyle with only a high school education is long past. And the people who want to keep pregnant teenagers from having abortions are frequently the exact same people that want to deny any public assistance to support that fetus once it is born - see: the pro-birth Sarah Palin's line item veto of state support for teenage mothers.
Pro-lifer's consider life sacred, which is why they think destroying even embryos is wrong.
Only a fetus is sacred. Once the fetus becomes an actual child, it can go fuck itself, because the same conservatives that want to ban abortion are usually the same conservatives that want to eliminate all social spending. So the pro-birth party is a-OK with using state power to prevent abortions, but once those fetuses turn into actual babies they can starve in the streets for all they care. Just ask the Disasta from Alaska.
The same arguments that are used now to justify abortion were used to justify the slaughter of indians, blacks, jews, et al. I'm sure you are thinking my opinion is crack-pottery, that a living person whom happens to be black or jewish is completely different from a fertilized embryo.
I suppose you could see it that way, it you were an absolute moron. One one hand, you have a single cell, and on the other hand, you have an actual human being with a personality, memories, feelings, and a family.
It's a slippery slope. Maybe harvesting embryo's isn't really bad.
These embryos from fertilization clinics, if not used for research, go straight into the trash. There is no slippery slope, and never has been.
But pro-choicers continue to press for more extreme rights, e.g. post-birth "abortion", aka infanticide.
Huh, I'm pretty sure that being a goddamned bald-faced liar is against one of the Ten Commandments.
Slashdot Mirror
The Democrats solution will invariably be to throw more money at the problem.
Riiiight. Try naming a single Socialist, much less a Democrat, who tries to solve problems simply by throwing money at them. I wont hold my breath.
Once you move past the old, pathetic conservative talking points (but I repeat myself), you might run into the reality that good facilities and professionals...cost...money. Low taxes didn't build us the Interstate Highway system. We didn't put a man on the moon with supply side economics.
Ever hear the expression "you get what you pay for"? Just how do you expect to get the cream of the crop by offering starting salaries of $27k per year to people with masters degrees and $50,000+ in student loan debts?
I do find it interesting that many private schools have an annual tuition that's less than the average amount we are paying per student for public schools and manage to turn out higher test scores and better educated/adjusted students.
Bullshit.
My Libertarian leanings would prefer to see less Governmental influence in education.
Then it would get far worse, not better, because large parts of the country just wouldn't give a shit. The welfare states that get far more tax money in than they pay out (you know, the ones that reliably vote for tax cutting Republicans) would be third world countries without federal mandates and federal spending.
Libertarianism might be just fine for an isolate Amish hamlet with a population of 500 people. But trying to apply it to national problems would be like drinking Drano to alleviate an ulcer.
This has nothing to do with God, it is all about money and power. Guess who has it, not the parents.
What a gigantic load of crap. Nothing get's one more politically motivated and involved than having kids - nothing. In between your anti-government rants, did it ever occur to you that there is a reason why those faux "think of the children" tactics work so well?
Oh, you mean the iLamps.
I really don't understand this phenomenon of the "Defender of the Strong"
It's become part of the culture of the United States - anti-union attitudes, anti-lawsuit attitudes, and of course being morally opposed to billionaire CEO's paying a higher tax rate than you yourself do.
eSATA doesn't get you daisy chaining, Firewire does. Which would be nice if Apple would keep developing it, as it's speced to at least 3.2 GPBS.
Sure, sure, cost. But why take the shows in the first place, instead of cranking out more cheap reality TV and crap sitcoms? Why invest in an expensive program like Firefly if you're going to deliberately kill it halfway through the first season? Unless, as TFA suggests, Fox only does it to hurt the competition.
Yeah, because Apple losing a potential sale of $79 when the company has gotten $30,000 from me over the course of my lifetime is really going to keep me up at night.
Get off your high horse, he's getting tired.
Says the person who owns a mac. ...yeah, the Macbook Pro I got for a good deal that stomps any Dell into the ground at that price point. Any more questions?
Any why do you say he's talking piffle, and then confirm what he said?
Because Best Buy's price gouging was twice as bad in my case. Duh.
There's only one manufacturer making iPhones, and it's not a "major handset manufacturer."
Batshit irrelevant to the subject of Android taking over the cell market.
When my sister wanted a new HDMI cable for the new blue ray player I convinced her the $60 that BB wanted wasn't worth it. She ordered the exact model from amazon for $20, passing up on other even less expensive versions.
Piffle. I wanted a DVI to HDMI cable for my new Macbook Pro. Worst Buy wanted $60 for the pleasure. Went online and found one for less than $6 with $4 for shipping.
Worst Buy is okay for sales on big items, but never, ever, ever buy cables from them unless you like paying for ocean front property in Arizona.
I never said it wasn't normal legislative procedure.
Then why bring it up in terms of an oligarchical abuse of power.
The bill was not released to congress days and weeks beforehand.
Because it was evolving legislation. Again, pretending that normal legislative procedure is something out of the ordinary.
I assume by "you guys" you mean Republicans, conservatives, Hooverites, right-wingers et al. To assume that I am one of those (or any part for that matter) when I am definitely not just proves your overwhelming bias against anything that doesn't fit in your world view.
Except of course that your use of "leftist media" outs you as a combination of the above, Mr. Pot.
Yes, there is a portion of the media that panders to the left. Just as there is a segment that panders to the right.
Ah, I see we've moved on to the false equivalency part of the equation. When Republicans controlled all three branches of government, they made up the majority of media appearances. This was justified that the GOP was the party in power. But now that the Democrats are in charge...the media still features 2 Republicans for every Democrat.
But of course someone who believes that government is the only answer (the most disheartening part of your reply)
But of course you're attacking a straw man in a rather pathetic fashion. No Democrat, no liberal, no progressive, nor even an out-and-out socialist has ever said that "government is the only answer". The point is that less government for the sake of less government is as asinine as more government for the sake of more government.
Government spending will not create demand.
Of course it will; you wingnuts really need to take remdial economics:
Government spending (infrastructure, research, etc) increases demand for labor and resources - which means...drumroll...jobs.
It will create bigger government, and at the expense of personal liberty.
Yawn. Why don't you go join one of those militias that are popping up again, after taking a nap through 8 years of Republican wiretapping & torture, you hack.
I think it's still pretty niche because you have to append that group to "wants all of the above AND OS X."
Not really, as Apple has been heavily pushing consumer media for a long time now. Garageband recordings, HD home videos, HD TV shows, large music collections and high res photos take up a lot of space. Throw in Time Machine for backups and you'll find yourself needing a lot of storage.
Apple could make ZFS as easy as Time Machine - plug in an internal hard drive, and the OS asks you if you want to make it a part of your storage pool.
Forget upping firewire... what the hell is wrong with eSATA?
Because without daisy chaining, there's not much point with going with eSATA over Firewire.
Hmm, I thought they were treated as new machines in every other respect. If not, I don't have too many moral qualms about grabbing a torrent if I just gave them over a thousand dollars. iLife updates would probably be free anyway if they weren't several gigabytes in size.
Endor, even. Stupid spellcheck.
On the contrary, the facts of reality back it up perfectly.
Only if you're rooming on Endorphin with Chewbaca.
Is this your "evidence" - a bunch of free-floating notions, with no connection to actual events?
You mean connections like a whistleblower trying to warn the FTC for ten years but was completely ignored? Or Allen Stanford, the hedge fund manager that fled authorities for one day, turned in identical tax returns two years in a row without investigation?
The problem began with the Fed's move to artificially lower interest rates in the name of "affordable housing". Combine that with the implicit government backing of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, which turned toxic assets into pure "gold" that could be traded as "securities", again in the name of "affordable housing". Combine that with community reinvestment plans from local/state and federal governments, which forced banks to accept loans from high risk individuals, again in the name of "affordable housing". These all came together to create a bubble that burst once interest rates went back up.
Typical wingnut misdirection. Our mess was caused by greed, by Fannie Maye, not by Freddie Mac, nor by minorities:
And, once again since you ignored it the first time, maybe you'd like to explain how a 30 year old law turned a few hundred billion in mortgages blew up to over $60 trillion dollars in swap markets - more than the planet's entire GDP.
This reminds me of an assertion that George W Bush made in one of the debates with Al Gore, that he [Bush] got the legislation passed on Patients Bill of Rights as governor of TX. However, the truth is that he vetoed that bill, the legislation then overrode his veto, and then he claimed credit for signing it.
Nevermind that scientific decisions were placed in the hands of corporate and religious ideologues, not scientists. Nevermind the pushing of failed strategies (abstinence only sex education) over proven successes (promoting condom use). Nevermind the appointments of right wing judges and administrative policies that favored big business at every turn.
Right, except the people you think were doing this weren't the ones doing it. It was the people pushing for embryonic stem cell research and the SSC who were doing it.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
This reminds me of an assertion that George W Bush made in one of the debates with Al Gore, that he [Bush] got the legislation passed on Patients Bill of Rights as governor of TX. However, the truth is that he vetoed that bill, the legislation then overrode his veto, and then he claimed credit for signing it.
Too bad the Washington Press Corpse was too busy making shit up about Al Gore (inventing the Internet, Love Story, Love Canal, etc) to notice this mother-of-all-flip-flops.
You're sort of conflating a somewhat reasonable funding ban (whichI disagree with) with the stupidity of playing bureaucratic games with Federal funding.
No, he's not.
Having two of everything to technically qualify for funding is bureaucratic stupidity.
No, that's a consequence of a federal funding ban. You're confusing cause with effect.
And in other news, Chewbaca has just moved his family to the forest moon of Endor...
It works if the government is always 1 step ahead of the market. But the government is never 1 step ahead of anything, let alone people who have huge financial motivation to find loopholes in regulation.
Why bother having criminal prosecutors, since the murders/thefts/assaults already took place? Your logic is Not Scottish.
What part of "all your talking points just got shot down" are you not understanding? Stop confusing cause with effect already.
But the studios paid the artists for their time and work.
But the studios continue to make money off of the artists' time and work, so the artists deserved continued compensation.
So should the plummer get a percentage when you sell or rent out your house then?
We already established that the plumbing analogy was not relevant to the subject of creative royalties.
And how much public money
As much as is reasonable to get the job done.
taken from people some of whom strongly disagree with this choice of spending
Some people also strongly disagree with organ transplants and blood donations. Too. God. Damned. Bad. For. Them.
should be poured into this morally dubious endeavor before we say
These embryos, if not used for research, will simply end up in the trash. The moral issue is in not using them to save the lives of real humans, with real emotions, real families, and real memories.
People complain already about how unjust it was to invade Iraq and stop oppression and persecution there.
Good thing you aren't Catholic or Baptist, or you might be struck by lightning for violating the 8th Commandment against lying through your teeth. Iraq wasn't invaded for humanitarian reasons, but because Bush and Cheney and Powell lied about WMD's and Iraq being an imminent threat to the U.S. That's what people have a problem with.
I'm pretty sure you got that backwards.
'Fraid not, Mr. Pot.
Pro-choice'ers are the ones that think that teenage pregnancy is an unjust punishment.
Um...because it is? The days of a majority of the population being able to earn a middle class lifestyle with only a high school education is long past. And the people who want to keep pregnant teenagers from having abortions are frequently the exact same people that want to deny any public assistance to support that fetus once it is born - see: the pro-birth Sarah Palin's line item veto of state support for teenage mothers.
Pro-lifer's consider life sacred, which is why they think destroying even embryos is wrong.
Only a fetus is sacred. Once the fetus becomes an actual child, it can go fuck itself, because the same conservatives that want to ban abortion are usually the same conservatives that want to eliminate all social spending. So the pro-birth party is a-OK with using state power to prevent abortions, but once those fetuses turn into actual babies they can starve in the streets for all they care. Just ask the Disasta from Alaska.
The same arguments that are used now to justify abortion were used to justify the slaughter of indians, blacks, jews, et al. I'm sure you are thinking my opinion is crack-pottery, that a living person whom happens to be black or jewish is completely different from a fertilized embryo.
I suppose you could see it that way, it you were an absolute moron. One one hand, you have a single cell, and on the other hand, you have an actual human being with a personality, memories, feelings, and a family.
It's a slippery slope. Maybe harvesting embryo's isn't really bad.
These embryos from fertilization clinics, if not used for research, go straight into the trash. There is no slippery slope, and never has been.
But pro-choicers continue to press for more extreme rights, e.g. post-birth "abortion", aka infanticide.
Huh, I'm pretty sure that being a goddamned bald-faced liar is against one of the Ten Commandments.
If the embryos aren't used, they end up in the trash, so the fundies are STILL full of crap.