Nobody is going to send them all elsewhere especially since so many of those who make the rules are already benefiting from a shadow economy of people that can be paid less and treated worse than a "legal" employee.
Of course, you could put the employees who employ them in jail instead of letting them get away with civil penalties. Zuckerberg can pay ANY fine imposed. But what if he were risking a jail term?
Yeah, but what did they do besides THAT? Give it time. If things keep going the way they are going, you'll start hearing that unfair wage difference is unamerican. Tyranny does not care that it is cliche -- Christopher Hitchens.
The reality of it is not that most people don't know people who identify with Tea Party. It's just the tea party people tend to be normal. So they don't get into the foam-at-mouth nasty political debates. They aren't quite the silent minority, but they do have jobs, families, etc. So their priorities are on daily life rather than on proving a point. They just don't argue the point most of the time. Every parent very quickly learns the lesson to keeping the peace -- pick your battles. And winning a debate against people with whom you otherwise get along is not a battle worth winning.
Funny, I've never met a single one who wasn't (and I've met a lot of them; not quite a million, but still a lot).
I am gonna just plain call bull shit. You haven't met too many. Or you are lying about the ones you have met. Tea Party, as in the party named after the revolt are very much a one issue group -- responsible government spending and government small enough to be able to stay efficient. For a very large majority of them that means opposing the over-militarism of the Republican party and the welfare state of the Democratic party. Family values people are just not live-and-let-live enough to be in the Tea Party. So yeah, on this:
Trust me
just, plain "no" is the only justified reaction to you.
Aha. Except the analysis was not of scientific education. It was of scientific comprehension. So it had to be an actual metric of scientific reasoning rather than scientific literacy. But that's ok. No one expects a Communist to pass a reading comprehension test. Otherwise, they would have learned something from history. You are right on the facts about the doc's btw. Just not on the reasons. Doctors always backed the Republican party. Because the Republican party always advocated tort reform and it is the lawsuits (lawsuit insurance really) that have for a long time been the largest expense for most doctors.
No, we don't pay our bills. We "pay" with money which we "borrow" from a little black box which sits in a wall somewhere. FED's holding of the Bonds went up by 4 trillion in the last 5 years. That's a year's worth of federal budget. That money will be repaid with more bonds sold to the FED. We are using "debt" to print money by borrowing from an abstraction. We are a banana republic without bananas.
Don't kid yourself about gerrymandering, by the way. It's as much a bipartisan tool as filibuster. Democrats are just mad that they weren't in charge in 2010 (when the last census was conducted) so they didn't get to gerrymander to their advantage.
I guess we are now a banana republic. Every foreigner I spoke to who like that Obama was elected only liked him because he saw him as the PUNISHMENT US deserved. I am just not sure why we chose to punish ourselves.
The website is literally 1,000,000 times less complicated. You are arguing "in principle", when what matters here is the the scale. You are insane if you think they are even remotely competent. Movie theaters sell tickets around the country on a lesser budget. This is incomparable simple. And they still fucked it up. You are just trolling if you are still a Democrat.
Or are you suggesting that Obama decided to treat Healthcare.gov like the WW2 memorial, and deliberately sabotage it?
I think he was suggesting that Obama, bitter at the people who are frustrated with his incompetence, closed down the memorials to pay the Americans back for calling him on his bull shit. The healthcare.gov would be part of the incompetence in this scenario -- not part of the payback.
Really? So the argument is that a $400 million website (that's a budget many multiples that of, let's say, startup capital of Facebook) was not enough to withstand a 1-week absence of the upper management. Ok, then. Can't wait until the same business methods are used to design workflow of surgeons and EMT's. Oh, small question: why is it that NYSE exchange can have (literally) billions trades occurring every day? How many people signed up for the whole healthscare thing? A million? That's 1000 times less than a billion. I mean, hell, NSA can listen to all of their phone calls and not even come close to its upper capacity. But sign up for a web form (a much more structured data than voice recording) and noooo.... look over there... look!!! birds! You put your trust into a guy who can sell the "just bear with us and everything will be ok" line. That's the whole presidency of this guy. He is a clueless empty suit. But don't worry, I am sure his incompetence is only manifesting because I must be a racist.
You really think the President is going around shutting down just vet memorials to make some kind of a point?
Yes. Definitely, yes. It's the first rule of making budget cuts hurt: cut the areas most painful to the most people (policeman and fireman and maybe teachers) and cut the esoteric services last.
Gazprom doesn't always merge in the western sense of the merger. It takes major interest in smaller energy players and controls them without actually absorbing them. Merger has tax advantages in the west because transfer of resources becomes internal and not subject to corporate tax. that is due on subsidiary-to-owner transfers. Gazprom gets to write its own tax law and every other law because Gazprom is indistinguishable from the Russian government. You have Gazprom officials holding positions in the government while holding positions in the company themselves. In the West this would be unheard of. Even Bloomberg, who owns majority stake in his namesake company, had to put his shares in an escrow and be completely isolated from running the company while serving as NYC mayor. Pretty sure (but not completely sure) the same is true of Berlusconi. In Russia this separation is unnecessary. But that's digressing from the main point somewhat. The main point being that, through all of its subsidiaries, Gazprom is the largest oil company in the world. It's highly, highly unlikely that it doesn't exercise any control over a territory adjacent to Russia and full of former Soviet citizens. The only trully West-aligned territory which could have been claimed to have such an alignment was Georgia. And Russia manufactured a provocation in order to launch a full-scale invasion of Georgia.
These are articles from 2012-2013 about then future development. Soviet Union fell 20 years ago. Gazprom, through all of its subsidiaries, is the largest oil company in the world.
What do you mean "just because"? They could be a brutal dictatorship participating in terror. Helping out in the war on terror is a step up for many dictatorships.
Ha? Which country? Azerbaijan is ran by Gazprom if you want to attribute it to an oil company... But if you were saying US is ran by BP, that's absurd. It's a minor corporation by any scale of imagination in the US. I am not even sure if it's in top 50.
I am not sure if this is more or less honest than the modern election campaigns designed to essentially subvert free will. Every voter can only care about 7 issues at any one time. As long as you can manufacture 7 issues capturing people's attention, you can always get them to vote against their interest. Given pervasive statistical data, you can identify very surgically how each group of people can be swayed to abandon their best interests. We KNOW that's how Obama won. No President had ever won with the same performance metrics before (regardless of where your politics are... just by the numbers). Is spending a billion dollars to micro-market more or less honest than simply stealing the election through brute force? I guess it depends on how easy it is to get that billion dollars.
Buh... obvoiusly, I have to correct myself. It's late... Communists are bad even if they are NOT foreigners.... and... You can be an atheist and still not be dumb enough to think that people forced to be subdued to an authoritarian government ruling by coercion is GOOD..
US waterboarded a total of 3 people. More people have died as a result of faulty candy wrappers. None of the subjects of the waterboarding died. I'll take my chances with the country which believes in consulting an army of lawyers before waterboarding its sworn enemies in the presence of an army of doctors. You can take your chances with the countries that set their armies of soldiers, armed with live ammunition, against their own people. I like my chances better than I like yours.
Communists are bad guys even if they are foreigners. You can be an atheist and still not be dumb enough to think that people forced to be subdued to an authoritarian government ruling by coercion is bad. It doesn't matter that they claim to "work for the people." Everyone who is subdued is working for those who subdue them. And the intentions of the ruling are always fickle and temporary.
And why only for violence? Why not also for spreading ignorance? If you are a comedian acting as a reporter (yes, you Jon), and you botch up science, should you be forced to bore everyone to tears with your apologies? We know you are a tool. We don't need you telling us. If you make dumb political arguments, they cost society more harm than any shooting. They cause increased disease fatalities, increased poverty, etc. Should the every form of expression that cause harm be subject to censorship of "good ideas?" If you promote socialism and attack capitalism, should you also explain why you are wrong? This isn't off topic. This a 3rd party trying to inject itself into a commercial transaction between an entertainer and the audience. If it's ok for video games, it's ok for all entertainers. Good intentions be damn.
Slashdot Mirror
Nobody is going to send them all elsewhere especially since so many of those who make the rules are already benefiting from a shadow economy of people that can be paid less and treated worse than a "legal" employee.
Of course, you could put the employees who employ them in jail instead of letting them get away with civil penalties. Zuckerberg can pay ANY fine imposed. But what if he were risking a jail term?
Somehow they think this less defamatory. As if driving a car while unlicensed is less illegal than speeding.
Yeah, but what did they do besides THAT? Give it time. If things keep going the way they are going, you'll start hearing that unfair wage difference is unamerican. Tyranny does not care that it is cliche -- Christopher Hitchens.
The reality of it is not that most people don't know people who identify with Tea Party. It's just the tea party people tend to be normal. So they don't get into the foam-at-mouth nasty political debates. They aren't quite the silent minority, but they do have jobs, families, etc. So their priorities are on daily life rather than on proving a point. They just don't argue the point most of the time. Every parent very quickly learns the lesson to keeping the peace -- pick your battles. And winning a debate against people with whom you otherwise get along is not a battle worth winning.
Funny, I've never met a single one who wasn't (and I've met a lot of them; not quite a million, but still a lot).
I am gonna just plain call bull shit. You haven't met too many. Or you are lying about the ones you have met. Tea Party, as in the party named after the revolt are very much a one issue group -- responsible government spending and government small enough to be able to stay efficient. For a very large majority of them that means opposing the over-militarism of the Republican party and the welfare state of the Democratic party. Family values people are just not live-and-let-live enough to be in the Tea Party. So yeah, on this:
Trust me
just, plain "no" is the only justified reaction to you.
Aha. Except the analysis was not of scientific education. It was of scientific comprehension. So it had to be an actual metric of scientific reasoning rather than scientific literacy. But that's ok. No one expects a Communist to pass a reading comprehension test. Otherwise, they would have learned something from history. You are right on the facts about the doc's btw. Just not on the reasons. Doctors always backed the Republican party. Because the Republican party always advocated tort reform and it is the lawsuits (lawsuit insurance really) that have for a long time been the largest expense for most doctors.
No, we don't pay our bills. We "pay" with money which we "borrow" from a little black box which sits in a wall somewhere. FED's holding of the Bonds went up by 4 trillion in the last 5 years. That's a year's worth of federal budget. That money will be repaid with more bonds sold to the FED. We are using "debt" to print money by borrowing from an abstraction. We are a banana republic without bananas.
Don't kid yourself about gerrymandering, by the way. It's as much a bipartisan tool as filibuster. Democrats are just mad that they weren't in charge in 2010 (when the last census was conducted) so they didn't get to gerrymander to their advantage.
I guess we are now a banana republic. Every foreigner I spoke to who like that Obama was elected only liked him because he saw him as the PUNISHMENT US deserved. I am just not sure why we chose to punish ourselves.
I believe Obama has other things on his schedule and the web site was probably delegated to others- maybe to contractors.
and completely disregarding the beginning of my post which said this:
So the argument is that a $400 million website was not enough to withstand a 1-week absence of the upper management.
say anything other than that you are trying to defend the indefensible (the Democratic Party)?
The website is literally 1,000,000 times less complicated. You are arguing "in principle", when what matters here is the the scale. You are insane if you think they are even remotely competent. Movie theaters sell tickets around the country on a lesser budget. This is incomparable simple. And they still fucked it up. You are just trolling if you are still a Democrat.
Or are you suggesting that Obama decided to treat Healthcare.gov like the WW2 memorial, and deliberately sabotage it?
I think he was suggesting that Obama, bitter at the people who are frustrated with his incompetence, closed down the memorials to pay the Americans back for calling him on his bull shit. The healthcare.gov would be part of the incompetence in this scenario -- not part of the payback.
Really? So the argument is that a $400 million website (that's a budget many multiples that of, let's say, startup capital of Facebook) was not enough to withstand a 1-week absence of the upper management. Ok, then. Can't wait until the same business methods are used to design workflow of surgeons and EMT's. Oh, small question: why is it that NYSE exchange can have (literally) billions trades occurring every day? How many people signed up for the whole healthscare thing? A million? That's 1000 times less than a billion. I mean, hell, NSA can listen to all of their phone calls and not even come close to its upper capacity. But sign up for a web form (a much more structured data than voice recording) and noooo.... look over there... look!!! birds! You put your trust into a guy who can sell the "just bear with us and everything will be ok" line. That's the whole presidency of this guy. He is a clueless empty suit. But don't worry, I am sure his incompetence is only manifesting because I must be a racist.
You really think the President is going around shutting down just vet memorials to make some kind of a point?
Yes. Definitely, yes. It's the first rule of making budget cuts hurt: cut the areas most painful to the most people (policeman and fireman and maybe teachers) and cut the esoteric services last.
Gazprom doesn't always merge in the western sense of the merger. It takes major interest in smaller energy players and controls them without actually absorbing them. Merger has tax advantages in the west because transfer of resources becomes internal and not subject to corporate tax. that is due on subsidiary-to-owner transfers. Gazprom gets to write its own tax law and every other law because Gazprom is indistinguishable from the Russian government. You have Gazprom officials holding positions in the government while holding positions in the company themselves. In the West this would be unheard of. Even Bloomberg, who owns majority stake in his namesake company, had to put his shares in an escrow and be completely isolated from running the company while serving as NYC mayor. Pretty sure (but not completely sure) the same is true of Berlusconi. In Russia this separation is unnecessary. But that's digressing from the main point somewhat. The main point being that, through all of its subsidiaries, Gazprom is the largest oil company in the world. It's highly, highly unlikely that it doesn't exercise any control over a territory adjacent to Russia and full of former Soviet citizens. The only trully West-aligned territory which could have been claimed to have such an alignment was Georgia. And Russia manufactured a provocation in order to launch a full-scale invasion of Georgia.
These are articles from 2012-2013 about then future development. Soviet Union fell 20 years ago. Gazprom, through all of its subsidiaries, is the largest oil company in the world.
What do you mean "just because"? They could be a brutal dictatorship participating in terror. Helping out in the war on terror is a step up for many dictatorships.
Ha? Which country? Azerbaijan is ran by Gazprom if you want to attribute it to an oil company... But if you were saying US is ran by BP, that's absurd. It's a minor corporation by any scale of imagination in the US. I am not even sure if it's in top 50.
I am not sure if this is more or less honest than the modern election campaigns designed to essentially subvert free will. Every voter can only care about 7 issues at any one time. As long as you can manufacture 7 issues capturing people's attention, you can always get them to vote against their interest. Given pervasive statistical data, you can identify very surgically how each group of people can be swayed to abandon their best interests. We KNOW that's how Obama won. No President had ever won with the same performance metrics before (regardless of where your politics are... just by the numbers). Is spending a billion dollars to micro-market more or less honest than simply stealing the election through brute force? I guess it depends on how easy it is to get that billion dollars.
What makes you think developed countries want honest elections?
Buh... obvoiusly, I have to correct myself. It's late... Communists are bad even if they are NOT foreigners. ... and... You can be an atheist and still not be dumb enough to think that people forced to be subdued to an authoritarian government ruling by coercion is GOOD..
US waterboarded a total of 3 people. More people have died as a result of faulty candy wrappers. None of the subjects of the waterboarding died. I'll take my chances with the country which believes in consulting an army of lawyers before waterboarding its sworn enemies in the presence of an army of doctors. You can take your chances with the countries that set their armies of soldiers, armed with live ammunition, against their own people. I like my chances better than I like yours.
Communists are not harmful just because they start wars. They are harmful because they subjugate through channeling the desperation of the ignorant.
Communists are bad guys even if they are foreigners. You can be an atheist and still not be dumb enough to think that people forced to be subdued to an authoritarian government ruling by coercion is bad. It doesn't matter that they claim to "work for the people." Everyone who is subdued is working for those who subdue them. And the intentions of the ruling are always fickle and temporary.
And why only for violence? Why not also for spreading ignorance? If you are a comedian acting as a reporter (yes, you Jon), and you botch up science, should you be forced to bore everyone to tears with your apologies? We know you are a tool. We don't need you telling us. If you make dumb political arguments, they cost society more harm than any shooting. They cause increased disease fatalities, increased poverty, etc. Should the every form of expression that cause harm be subject to censorship of "good ideas?" If you promote socialism and attack capitalism, should you also explain why you are wrong? This isn't off topic. This a 3rd party trying to inject itself into a commercial transaction between an entertainer and the audience. If it's ok for video games, it's ok for all entertainers. Good intentions be damn.