You're not, I hope, trolling. I know there are people out there who fervently believe the beauty of pure capitalism, such as all those interesting folks at the Cato Institute.
Exagerating a bit, my experiences in France (as well as the actions of G.W.) have pushed me away from the republicans, but I'm not quite all the way to anarcho-capitalist. Free market libertarian is probably the best descriptor - allow the government to run national defence and protect the people and property against the most egregious crimes: primarily murder. Most everything else can be handled by tort law. Social and especially moral issues are not the state's concern.
I understand the power of personal incentive, but I do believe there is a proper balance between the needs of the individual and the needs of society.
I think Adam Smith was right, an individual, working only for his own benefit will positively influence society. Working for only my own benefit, how many people's livlihood do I contribute to? Unless I'm sacking my money away under the matress, I'm providing employment (well, contributing to it anyways), everyone from the grocery clerk on up is benefiting from my being employed. If I don't spend it and invest it that money is allowing banks to make business or mortage loan or giving companies the capital to expand. I'm not doing this out of the goodness of my heart, I'm getting a return. At this point the argument generally shifts around to the "super rich" and how they're not paying their fair share. Their money isn't under the mattress' either, it's providing more jobs, loans, and capital than my small salary ever could.
Beyond all that, it's my belief that people can only operate in their own best interest due to the survival instinct. There are a very few true martyrs, most are simple cons preying on people's good nature. Every society has them, the party members who lived it pretty damn well while the "proles" subsisted in misery or our current government whose forcing us into the social security con while exempting themselves (ever seen the pension those bastards get?). Again, the "super rich" are usually lumped into this category but do they truly belong? I've never heard bill gates claim to be "giving himself up only for my benefit". Those who are truly martyrs? They're dead and their usefulness and contribution to society died with them.
Societies can and do get torn apart when the power of individuals gets too strong.
Only when those individuals are created by the will of, or due to force of, the state. Al Capone, Pablo Escobar, or the other crime lords? All created by the state's wish to control some substances "for our benefit". State created monopolies are a problem, think ma bell. When the state, who is supposed to operate for everyone's benefit, declares that one company is the one true way, that's a huge barrier to entry. Outside of those, the free market has ways of dealing with individuals who get out of hand. Microsoft is the current target, but really, as microsofts share in the marketplace has risen, haven't you noticed the rise in Linux and BSD distributions? If you can do better than MS, do so, otherwise get the hell out of the way because someone else will. Money spent on lawsuits trying to break up the company could have been invested into a competitor to bring another product to market. There is no need for the state to interfere in this area.
I have to apologize for the spelling and lack of coherence, it's way past my bedtime... If you're at all interested in this viewpoint, check out Harry Browne a past libertarian candidate and much more skilled orator.
It's too bad more Americans don't ever leave their own countries. It's my explanation for why the Republican Party can continue to exist.
At last, something we can agree on. The last 2 years here has shown me how bad reliance on the state can be and pushed me from moderate republican to anarcho-capitalist.
Uhhhh, what? Modern Europe has some pretty solid economic foundations. Life's pretty good there for most.
The french govt workers, transport specifically, spent most of last summer on strike. Chirac's attempt to balance the budget, caused by a looming increase of pensioners on an already overburdened system led the teachers and medical workers to walk out. Lets also not forget the 10,000 or so people who died last year in the heat wave because the state operated hospitals didn't have enough people. These are not solid economic foundations.
Then the Republican party must be dominated by socialists, how else would you explain the recent focus on Mars and Nasa:-).
Or the prescription drug bill, the massive increase in government spending for homeland (in)security, and education. You're correct there, the current version of the republicans are no different than their democrat opponents, not overt socialists but certainly not economic conservatives.
Capitalists are a pretty stupid bunch. With their focus on short term profit they tend to be sort of self destructive. Socialism was a response to the capitalistic self destructiveness
You're refering to the capitalist ideal of social security, which in the name of short term policies is doomed to require a massive cash influx? Or the capitalist ideals of modern europe who are also faced with the baby boom, have promised things that are undeliverable and now face massive strikes when the truth comes out?
Since they won't be affordable, all this does is create a new class of subsidized business, and executives to run the businesses, and higher taxes on
Who's to say that's not desirable - for the state. One's power increases with each person dependant on you, all the better to guarantee your position in government.
Of course, someday in the near future I'm fairly certain both will be equally accepted as the old religious farts die off (The ones that control the content)
Unfortunately, the old religious farts are prolific breeders (the only acceptable sex to them) and thus raise a whole new generation of self rightous morals police.
Re:no matter how big of a geek you are...
on
Running for Geeks
·
· Score: 4, Funny
I don't care how big of a geek you are... Strap on some running shoes and shorts
Some of us are big enough geeks that loose sweats are preferable
As in, should another taxpayer funded voyage be made? No. If private industry wants to start, go for it. Want your money to go towards it, buy stock. Let's get the US Government's budget under control and regain the ability to pay for the things we've promised (Social Security for one) before we start talking about funding flights to the moon.
I've heard it claimed that the US could immediately balance it's budget if all the tax cheating could be stopped. I don't know how they came to this conclusion, but I do tend to believe it.)
That would only be true if the government budget was balanced in the first place. If the deficit was due to budgeting 100 billion in collections and only recieving 90 billion due to cheating, than the cheating is causing the deficit.
As it is today, they planned on taking in 90 billion and spending 110 billion. The remaining 20 is borrowed.
So now the media thinks we should *thank* them for taking our jobs.:-) Capitalism is great for the top 2% of the country. For the rest of us... Well, we dont have time to think about shit like that, we have to get up, go to work and make other people rich...
Actually, it's properly called Comparative Advantage, and yes you should be thanking them because in the end, it benefits all of us...
it is when the company has killed off competition via illegal means.
Now this is something I'd like to see a site for. I know they've bought up other companies but who specificaly have they killed off and how was it against the law.
First developers (Or many tech related jobs) and now writers.. This is starting to get really scary, especially for people my age; I'm still in high school and it's going to be a few years before I can get a _real_ job, This really needs to stop, or at least be done in moderation, it's getting out of hand.
You know, back in the the late eighties, in northeast ohio I was in your shoes. Graduating high school and you looking at "all the good jobs" going to japan, or korea, or mexico. You know, high paying jobs in the auto manufacturing industry. Similarly, my dad graduated in the mid sixties just in time to see the steel industry leave the same way. Guess what, we're all better off because of it.
In a couple years you'll have to take an economics class or two, pay attention. Until then, google "comparative advantage". When something can be done cheaper in another country, whether it's making wine in portugal, steel in china, cars in mexico or software in india, it frees up capital in the "outsourcing country" to be used in other things. Capital is that stuff that rich people have and they want more of it (like the rest of us), so instead of socking it under their mattress', they invest it. Where do they invest it, in companies which employ the rest of us.
Great you say, but how is that going to find me a job? In software development it probably won't, but the investment will bring jobs which pay the same or better in a new field, maybe biotech, maybe space exploration, who knows. Just watch, the cycle will repeat itself and in 15 years you too will be advising some high school student not to panic because the then "hot field" will be headed off overseas. Til then, keep your eyes open and your options loose, be flexible and you'll probably make a killing.
First developers (Or many tech related jobs) and now writers.. This is starting to get really scary, especially for people my age; I'm still in high school and it's going to be a few years before I can get a _real_ job, and at this rate it's going to be hard to find any local ones. This really needs to stop, or at least be done in moderation, it's getting out of hand.
Is a 60 year old white female EXACTLY AS LIKELY to be a suicide bomber looking to blow up a few American White Devils as a 24 year old Saudi Arabian of Palistinean lineage? Do you really think so?
If you haven't seen it before, check out the Carnival Booth paper and remember your argument when they mention Richard Reid and John Walker whatshisname.
but if you think things like education, healthcare, social security, and pensions are the makings of an authoritarian regime
I don't think anyone claimed they were the makings of an authoritarian regime, both you and this idiot seem to mix up economics (socialism|liberalism) with political (authoritarian|libertarian). Check out The Political Compass and see one can be authoritarian and socialist like Stalin, authoritarian and free-market oriented like Thatcher or some other combination.
"And Benjamin consented to break his rule and he read out to her what was written on the wall. There was nothing there now except a single commandment. It ran: 'ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS'".
everyone should download anything and everything they can think of. Delete it when it is done and then initiate a new down load
Similar concept but I think everything should be encrypted. Notes to mom, grocery list to the s.o., plans for laser beams mounted on fricken sharks, encrypt it. Fuck em, let em spend a ton of money decrypting a note to my g.f. asking to pick up drycleaning... Overload the system.
If we are going to pay for them with taxes, then they should not be in the form of additional taxes. Rather, the legislature needs to tighten its purse-strings: cut social programs, reduce administrative salaries, and put the money back into where it needs to go: defense and public works.
I'm right there with you, but I'm afraid we can't get there without crashing and burning first.
think our Congressmen, Representatives and top-level government administrators have forgotten that they are servants of the people! They should be honored to have such a job!
They certainly carry the attitude that we're lucky to have such generous people in charge.
because the next step will be to ban encryption on the U.S. part of the internet. Ok, this will severely interfer with all kinds of online payment but how much sense would it make for the FBI if they are allowed to wiretap you but can't read what you type?
They'll just ban "bad" encryption, you know, the kind without some sort of key escrow system. Expect the usual, "only a terrorist would be afraid" of key escrow...
The government should pay for the upgrades, not the consumer.
Either way, the consumer ends up paying, be it in the form of increased access fees or a tax hike or, most likely with our govt, just tacking it on to the deficit.
Bottom line: The FBI can go piss on itself. Fuck the system
Middle America thinks free trade is fair when America's gaining from it, but as soon as America's deal isn't so sweet, fair trade is something to be condemned.
Actually for "middle america" the deal is just fine. The law of comparative advantage still holds true, some 200 years later, regardless of the product or service being produced. True, it sucks for many of us in IT who now need to find other work but this isn't going to kill the American economy or destroy the middle class. We don't require protection, we need to get on with our lives and find something else to do to earn a living. The Economist from 2/21 makes this point much clearer.
Slashdot Mirror
Exagerating a bit, my experiences in France (as well as the actions of G.W.) have pushed me away from the republicans, but I'm not quite all the way to anarcho-capitalist. Free market libertarian is probably the best descriptor - allow the government to run national defence and protect the people and property against the most egregious crimes: primarily murder. Most everything else can be handled by tort law. Social and especially moral issues are not the state's concern.
I understand the power of personal incentive, but I do believe there is a proper balance between the needs of the individual and the needs of society.
I think Adam Smith was right, an individual, working only for his own benefit will positively influence society. Working for only my own benefit, how many people's livlihood do I contribute to? Unless I'm sacking my money away under the matress, I'm providing employment (well, contributing to it anyways), everyone from the grocery clerk on up is benefiting from my being employed. If I don't spend it and invest it that money is allowing banks to make business or mortage loan or giving companies the capital to expand. I'm not doing this out of the goodness of my heart, I'm getting a return. At this point the argument generally shifts around to the "super rich" and how they're not paying their fair share. Their money isn't under the mattress' either, it's providing more jobs, loans, and capital than my small salary ever could.
Beyond all that, it's my belief that people can only operate in their own best interest due to the survival instinct. There are a very few true martyrs, most are simple cons preying on people's good nature. Every society has them, the party members who lived it pretty damn well while the "proles" subsisted in misery or our current government whose forcing us into the social security con while exempting themselves (ever seen the pension those bastards get?). Again, the "super rich" are usually lumped into this category but do they truly belong? I've never heard bill gates claim to be "giving himself up only for my benefit". Those who are truly martyrs? They're dead and their usefulness and contribution to society died with them.
Societies can and do get torn apart when the power of individuals gets too strong.
Only when those individuals are created by the will of, or due to force of, the state. Al Capone, Pablo Escobar, or the other crime lords? All created by the state's wish to control some substances "for our benefit". State created monopolies are a problem, think ma bell. When the state, who is supposed to operate for everyone's benefit, declares that one company is the one true way, that's a huge barrier to entry. Outside of those, the free market has ways of dealing with individuals who get out of hand. Microsoft is the current target, but really, as microsofts share in the marketplace has risen, haven't you noticed the rise in Linux and BSD distributions? If you can do better than MS, do so, otherwise get the hell out of the way because someone else will. Money spent on lawsuits trying to break up the company could have been invested into a competitor to bring another product to market. There is no need for the state to interfere in this area.
I have to apologize for the spelling and lack of coherence, it's way past my bedtime... If you're at all interested in this viewpoint, check out Harry Browne a past libertarian candidate and much more skilled orator.
At last, something we can agree on. The last 2 years here has shown me how bad reliance on the state can be and pushed me from moderate republican to anarcho-capitalist.
The french govt workers, transport specifically, spent most of last summer on strike. Chirac's attempt to balance the budget, caused by a looming increase of pensioners on an already overburdened system led the teachers and medical workers to walk out. Lets also not forget the 10,000 or so people who died last year in the heat wave because the state operated hospitals didn't have enough people. These are not solid economic foundations.
Or the prescription drug bill, the massive increase in government spending for homeland (in)security, and education. You're correct there, the current version of the republicans are no different than their democrat opponents, not overt socialists but certainly not economic conservatives.
Capitalists are a pretty stupid bunch. With their focus on short term profit they tend to be sort of self destructive. Socialism was a response to the capitalistic self destructiveness
You're refering to the capitalist ideal of social security, which in the name of short term policies is doomed to require a massive cash influx? Or the capitalist ideals of modern europe who are also faced with the baby boom, have promised things that are undeliverable and now face massive strikes when the truth comes out?
Who's to say that's not desirable - for the state. One's power increases with each person dependant on you, all the better to guarantee your position in government.
Unfortunately, the old religious farts are prolific breeders (the only acceptable sex to them) and thus raise a whole new generation of self rightous morals police.
Some of us are big enough geeks that loose sweats are preferable
As in, should another taxpayer funded voyage be made? No. If private industry wants to start, go for it. Want your money to go towards it, buy stock. Let's get the US Government's budget under control and regain the ability to pay for the things we've promised (Social Security for one) before we start talking about funding flights to the moon.
That would only be true if the government budget was balanced in the first place. If the deficit was due to budgeting 100 billion in collections and only recieving 90 billion due to cheating, than the cheating is causing the deficit.
As it is today, they planned on taking in 90 billion and spending 110 billion. The remaining 20 is borrowed.
Actually, it's properly called Comparative Advantage, and yes you should be thanking them because in the end, it benefits all of us...
Freedom for Iraqis
Now this is something I'd like to see a site for. I know they've bought up other companies but who specificaly have they killed off and how was it against the law.
First developers (Or many tech related jobs) and now writers.. This is starting to get really scary, especially for people my age; I'm still in high school and it's going to be a few years before I can get a _real_ job, This really needs to stop, or at least be done in moderation, it's getting out of hand.
You know, back in the the late eighties, in northeast ohio I was in your shoes. Graduating high school and you looking at "all the good jobs" going to japan, or korea, or mexico. You know, high paying jobs in the auto manufacturing industry. Similarly, my dad graduated in the mid sixties just in time to see the steel industry leave the same way. Guess what, we're all better off because of it.
In a couple years you'll have to take an economics class or two, pay attention. Until then, google "comparative advantage". When something can be done cheaper in another country, whether it's making wine in portugal, steel in china, cars in mexico or software in india, it frees up capital in the "outsourcing country" to be used in other things. Capital is that stuff that rich people have and they want more of it (like the rest of us), so instead of socking it under their mattress', they invest it. Where do they invest it, in companies which employ the rest of us.
Great you say, but how is that going to find me a job? In software development it probably won't, but the investment will bring jobs which pay the same or better in a new field, maybe biotech, maybe space exploration, who knows. Just watch, the cycle will repeat itself and in 15 years you too will be advising some high school student not to panic because the then "hot field" will be headed off overseas. Til then, keep your eyes open and your options loose, be flexible and you'll probably make a killing.
First developers (Or many tech related jobs) and now writers.. This is starting to get really scary, especially for people my age; I'm still in high school and it's going to be a few years before I can get a _real_ job, and at this rate it's going to be hard to find any local ones. This really needs to stop, or at least be done in moderation, it's getting out of hand.
If you haven't seen it before, check out the Carnival Booth paper and remember your argument when they mention Richard Reid and John Walker whatshisname.
Err, it's hug, not hump, it's a common mistake...
I don't think anyone claimed they were the makings of an authoritarian regime, both you and this idiot seem to mix up economics (socialism|liberalism) with political (authoritarian|libertarian). Check out The Political Compass and see one can be authoritarian and socialist like Stalin, authoritarian and free-market oriented like Thatcher or some other combination.
Oh shit, I forgot how much more enlightened they are. I mean, all those things I could be doing to myself and their wisdom is saving me.
May I point you to my favorite civil libertarian author's thoughts on the subject of privacy.
"And Benjamin consented to break his rule and he read out to her what was written on the wall. There was nothing there now except a single commandment. It ran: 'ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS'".
Similar concept but I think everything should be encrypted. Notes to mom, grocery list to the s.o., plans for laser beams mounted on fricken sharks, encrypt it. Fuck em, let em spend a ton of money decrypting a note to my g.f. asking to pick up drycleaning... Overload the system.
I'm right there with you, but I'm afraid we can't get there without crashing and burning first.
think our Congressmen, Representatives and top-level government administrators have forgotten that they are servants of the people! They should be honored to have such a job!
They certainly carry the attitude that we're lucky to have such generous people in charge.
They'll just ban "bad" encryption, you know, the kind without some sort of key escrow system. Expect the usual, "only a terrorist would be afraid" of key escrow...
Either way, the consumer ends up paying, be it in the form of increased access fees or a tax hike or, most likely with our govt, just tacking it on to the deficit. Bottom line: The FBI can go piss on itself. Fuck the system
Amen
Actually for "middle america" the deal is just fine. The law of comparative advantage still holds true, some 200 years later, regardless of the product or service being produced. True, it sucks for many of us in IT who now need to find other work but this isn't going to kill the American economy or destroy the middle class. We don't require protection, we need to get on with our lives and find something else to do to earn a living. The Economist from 2/21 makes this point much clearer.