I have been arguing for years that the federal government should set up a bureaucracy to govern the flow of ip packets since they travel tubes in every state. It's only fair that the tube usage should be regulated by fair politicians instead of allowing greedy citizens (i.e. DMCA violators) to hog them. I am so glad you agree!
There's no problem if you earned the money. If you do gamble responsibly you are one of the very few. There are people spending their rent money at blackjack tables. You are equating poverty with eligibility for public assistance. You can't do that.
Well, if you're going to put it that way then yes. Why should the government take money that a working person might need for food, shelter, or medicine and give it to someone else for entertainment? Who is wealthier? The guy working everyday or the guy going to the casino?
Besides, gambling isn't really entertainment. It's just conning people into thinking they're going to hit the jackpot. (Which is fine if they are blowing their OWN money.)
"Or is entertainment the privilege of the wealthy alone?"
Many tax payers live more humbly than the tax receivers because they had to work for the money they have. Many people on federal assistance blow the money because they know more is coming. If you disagree with that statement you're just not paying attention.
It's immoral to take money from someone who doesn't get to spend enough time with his family because he works 50 hours a week and hand it to someone to blow on a gambling habit. Someone asking for public assistance shouldn't waste money. If you disagree you can start a charity that buses people to casinos and hands them buckets of cash without forcing taxpayers to participate.
Wouldn't be easier to go back to limited government and federalism so that you don't have to weigh national security, education, transportation, health care, etc. when voting for a single office?
What you want would just result in tyranny by the largest plurality.
I didn't realize it was a register access deal. I generally have a rosier picture of the economy than the barber shop and those numbers even surprised me but I don't blame anyone for being skeptical of statistics, especially in a political discussion.
The article refers to quintiles of households by income, with the poorest spending $10,678/person/year and richest spending $22,536/person/year. The average household size is 1.7 for the lowest quintile and 3.1 for highest.
Funny stuff, but we ALREADY import enough cocaine to ski on without the trade agreement. We need to treat Colombia well. They have been one of our best allies and all they are asking for is an open market.
>>1) Unemployment is historically low. >This is correct, but it is no good enough if your home is going to be repossessed. What prevents home foreclosure like employment??
>What did ever Iraq do to the US? THEY WERE SHOOTING AT OUR PILOTS DAILY!! Just because they weren't very good at it doesn't make it all better.
>You were lied to... Is it the President Bush's fault he believed all the Democrats telling him that Iraq had WMD's?
>...Guantanamo as one of the most egregious violations of human rights by a liberal democracy... You never heard of the Japanese internment in WWII? Those were not people picked up after trying to kill US Soldiers or Afghan civilians like the Guantanamo residents. Why can't we hold enemy combatants until the war on terror is over? In WWII did we release captured Germans, hand them a rifle and tell them good luck in their next battle?
There is no trade imbalance. We get all the goods we pay for.
More seriously, there would be less trade imbalance if the Democrats would support a free trade agreement with Colombia so they could buy from us. How will the Democrats' policies of sky-high taxes and industry hostility bring any manufacturing back to the USA? If you were building a factory would YOU want to build in Hillary's Village?
2) Self defense is not war mongering. Even if you think Iraq was no threat, they've
gone from 50,000 killed per year under Saddam to 50,000 killed in the time since.
It may be the lesser of two evils, but this evil is a LOT less. Don't forget that all
the Democrats WANTED the war in Iraq. They just don't want to stick around and WIN it.
3) Wanting free trade with other nations is not a sign of xenophobia or racism nor
is appointing the first two black Sec's of State.
4) 3 Documented cases of waterboarding in the GWT is not a pattern of Communist style torture. Overall, enemy combatants have been given better treatment than domestic felons.
5) People have more stuff than they ever have. The NY Times, which is NOT GOP
friendly, ran an op-ed explaining that consumption by the top fifth of the
population by income is only twice that of the bottom fifth. How many other
countries can come close to that?? Yes, there's a big mortgage problem out there, but before lending homes to poor people was "predatory lending" the Dems were pushing the banks to give those loans.
6) We've even cut greenhouse gas emissions for hippies who still believe in that crap.
Yes, the GOP should cut government spending and get rid of dumb-ass shit like
Social Security and Medicare but they don't have the votes to make it happen.
Uncle Sam collects about $17,000 per worker, most of which goes to social
programs that no one would ever need if their taxes were less. It won't stop
no matter who is in power until the public realizes the true cost.
The potential for abuse is there and we've already seen some of that, but the people who are foaming at the mouth about privacy are first in line to surrender every other right: free speech, property rights, free trade, firearms, etc. They want everything to be illegal but they're shocked when the government tries to catch that illegal activity. Most of the protection you want would come from repealing intrusive laws that make everyone a criminal in the first place.
"Why are we allowing them to make LIFE OR DEATH DECISIONS based on the [bleep] profit motive?"
I trust a company with a reputation to defend a lot more than the federal government when it comes to life and death. Look at the FDA.
I don't like MicroSoft but they do pay $6,000,000,000 in income taxes per year on a net income of $14,000,000,000. (via Yahoo Finance. 2007 numbers) Do you seriously think they are not paying their share??? That's $20 for every man, woman, and child in the whole freaking country and they are only ONE company!
Slashdot Mirror
I have been arguing for years that the federal government should set up a bureaucracy to govern the flow of ip packets since they travel tubes in every state. It's only fair that the tube usage should be regulated by fair politicians instead of allowing greedy citizens (i.e. DMCA violators) to hog them. I am so glad you agree!
When one wrong = 1.5 lefts?
Once again, funny + true = flamebait.
There's no problem if you earned the money. If you do gamble responsibly you are one of the very few. There are people spending their rent money at blackjack tables. You are equating poverty with eligibility for public assistance. You can't do that.
Well, if you're going to put it that way then yes. Why should the government take money that a working person might need for food, shelter, or medicine and give it to someone else for entertainment? Who is wealthier? The guy working everyday or the guy going to the casino? Besides, gambling isn't really entertainment. It's just conning people into thinking they're going to hit the jackpot. (Which is fine if they are blowing their OWN money.)
Many tax payers live more humbly than the tax receivers because they had to work for the money they have. Many people on federal assistance blow the money because they know more is coming. If you disagree with that statement you're just not paying attention.
It's immoral to take money from someone who doesn't get to spend enough time with his family because he works 50 hours a week and hand it to someone to blow on a gambling habit. Someone asking for public assistance shouldn't waste money. If you disagree you can start a charity that buses people to casinos and hands them buckets of cash without forcing taxpayers to participate.
I still want a law that puts casino patrons on a public assistance black list.
What you want would just result in tyranny by the largest plurality.
I was waiting for a story about delayed messaging for procrastinators.
I didn't realize it was a register access deal. I generally have a rosier picture of the economy than the barber shop and those numbers even surprised me but I don't blame anyone for being skeptical of statistics, especially in a political discussion.
The article refers to quintiles of households by income, with the poorest spending $10,678/person/year and richest spending $22,536/person/year. The average household size is 1.7 for the lowest quintile and 3.1 for highest.
Funny stuff, but we ALREADY import enough cocaine to ski on without the trade agreement. We need to treat Colombia well. They have been one of our best allies and all they are asking for is an open market.
>>1) Unemployment is historically low.
>This is correct, but it is no good enough if your home is going to be repossessed.
What prevents home foreclosure like employment??
>What did ever Iraq do to the US?
THEY WERE SHOOTING AT OUR PILOTS DAILY!! Just because they weren't very good at it
doesn't make it all better.
>You were lied to...
Is it the President Bush's fault he believed all the Democrats telling him that Iraq had WMD's?
>...Guantanamo as one of the most egregious violations of human rights by a liberal democracy...
You never heard of the Japanese internment in WWII? Those were not people picked up after trying to
kill US Soldiers or Afghan civilians like the Guantanamo residents. Why can't we hold enemy combatants
until the war on terror is over? In WWII did we release captured Germans, hand them a rifle and tell them good
luck in their next battle?
He almost started a shooting war with Russia over f***king airport in Kosovo.
More seriously, there would be less trade imbalance if the Democrats would support a free trade agreement with Colombia so they could buy from us. How will the Democrats' policies of sky-high taxes and industry hostility bring any manufacturing back to the USA? If you were building a factory would YOU want to build in Hillary's Village?
1) Unemployment is historically low.
2) Self defense is not war mongering. Even if you think Iraq was no threat, they've gone from 50,000 killed per year under Saddam to 50,000 killed in the time since. It may be the lesser of two evils, but this evil is a LOT less. Don't forget that all the Democrats WANTED the war in Iraq. They just don't want to stick around and WIN it.
3) Wanting free trade with other nations is not a sign of xenophobia or racism nor is appointing the first two black Sec's of State.
4) 3 Documented cases of waterboarding in the GWT is not a pattern of Communist style torture. Overall, enemy combatants have been given better treatment than domestic felons.
5) People have more stuff than they ever have. The NY Times, which is NOT GOP friendly, ran an op-ed explaining that consumption by the top fifth of the population by income is only twice that of the bottom fifth. How many other countries can come close to that?? Yes, there's a big mortgage problem out there, but before lending homes to poor people was "predatory lending" the Dems were pushing the banks to give those loans.
6) We've even cut greenhouse gas emissions for hippies who still believe in that crap.
Yes, the GOP should cut government spending and get rid of dumb-ass shit like Social Security and Medicare but they don't have the votes to make it happen. Uncle Sam collects about $17,000 per worker, most of which goes to social programs that no one would ever need if their taxes were less. It won't stop no matter who is in power until the public realizes the true cost.
The potential for abuse is there and we've already seen some of that, but the people who are foaming at the mouth about privacy are first in line to surrender every other right: free speech, property rights, free trade, firearms, etc. They want everything to be illegal but they're shocked when the government tries to catch that illegal activity. Most of the protection you want would come from repealing intrusive laws that make everyone a criminal in the first place.
Indeed.
I read 30 posts and this one was the only one that had information beyond someone's gut reaction.
"Why are we allowing them to make LIFE OR DEATH DECISIONS based on the [bleep] profit motive?"
I trust a company with a reputation to defend a lot more than the federal government when it comes to life and death. Look at the FDA.
I don't like MicroSoft but they do pay $6,000,000,000 in income taxes per year on a net income of $14,000,000,000. (via Yahoo Finance. 2007 numbers) Do you seriously think they are not paying their share??? That's $20 for every man, woman, and child in the whole freaking country and they are only ONE company!
Try running a Jew in an Saudi election.
Why, do you think that would give it more female penetration?
*No one is noone for Slashdotters.