So keep plugging your network cables or whatever you do from your 40th percentile income bracket, and leave the thinking to people who went to college.
Wow, no vitriol there.
Just know that engineer types like you are something of a joke in math/CS circles. Like a dusty farmer in overalls driving his tractor around feeling proud that he's doing something productive for society and disdaining the far-off castle-tower academics who just drain resources, while unknown to him the genetically modified seeds he's planting are increasing yields more than even inhuman hard work ever could.
Great. Can you tell me what "genetically modified seeds" you've given us (or the general state of the art) so I can thank you personally oh great one from the 90th percentile income bracket?
And to the OP, just know that not everyone of us who went to college and uses their brain instead of their back is an elitist child, that some of us appreciate the fact that just about everything is relative and arbitrary, and in the end, what we are ultimately measured by is rarely our IQ or our wallets.
And there lies the crux of the failed impeachment against Clinton.
Failed? You are aware that Clinton was impeached right?
Clinton asked the judge to define sexual relations. He then responded according to that definition.
I'm curious - did you just make that up right now, or did you read it somewhere? Either way, it's not true. First of all, there were more than one count of perjury (4 parts, but 6 total I think, none of which involved Clinton asking a judge to define something and then answering affirmative or negative). Clinton's lawyers later made some of the same arguments you are implying.
You know, regardless of how you feel about this particular issue, it should make everyone ill when someone presents something as fact that is purely imaginary - especially when it deals with history. I'm aggravated even more by the fact that you are moderated +5 insightful.
If the tables were turned and Hillary had an insurmountable lead while Obama won the non-binding Florida and Michigan primaries, do you think for a second she'd be lifting a finger to get those delegates seated?
Hmmm...this sounds eerily familiar...where have I heard this before?
I'm a bit of topic, but you missed the mark there. What they (the WEO) said was, "The financial market crisis that erupted in August 2007 has developed into the largest financial shock since the Great Depression, inflicting heavy damage on markets and institutions at the core of the financial system."
However, if you read on, you realize this is just a bit of journalistic bluster since the WEO is predicting the US economy to grow this year (just grow slowly). Growing slowly isn't a recession at all - I believe the most commonly accepted definition of a recession is two consecutive shrinking quarters. We technically haven't even had one quarter like that yet.
Admittedly, we could still have a recession and grow this year (if the economy came back strong enough in the last quarter), but this wouldn't be the steepest recession since the GD. In fact, it might not even be the steepest of this decade.
I'm not saying things aren't looking gloomy right now (my portfolio sure does), but I doubt it's quite as bad as some sensationalist would have you believe.
Well...if you think you should have your education/health care paid for because others had their education/health care paid for - aren't you the one with the sense of entitlement?
Which generation is going to stand up declare that they don't need their parents/children/grandchildren to take care of them? Shouldn't it be ours?
I couldn't reason out from this link what spending they were talking about. Just government spending? Also, I guess it depends on the details of what "basket of goods" they're selecting for the PPP adjustment, but I'm not convinced about the gap widening as you say - the weakening dollar might have a dramatic effect here.
Nobody said going to the dentist every once in a while was cheap:)
Seriously though, what is your source for that? I'm not doubting it, in fact it makes perfect sense from what I know about health care services in both countries (my mother is English), but I would like to see the breakdown.
I can't say what you're tax rate would be in the US because we have a progressive rate. You can take a look here though. You can see average breakdowns for state/local tax rates here. Can't find a site for average property tax rates. This site give a brief rundown of other kinds of taxes and how they vary in general from state to state.
I know we've gone pretty far off topic here, but there is one point I'd like to make. Here in the US at least, no one really knows what their true tax burden is. There are a number of reasons for this, but I think the most overlooked one is the way taxes roll down hill. That is, things that you buy, apart from any explicit tax applicable for that good or service, has a built in tax as well. Corporations who sell goods and services generally try to do so at a profit. If they do, the "corporate tax" they owe isn't picked up by the corporation, it's passed on to the consumer. Just as when a renter pays the property tax with each rent check they make, so do folks who buy a widget pay the "corporate tax" for selling that widget. Corporations also pay taxes on behalf of the people they employ which is either passed on to consumers or to the employee (most likely both).
There are a thousand ways each dollar you earn is taxed in a myriad of subtle ways. Most countries, I imagine, work the same way. My point here is that how can anyone say they are satisfied with the tax they pay (and by proxy the government services they receive) unless they have a full understanding of what their true tax burden is - in fact no one can make this judgment without tax transparency.
Like I said above, I have no idea what my true tax burden is, but I'd be surprised if I didn't pay more than 60 cents for every dollar I earn directly to the government.
Ok, let me get this straight. You did not cooperate with the new developers, or "teach them your code". You not only actively encouraged others to do the same, but also look for new jobs. You then in fact left the company - without, it seems, adequate documentation - and somehow you think they sold you out?
Yeah, I'm sure you're both geniuses. Now read the article - it's about physiological "slow" development of the cortex (not even that really, the summary is badly done), not intellectually slow development.
1) I contend that, for the most part, an employee (especially a knowledge/creative employee) does add value simply by being at a company for another year. I suppose it depends quite a bit on what the company does exactly, but for a product development company, a junior person who has experience in the environment and in the product for 3 years has a much greater present value than that of a newcomer, even if the newcomer has accumulated much more general experience. This changes as the newcomer has been there a while though, which oddly enough, enforces the idea that it is probably wise to reward another year's experience at that company.
2) The fed is very inflation-sensitive (they have been for the last 20 years), and I think they've done a pretty fair job (relatively speaking).
My local PBS broadcasted a two part series last night on the struggle between Keynes and Hayek economic theories that discussed exactly this. While no global economy is anywhere near 100% capitalist (including the US and GB), it's obvious that the Keynesians (economists who held that the economy was a machine whose mechanisms could be/should be adjusted by governments) have been ultimately (and decidedly) proved wrong.
Maybe, but Putin didn't loose his dogs on Khodorkovsky simply for being rich, he did it because Khodorkovsky was throwing that wealth at the opposition party. This also had the effect of making Yukos a state run enterprise. These actions do indeed fall well to the right on the political spectrum.
Would you be amazed if I used the argument that we are better off than Europe then? Take a look at your own framework for collecting and distributing data on "suspected" criminals, along with other powers not seen here in the US since WWII (or even then).
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, no vitriol there.
Just know that engineer types like you are something of a joke in math/CS circles. Like a dusty farmer in overalls driving his tractor around feeling proud that he's doing something productive for society and disdaining the far-off castle-tower academics who just drain resources, while unknown to him the genetically modified seeds he's planting are increasing yields more than even inhuman hard work ever could.
Great. Can you tell me what "genetically modified seeds" you've given us (or the general state of the art) so I can thank you personally oh great one from the 90th percentile income bracket?
And to the OP, just know that not everyone of us who went to college and uses their brain instead of their back is an elitist child, that some of us appreciate the fact that just about everything is relative and arbitrary, and in the end, what we are ultimately measured by is rarely our IQ or our wallets.
You're compensating for a huge vagina?
Failed? You are aware that Clinton was impeached right?
Clinton asked the judge to define sexual relations. He then responded according to that definition.
I'm curious - did you just make that up right now, or did you read it somewhere? Either way, it's not true. First of all, there were more than one count of perjury (4 parts, but 6 total I think, none of which involved Clinton asking a judge to define something and then answering affirmative or negative). Clinton's lawyers later made some of the same arguments you are implying.
You know, regardless of how you feel about this particular issue, it should make everyone ill when someone presents something as fact that is purely imaginary - especially when it deals with history. I'm aggravated even more by the fact that you are moderated +5 insightful.
Hmmm...this sounds eerily familiar...where have I heard this before?
However, if you read on, you realize this is just a bit of journalistic bluster since the WEO is predicting the US economy to grow this year (just grow slowly). Growing slowly isn't a recession at all - I believe the most commonly accepted definition of a recession is two consecutive shrinking quarters. We technically haven't even had one quarter like that yet.
Admittedly, we could still have a recession and grow this year (if the economy came back strong enough in the last quarter), but this wouldn't be the steepest recession since the GD. In fact, it might not even be the steepest of this decade.
I'm not saying things aren't looking gloomy right now (my portfolio sure does), but I doubt it's quite as bad as some sensationalist would have you believe.
Which generation is going to stand up declare that they don't need their parents/children/grandchildren to take care of them? Shouldn't it be ours?
I couldn't reason out from this link what spending they were talking about. Just government spending? Also, I guess it depends on the details of what "basket of goods" they're selecting for the PPP adjustment, but I'm not convinced about the gap widening as you say - the weakening dollar might have a dramatic effect here.
Seriously though, what is your source for that? I'm not doubting it, in fact it makes perfect sense from what I know about health care services in both countries (my mother is English), but I would like to see the breakdown.
agreed. very funny.
I know we've gone pretty far off topic here, but there is one point I'd like to make. Here in the US at least, no one really knows what their true tax burden is. There are a number of reasons for this, but I think the most overlooked one is the way taxes roll down hill. That is, things that you buy, apart from any explicit tax applicable for that good or service, has a built in tax as well. Corporations who sell goods and services generally try to do so at a profit. If they do, the "corporate tax" they owe isn't picked up by the corporation, it's passed on to the consumer. Just as when a renter pays the property tax with each rent check they make, so do folks who buy a widget pay the "corporate tax" for selling that widget. Corporations also pay taxes on behalf of the people they employ which is either passed on to consumers or to the employee (most likely both).
There are a thousand ways each dollar you earn is taxed in a myriad of subtle ways. Most countries, I imagine, work the same way. My point here is that how can anyone say they are satisfied with the tax they pay (and by proxy the government services they receive) unless they have a full understanding of what their true tax burden is - in fact no one can make this judgment without tax transparency.
Like I said above, I have no idea what my true tax burden is, but I'd be surprised if I didn't pay more than 60 cents for every dollar I earn directly to the government.
For more on Salter's opinions, see his personal blog at tubgirl.com or goatse.net.
Ok, let me get this straight. You did not cooperate with the new developers, or "teach them your code". You not only actively encouraged others to do the same, but also look for new jobs. You then in fact left the company - without, it seems, adequate documentation - and somehow you think they sold you out?
Wow.
Sounds like you really got screwed.
Yeah, I'm sure you're both geniuses. Now read the article - it's about physiological "slow" development of the cortex (not even that really, the summary is badly done), not intellectually slow development.
Not true.
2) The fed is very inflation-sensitive (they have been for the last 20 years), and I think they've done a pretty fair job (relatively speaking).
My local PBS broadcasted a two part series last night on the struggle between Keynes and Hayek economic theories that discussed exactly this. While no global economy is anywhere near 100% capitalist (including the US and GB), it's obvious that the Keynesians (economists who held that the economy was a machine whose mechanisms could be/should be adjusted by governments) have been ultimately (and decidedly) proved wrong.
Nope, can't say that I do. Could you source it for me?
Saudi Arabia is pumping as much as they can, however they are planning to increase their capacity over the next ten years.
Actually, I'm not sure the data supports this idea anymore. I think the theory with the most support these days is the collision theory.
Maybe, but Putin didn't loose his dogs on Khodorkovsky simply for being rich, he did it because Khodorkovsky was throwing that wealth at the opposition party. This also had the effect of making Yukos a state run enterprise. These actions do indeed fall well to the right on the political spectrum.
Nothing is really ever "tried and tested" until it's failed.
The British, for example, have a much lower threashold to search and sieze, as well as detain without trial. England is not alone however.
I guess what I'm saying, with about 5 minutes worth of research, is, it's not wise to throw stones if you live in a glass house.
Their really pushing the envelope on there site, aren't they. They're - I said it! Are you happy?
Personal responsibility? That's a pretty novel idea. Wonder if it'll catch on?
Yeah, I hate it when Americans generalize about the Chinese - almost as much as when Americans generalize about Americans.