feudal plutocracy that libertarian ideals inevitably lead to.
We agree on something!!:)
It is capitalist with a stabilizing influence of socialism where you are never punished for getting rich, nor are you punished for being poor or middle class.
Except that I see "ever-increasing control of the economy" as the end result of the government-mandated desire for "some social justice, some equity, some defense for the common man against the abuse of those in power."
Sadly, I see only feudal plutocracy as the ultimate (but not linear from here directly to there) outcome.
How fscking difficult is it for an allegedly smart person (no knowingly stupid people visit Slashdot, do they?) to look at at tax schedule and see that rich people pay higher more tax rates than not-rich people?
If you want them to actually pay what the tax tables say they should pay, then close many of the 10 jillion loopholes in the tax code (which is what Reagan tried to do in 1986).
reduced to zero, they'd lay off all their workers, who would then be *really pissed* at the elitist bastard protesters.
Then the workers would mostly vote Republican since the Republicans would say, "You had a job until those elitist left-wing bastards destroyed your jobs."
You've got to have lots of disposable income to buy Smart Phones and drink really expensive coffee. Which pretty much completely negates the whole We're So Poor And Downtrodden meme.
If it actually were 1% then the police would be part of the 99%.
This reminds me of the riots at the 1968 Democrat Convention. College punks raging against the System and getting beaten down by (literally) Blue Collar workers.
The 99% needs to learn to not be asleep at the wheel half the time
The 99% needs to stop wanting to be numbed into oblivion by Bud Light and the Vast Wasteland (more now than just television).
But then... maybe 99% of the population wants to be numb because they are -- to one degree or another -- followers. After all, we are social animals, and social animals organize themselves into hierarchies.
Realizing, as another poster wrote, that they are the upper crust of the richest nation on earth (like that black who guy knelt down on Wall Street, screaming, "I'm a law student at GWU, my parents make $350,000 a year, and the bank is repossessing our $500,000 mansion!" when the bank actually wasn't.)
However, the few times 'other' people come into focus, it's as "invaders" who did nothing more than occupy some land until the good guys finally restored order and threw them out.
I was taught back in the 1970s that the Spaniards were brutish to conquer the Moors and the Aztecs and the Christians were downright Evil to invade the Holy Land. Maybe an anti-Catholic bias?
How does the existence Christian crusaders negate the existence of Muslim crusaders
Who says I did?
But I do know that while in school the evils of the Christian Crusaders was repeated many times, while even the very *fact* that Muslims invaded Holy Land was *completely* glossed over as if they had always been there. And this was 35 years ago in a sectarian school with no Anti-Christian bias.
Likewise the Eeeevils of the Iberian Reconquista.
Thus, I'm betting that most everyone else in the US was not taught the same things.
As opposed to the Muslim invasions of the Palestine, Egypt, whatever the rest of North Africa was called 1300 years ago, Iberia, France, Babylon, Persia, Afghanistan, India, etc, etc, etc?
After explaining to an otherwise educated person (i.e. educated stupid) for the fifth time that when you ask him to "right-click with the right mouse button" it is not the same as "double-click (with the left)" you start thinking about remote desktop yourself.
Three cheers for the CLI !! You IM the luser commands to run and have them paste in the results.
As if to illustrate Cleeves’ point, Shaw tells a story from his days as a young, just-out-of-college engineer at GM in 1988. “I came up with this change to an internal part of the air conditioning compressor,” he says. It was part of a project to switch over to a new, environmentally safer coolant. “It passed every test. I was rocking and rolling. I was going to change the world. My boss said, ‘Okay, why don’t you get on the plane and go down to the plant and tell them all about it.’ So I go down there and I start to give my spiel. And the plant manager says, ‘Let me give you a tour of the factory.’
“He shows me where the blank aluminum comes in and where it’s machined and processed. And then he takes me down this line of machines. There are 320 steps and each machine does one step and it’s really fast and precise. And at the end of the line this part rolls off. And he says ‘The part you want to change is machined on step number two. And on every machine after step number two, that’s where they grab the part and hold it to do all the subsequent machine steps. So we’d have to retool 320 machines. Is your change that good? How much more are people willing to pay for their cars based on the improved performance from your little part change, versus what it’s going to cost the company?’ That was a really interesting lesson for me.”
Slashdot Mirror
feudal plutocracy that libertarian ideals inevitably lead to.
We agree on something!! :)
It is capitalist with a stabilizing influence of socialism where you are never punished for getting rich, nor are you punished for being poor or middle class.
Except that I see "ever-increasing control of the economy" as the end result of the government-mandated desire for "some social justice, some equity, some defense for the common man against the abuse of those in power."
Sadly, I see only feudal plutocracy as the ultimate (but not linear from here directly to there) outcome.
to match (at least) the same tax rate as the middle class pays.
Sigh.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States#Year_2011_income_brackets_and_tax_rates
How fscking difficult is it for an allegedly smart person (no knowingly stupid people visit Slashdot, do they?) to look at at tax schedule and see that rich people pay higher more tax rates than not-rich people?
If you want them to actually pay what the tax tables say they should pay, then close many of the 10 jillion loopholes in the tax code (which is what Reagan tried to do in 1986).
What else -- other than fascism -- is the ultimate result of ever-increasing government control of the economy?
Typical leftist response: "Why aren't you voting for us? Are you too stupid to realize that the economy is all that matters?"
As if:
What's OWS? (Google isn't very helpful.)
I'd say that there are degrees of followiness, which is why I did not use the word "sheeple".
reduced to zero, they'd lay off all their workers, who would then be *really pissed* at the elitist bastard protesters.
Then the workers would mostly vote Republican since the Republicans would say, "You had a job until those elitist left-wing bastards destroyed your jobs."
+5, Insightful.
You've got to have lots of disposable income to buy Smart Phones and drink really expensive coffee. Which pretty much completely negates the whole We're So Poor And Downtrodden meme.
It does make that Libertarian a hypocrite IF he's glad that those government-coerced "things" exist.
I'm sure the country is sharply divided about which is the 80% and which is the 19%.
If it actually were 1% then the police would be part of the 99%.
This reminds me of the riots at the 1968 Democrat Convention. College punks raging against the System and getting beaten down by (literally) Blue Collar workers.
Florida's government imposed a new fee to reimburse them for the revenue they lost
Probably because they have fixed expenses of their own which they have to pay no matter how much income they receive.
What exactly can I do with Bitcoins? Pay for groceries? The mortgage? Light bill? Etc, etc.
The 99% needs to learn to not be asleep at the wheel half the time
The 99% needs to stop wanting to be numbed into oblivion by Bud Light and the Vast Wasteland (more now than just television).
But then... maybe 99% of the population wants to be numb because they are -- to one degree or another -- followers. After all, we are social animals, and social animals organize themselves into hierarchies.
the losing side in the class war
Look really closely at the Occupiers, and I bet you find a bunch of elitist bastards from Ivy League and other top-tier Universities.
+5, Insightful.
Realizing, as another poster wrote, that they are the upper crust of the richest nation on earth (like that black who guy knelt down on Wall Street, screaming, "I'm a law student at GWU, my parents make $350,000 a year, and the bank is repossessing our $500,000 mansion!" when the bank actually wasn't.)
Boo Fscking Hoo!
However, the few times 'other' people come into focus, it's as "invaders" who did nothing more than occupy some land until the good guys finally restored order and threw them out.
I was taught back in the 1970s that the Spaniards were brutish to conquer the Moors and the Aztecs and the Christians were downright Evil to invade the Holy Land. Maybe an anti-Catholic bias?
Nothing about how others were temporary invaders.
Is Crocodile Dundee too old to put up a fight? (From seeing his age at IMDB, I guess he is...)
What you are describing is actually a pro-christian bias.
Eurocentric, not pro-Christian.
How does the existence Christian crusaders negate the existence of Muslim crusaders
Who says I did?
But I do know that while in school the evils of the Christian Crusaders was repeated many times, while even the very *fact* that Muslims invaded Holy Land was *completely* glossed over as if they had always been there. And this was 35 years ago in a sectarian school with no Anti-Christian bias.
Likewise the Eeeevils of the Iberian Reconquista.
Thus, I'm betting that most everyone else in the US was not taught the same things.
Screws up pagination, image location, etc. That's my guess.
Christian "crusades"
As opposed to the Muslim invasions of the Palestine, Egypt, whatever the rest of North Africa was called 1300 years ago, Iberia, France, Babylon, Persia, Afghanistan, India, etc, etc, etc?
After explaining to an otherwise educated person (i.e. educated stupid) for the fifth time that when you ask him to "right-click with the right mouse button" it is not the same as "double-click (with the left)" you start thinking about remote desktop yourself.
Three cheers for the CLI !! You IM the luser commands to run and have them paste in the results.
upper management will kill it because it's: too expensive
Well shit on a stick, dude. If it's too expensive then it's not a very damned good idea!!!
but can't for some reason or another
Like manufacturing practicality?
From TFA:
As if to illustrate Cleeves’ point, Shaw tells a story from his days as a young, just-out-of-college engineer at GM in 1988. “I came up with this change to an internal part of the air conditioning compressor,” he says. It was part of a project to switch over to a new, environmentally safer coolant. “It passed every test. I was rocking and rolling. I was going to change the world. My boss said, ‘Okay, why don’t you get on the plane and go down to the plant and tell them all about it.’ So I go down there and I start to give my spiel. And the plant manager says, ‘Let me give you a tour of the factory.’
“He shows me where the blank aluminum comes in and where it’s machined and processed. And then he takes me down this line of machines. There are 320 steps and each machine does one step and it’s really fast and precise. And at the end of the line this part rolls off. And he says ‘The part you want to change is machined on step number two. And on every machine after step number two, that’s where they grab the part and hold it to do all the subsequent machine steps. So we’d have to retool 320 machines. Is your change that good? How much more are people willing to pay for their cars based on the improved performance from your little part change, versus what it’s going to cost the company?’ That was a really interesting lesson for me.”