It doesn't, but the nation, as a whole, is much better off if everyone is provided for than if it isn't. Take schooling, for instance. Nowhere in the Bill of Rights does it state that education should be mandatory. But it is, because it's well known that the more educated the people are, the more money they'll make, and then the more money they'll pay back in taxes.
Now expand that to basic health care. You can either half unhealthy workers who may or may not be able to hold down a job, or healthy workers who _should_ be able to hold down a job. This also means more people are working and making money than they are sitting in a bed with three herniated discs and no feeling in their legs and unable to hold down a job
Now take a look at welfare. On the surface, it looks like you're paying Cletus to get drunk and not do anything. But you're also provided for his children that do NOT have to turn out like him. It is very likely that Cletus wouldn't work whether or not you gave him money, but at least this way, his kids have food and have the potential to succeed in school and eventually in life.
All you need after this is free college and society, as a whole, is much better off. You can think of it this way: if you buy a field and let it to itself, of course plants are going to grow. But if you spend a bit more money and fertilize it, its going to have much better returns than if you left it to its own devices.
But then again, I'm not an economist. It makes sense to me, but I've been known to be wrong in the past.
OpenOffice takes around 50 seconds to load on my box (Athlon XP 1900+, 512MB DDR, 40gb 7200RPM harddrive). Everything else opens like lightning, but OO takes forever. I can't figure out why.
Then Google has a pretty easy solution: don't offer it to the Europeans. If the EU is that concerned about it, then that's fine, it's their right, but Google doesn't HAVE to offer it to you. They probably won't lose any money on it, considering how much they'd end up 'losing' if they COULDN'T target their ads towards you.
(By 'losing' I mean "theoretically could have made but didn't". I'm sure there's a proper term for it, but I haven't the slightest idea as to what that may be.
Uhh, technically, as an American, he has ever right to try to change this country to suit his needs and opinions. That is one of the most fundamental of all laws that our Constitution grants us.
I wasn't referring to that. I was referring to the destruction of all morality for the sake of making a buck and meeting the bottom line. To hell with the environment: that's not profitable. Forget the social welfare: we can make much more money off of mindless consumer drones than elevating educational and social standards.
A society such as this will eventually rot from the inside and fall apart. Corruption isn't the only problem affecting capitalism. Religion won't completely fill this gap because it has lost touch with the present. I don't know the answer, but I can plainly see the problem.
I'm not anti-capitalist. I'm not pro-socialist. They both have problems that affect them somewhere along the line. I'm just stating that something is wrong and we, collectively, need to arrive at a solution within the next few hundred years or we'll be in serious shit.
Well, someone needs to correct the repercussions of the telecommunications history of monopoly. They may be broken up into much smaller segments, now, but in most places, your choice falls down to only having one company. If the local government were to introduce the capital to start (or run) a new telco for each area then privatize it after it recouped it's losses, it would introduce a new game in town and help alleviate the problem of extremely high initial costs.
Unless you can think of anyone else crazy enough to do something like this with the knowledge they probably won't make any money from it...
Oh, don't sound so condescending. Capitalism and its unchecked greed can cause just as many problems as a socialistic society. They're just different problems.
But this isn't regulation. This is competition. This is like a judge of a contest only getting one entry and saying 'ah, well, I'll just enter myself AND continue judging, then!'
It is certainly possible that the judge would remain unbiased if any confrontations were to flare up, but we can't count on that.
Okay, so we're going to tell civilians in Nanking that the civilians in Nagasaki and Hiroshima were innocent. All that proves is that mankind remains bound to misplaced hatreds no matter the facts.
If you follow strict set of rules and guidelines, it's not bribery, it's lobbying, and thus is legal. Otherwise, it's illegal and everyone gets in trouble.
I'm not sure anyone thinks that. While I don't agree with it, the law is probably intended to keep all drunk people off the road, no matter what. Who cares if someone got 4 DUI's before they killed someone vs. someone who never had a single DUI before they killed someone? The end result is the same: someone is dead and those rat bastards need to be hung by their own intestines.
He's just pointing out that they're shady creatures of dubious nature. He wasn't saying the U.N. was any worse than the U.S., but that they both lack any true grounding in any respectable morality.
I don't forsee the editor being too miffed about being partially responsible for negative PR for Microsoft. Hell, I'm a Windows user and even I wouldn't care one way or the other.
But if they want to name their company Taxle (Titanium axle), they're well within their rights to do so. It's similar to yours, yes, but that's because both companies were idiots and chose a generic name for themselves/their products.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't we have some terrorists to be finding and stopping before they can kill us all? Or even rapists and murderers fleeing across state lines?
Just seems like the FBI has their priorities a bit out of place, here...
It doesn't, but the nation, as a whole, is much better off if everyone is provided for than if it isn't. Take schooling, for instance. Nowhere in the Bill of Rights does it state that education should be mandatory. But it is, because it's well known that the more educated the people are, the more money they'll make, and then the more money they'll pay back in taxes.
Now expand that to basic health care. You can either half unhealthy workers who may or may not be able to hold down a job, or healthy workers who _should_ be able to hold down a job. This also means more people are working and making money than they are sitting in a bed with three herniated discs and no feeling in their legs and unable to hold down a job
Now take a look at welfare. On the surface, it looks like you're paying Cletus to get drunk and not do anything. But you're also provided for his children that do NOT have to turn out like him. It is very likely that Cletus wouldn't work whether or not you gave him money, but at least this way, his kids have food and have the potential to succeed in school and eventually in life.
All you need after this is free college and society, as a whole, is much better off. You can think of it this way: if you buy a field and let it to itself, of course plants are going to grow. But if you spend a bit more money and fertilize it, its going to have much better returns than if you left it to its own devices.
But then again, I'm not an economist. It makes sense to me, but I've been known to be wrong in the past.
Crap, I thought he was saying bulls. Here I was thinking he was a rancher of some sort.
Well, you should probably drag your computer back out of that safe you buried under a nuclear power plant. No wonder you're not getting anything.
OpenOffice takes around 50 seconds to load on my box (Athlon XP 1900+, 512MB DDR, 40gb 7200RPM harddrive). Everything else opens like lightning, but OO takes forever. I can't figure out why.
Then Google has a pretty easy solution: don't offer it to the Europeans. If the EU is that concerned about it, then that's fine, it's their right, but Google doesn't HAVE to offer it to you. They probably won't lose any money on it, considering how much they'd end up 'losing' if they COULDN'T target their ads towards you.
(By 'losing' I mean "theoretically could have made but didn't". I'm sure there's a proper term for it, but I haven't the slightest idea as to what that may be.
Used them before. They weren't bad, but the server died around 5 times a day - if not more.
This is like a judge of a contest
Court system what?
Uhh, technically, as an American, he has ever right to try to change this country to suit his needs and opinions. That is one of the most fundamental of all laws that our Constitution grants us.
I wasn't referring to that. I was referring to the destruction of all morality for the sake of making a buck and meeting the bottom line. To hell with the environment: that's not profitable. Forget the social welfare: we can make much more money off of mindless consumer drones than elevating educational and social standards.
A society such as this will eventually rot from the inside and fall apart. Corruption isn't the only problem affecting capitalism. Religion won't completely fill this gap because it has lost touch with the present. I don't know the answer, but I can plainly see the problem.
I'm not anti-capitalist. I'm not pro-socialist. They both have problems that affect them somewhere along the line. I'm just stating that something is wrong and we, collectively, need to arrive at a solution within the next few hundred years or we'll be in serious shit.
Well, someone needs to correct the repercussions of the telecommunications history of monopoly. They may be broken up into much smaller segments, now, but in most places, your choice falls down to only having one company. If the local government were to introduce the capital to start (or run) a new telco for each area then privatize it after it recouped it's losses, it would introduce a new game in town and help alleviate the problem of extremely high initial costs.
Unless you can think of anyone else crazy enough to do something like this with the knowledge they probably won't make any money from it...
Oh, don't sound so condescending. Capitalism and its unchecked greed can cause just as many problems as a socialistic society. They're just different problems.
But this isn't regulation. This is competition. This is like a judge of a contest only getting one entry and saying 'ah, well, I'll just enter myself AND continue judging, then!'
It is certainly possible that the judge would remain unbiased if any confrontations were to flare up, but we can't count on that.
Actually, I'd posit the notion that a majority of Americans don't really give a damn. And since it's the status quo, it won't change.
I'm not for it (or against it, really; I see both pros and cons to a local community running their own telco), I'm just making a point.
The government's purpose was not to provide us with cheap utilities. That doesn't mean it can't change.
and I bet he's way smarter than you...
Okay, so we're going to tell civilians in Nanking that the civilians in Nagasaki and Hiroshima were innocent. All that proves is that mankind remains bound to misplaced hatreds no matter the facts.
If you follow strict set of rules and guidelines, it's not bribery, it's lobbying, and thus is legal. Otherwise, it's illegal and everyone gets in trouble.
No, they control things legally. They do it immorally, however.
I'm not sure anyone thinks that. While I don't agree with it, the law is probably intended to keep all drunk people off the road, no matter what. Who cares if someone got 4 DUI's before they killed someone vs. someone who never had a single DUI before they killed someone? The end result is the same: someone is dead and those rat bastards need to be hung by their own intestines.
He's just pointing out that they're shady creatures of dubious nature. He wasn't saying the U.N. was any worse than the U.S., but that they both lack any true grounding in any respectable morality.
I concede your point. Shortly after I submitted my post I reflected on that fact, but the damage was already done.
No, that's been around since Nixon, but thanks for playing.
I don't forsee the editor being too miffed about being partially responsible for negative PR for Microsoft. Hell, I'm a Windows user and even I wouldn't care one way or the other.
But if they want to name their company Taxle (Titanium axle), they're well within their rights to do so. It's similar to yours, yes, but that's because both companies were idiots and chose a generic name for themselves/their products.