Not all corporations, just the largest N percent. They hold undue power and influence for an entity that is not beholden to anyone but its own bottom line.
Re:low unemployment compared to europe
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I agree that opening trade and the free flow of labor is a good thing, but only if there is a way to ensure that people's human rights are being protected, and that environmental regulations are upheld to first-world standards. Otherwise, it will *always* be cheaper to go to China, where they don't care about human rights or the environment.
The WTO is widely seen by my fellow leftists as an evil entity. However, I can see it as a world trade regulator, if the influences of corporations are removed and it is chosen by a democratic vote. Imagine if the world could say to China or Saudi Arabia or Indonesia: "If you don't respect human rights based on what the world has agreed upon, and you don't provide this minimum environmental regulations, we will not trade with you." They would stop immediately.
If we *don't* do this, free trade will simply be a race to the bottom: The country with the lowest cost of living, the lowest respect for human rights, and the lowest environmental regulations will get all the jobs, and other countries will have to lower their standards in order to compete.
I think what will keep us fiscally healthy as certain types of jobs become more efficient to export is innovation, pure and simple. We need to encourage innovation and entrepreneurialism, which will not only create new jobs, but new TYPES of jobs, new fields, and new skills that we will have a distinct advantage in possessing.
And what happens when those skills get sent overseas? Are people in India or Korea any less creative than Americans?
What happens when China decides to stop taking our money, or stop exporting goods to us? We *need* a manufacturing sector. If China decides to invade Taiwan, where will we get our steel or semiconductors? This is a very real threat.
Finally, these "new industries" have extremely high costs of entry. What new industry would be possible? Biotech? Nanotech? Robotics? Space? How will a small business raise the hundreds of millions of dollars needed to start any of these businesses? Who the heck will buy carbon nanotubes if they don't do anything? And how the hell are we going to keep biotech open if we allow big companies to patent genes?
The answer isn't a "Creative" economy. That's bullshit. The only thing a creative economy will get us is more PHBs spouting jargon. There's only so much crap people will buy, especially when John Q. Sixpack lost his job and can't find anything in his field.
The economy of tomorrow is going to be... a service economy. Those are the *only* jobs that can't be exported, because it's kinda hard for someone in India to unclog your toilet or (increasingly) change your bedpan. Our economy will be based on the baby boomers retiring. There's already a *huge* nursing shortage, to the point where they're offering $10,000 signing bonuses and $50,000/year salaries.
If we want to save our country, we need to stop the culture of consumerism by REMOVING PERSONHOOD FOR CORPORATIONS and TAXING THE HELL OUT OF THEM. This is the only way we will prevent Wal-Mart from being the de facto retailer, selling things *not* made in America to people who *lost their fscking jobs* because it's cheaper to hire a person with no human rights in China or Bangladesh.
Great! Maybe I should set up a website to accept donations... Hrm... Expatriate-Me.com
Yeah. It pisses at me off when I see a "conserve natural resources" or "John Kerry for President" sticker on an SUV. If these people actually believed what they espoused on their car-asses, they'd be driving Honda Insights or a Prius.
The whole situation has me looking for another country to join.
Might I suggest New Zealand? That's where I'm running off to should Shrub be reelected. They're currently experiencing quite a shortage in IT labor. And imagine livinging in Lothlorien, or Rohan, or The Shire. Now that would be sweet.
Apple doesn't have access to my viewing choices that they can sell to people.
And, no, I don't download from their music store. I use it to sample music before pirating it.
Let's just say I don't like giving out information to people who don't need it and who will use it without permission. Radio Shack still thinks I live at 1234 fake street.
I've said it, my dad has said it, and I'm saying it again: If George Bush wins, it just shows that leftists have no place in this country. So we're moving to Canada or New Zealand, and you fascist bastards can have your damn country music and sport-utes.
Bush is an idiot. Tell me something I didn't know.
As for Kerry: If he opposed the war, why did he vote *for* it? If he really opposed the war, which anyone could see was unjust and idiotic from the very beginning (including my 85 year old WWII veteran REPUBLICAN grandfather), why did he not oppose it from the very first Senate vote? Answer: So he could get reelected.
Hoo-fuckin'-rah. Kerry says he supports environmental initiatives. How much of that do you think he'll get through Congress? How much of that will he get passed if he knows his corporate donors won't support him in 2008?
I want a candidate who doesn't support most favored nation status for China. A candidate who will remove personhood for corporations. A candidate who will put human rights and environmental standards above corporate interests or a "healthy economy."
Kerry *isn't* that person. So in all the ways *I* care about, he's *exactly* like Shrub.
Sounds like a deal. It's cheaper than lobbing attack ads at each other, and about as effective in choosing a president as an election; whoever is willing to fight the dirtiest wins.
What's the difference between you two? I mean, seriously, should I vote for the rich Yaley who was in Skull & Bones and went to Vietnam, or the rich Yaley who was in Skull & Bones who didn't go to Vietnam?
Better idea: decentralize taxation. Make each state pay dues to the federal government for services. That way you can have the taxes set on a state-by-state basis based on the living conditions of the state.
People who vote for third party candidates are people who don't give a shit who will run the country. No this party will win this election so only vote for them if you don't give a shit about how the country is run or who is running it.
The Corporations run the country. The Democrats and Republicans aren't doing anything other than providing a pleasant distraction for the populous. Neither party wants to change the status quo too much, but it still needs changing.
I was thinking of voting for Cobb, then the Democrats scared me into thinking of what four more years of George Bush would be. Yeah, they'd suck royally. If they got too bad, I could always leave for Canada.
Kerry's economic and social plans don't call for any more restrictions on corporations, and what few he does call for will be easily thwarted by the shills in Congress.
So now I'm back to voting for Cobb. In a swing state. I'd be scared, but when you have corporations funding studies to see how to advertise to children so they can more effectively nag their parents, we have bigger fish to fry than Shrub's Boondoggle War or Kerry's Bloated Health Care Plan.
1) Getting to Mars takes six months. And compared to the cost of getting to the new world (adjusting for inflation and new technology) it costs the same as it did to colonize the new world.
2) Mars has all the materials we need to construct habitats. Sure, we'll have to bring one to live in until we get a more permanent structure built, but we can make cinder block-like materials and mortar, not to mention metal tools to construct them with. *It's all there*. And with our modern knowledge of materials science, we can use it.
To use your turn of phrase: Mars is covered with thousands of square miles of top-quality virgin iron ore. And aluminum. And Gold. All at temperatures that make producing high-quality metal goods very easy using carbonic acid deposition.
Not only that, but all we'll need to bring to mars is a nuclear reactor and gas processors to provide enough fuel, water, and air for as many as 100 people. (which use technology and industrial chemical reactions that we've known about for over a century).
3) Crops have been grown in simulated martian soil, and grow like gangbusters in pure CO2, so long as pressure and temperature are maintained. Not only that, but they make oxygen, and automatically regulate themselves.
So, you see, the food, fuel and air can be provided for with current technology. As for human contact: It takes 40 minutes for a signal to get from Mars to Earth. Too long for a phone conversation, but not like the six months it took for a letter to go round trip from America to Europe. Anyone can communicate with anyone on earth via voicemail, email, or even video mail.
And even if it was harder than what the pilgrims had to endure, I'd still go.
I was trying to make the point that, since no one can be totally sure that *no one* in their family owned slaves, there's no reason everyone should pay for reparations.
Should all descendants of every Egyptian pay every Jew reparations for slavery? It's idiotic. Why not just drop the issue and move on, preventing discrimination as much as we can?
Re:um... I'd have a different perspective
on
Less Might Be More
·
· Score: 1
2000 Power Mac G4/400. Nothing's failed on it. Ever. I still have the original 10GB HD installed where the zip drive should be with an emergency boot system, TechTool Pro, and backups of my most important files.
Also, what about families who *didn't* own slaves since they arrived in America and have records of this, or have lost members of their family fighting in the civil war to end slavery?
In other words: I didn't do anything to any black people, and neither did my family as far back as the 1680s. Why the heck should my money go to pay for something I'm not even remotely close to being responsible for?
Company? Who said we were talking about a company? This is a state government. It would take them decades to change anything. Believe me, I've worked in state government before.
From the day I got an interview offer it took a month for them to schedule it. Then it took a month for them to decide, and then another month before I started. We moved offices and it took a month for them to clear up the cubicles and two whole days to move 20 computers.
I think their next solution should be web based. That way, any new hardware issues can be resolved simply by bringing in a new PC. I can't think of any function performed by the DMV that can't be accomplished through a series of web forms, other than actually taking the photos without handling CF cards or something.
Slashdot Mirror
Not all corporations, just the largest N percent. They hold undue power and influence for an entity that is not beholden to anyone but its own bottom line.
hidden cron file at your hosting company.
The WTO is widely seen by my fellow leftists as an evil entity. However, I can see it as a world trade regulator, if the influences of corporations are removed and it is chosen by a democratic vote. Imagine if the world could say to China or Saudi Arabia or Indonesia: "If you don't respect human rights based on what the world has agreed upon, and you don't provide this minimum environmental regulations, we will not trade with you." They would stop immediately.
If we *don't* do this, free trade will simply be a race to the bottom: The country with the lowest cost of living, the lowest respect for human rights, and the lowest environmental regulations will get all the jobs, and other countries will have to lower their standards in order to compete.
And what happens when those skills get sent overseas? Are people in India or Korea any less creative than Americans?
What happens when China decides to stop taking our money, or stop exporting goods to us? We *need* a manufacturing sector. If China decides to invade Taiwan, where will we get our steel or semiconductors? This is a very real threat.
Finally, these "new industries" have extremely high costs of entry. What new industry would be possible? Biotech? Nanotech? Robotics? Space? How will a small business raise the hundreds of millions of dollars needed to start any of these businesses? Who the heck will buy carbon nanotubes if they don't do anything? And how the hell are we going to keep biotech open if we allow big companies to patent genes?
The answer isn't a "Creative" economy. That's bullshit. The only thing a creative economy will get us is more PHBs spouting jargon. There's only so much crap people will buy, especially when John Q. Sixpack lost his job and can't find anything in his field.
The economy of tomorrow is going to be... a service economy. Those are the *only* jobs that can't be exported, because it's kinda hard for someone in India to unclog your toilet or (increasingly) change your bedpan. Our economy will be based on the baby boomers retiring. There's already a *huge* nursing shortage, to the point where they're offering $10,000 signing bonuses and $50,000/year salaries.
If we want to save our country, we need to stop the culture of consumerism by REMOVING PERSONHOOD FOR CORPORATIONS and TAXING THE HELL OUT OF THEM. This is the only way we will prevent Wal-Mart from being the de facto retailer, selling things *not* made in America to people who *lost their fscking jobs* because it's cheaper to hire a person with no human rights in China or Bangladesh.
Yeah. It pisses at me off when I see a "conserve natural resources" or "John Kerry for President" sticker on an SUV. If these people actually believed what they espoused on their car-asses, they'd be driving Honda Insights or a Prius.
Might I suggest New Zealand? That's where I'm running off to should Shrub be reelected. They're currently experiencing quite a shortage in IT labor. And imagine livinging in Lothlorien, or Rohan, or The Shire. Now that would be sweet.
And, no, I don't download from their music store. I use it to sample music before pirating it.
Let's just say I don't like giving out information to people who don't need it and who will use it without permission. Radio Shack still thinks I live at 1234 fake street.
I've said it, my dad has said it, and I'm saying it again: If George Bush wins, it just shows that leftists have no place in this country. So we're moving to Canada or New Zealand, and you fascist bastards can have your damn country music and sport-utes.
As for Kerry: If he opposed the war, why did he vote *for* it? If he really opposed the war, which anyone could see was unjust and idiotic from the very beginning (including my 85 year old WWII veteran REPUBLICAN grandfather), why did he not oppose it from the very first Senate vote? Answer: So he could get reelected.
Hoo-fuckin'-rah. Kerry says he supports environmental initiatives. How much of that do you think he'll get through Congress? How much of that will he get passed if he knows his corporate donors won't support him in 2008?
I want a candidate who doesn't support most favored nation status for China. A candidate who will remove personhood for corporations. A candidate who will put human rights and environmental standards above corporate interests or a "healthy economy."
Kerry *isn't* that person. So in all the ways *I* care about, he's *exactly* like Shrub.
I've seen both, and the Corporation raises much better issues and in a better format.
And they both have Michael Moore in them!
Sounds like a deal. It's cheaper than lobbing attack ads at each other, and about as effective in choosing a president as an election; whoever is willing to fight the dirtiest wins.
What's the difference between you two? I mean, seriously, should I vote for the rich Yaley who was in Skull & Bones and went to Vietnam, or the rich Yaley who was in Skull & Bones who didn't go to Vietnam?
Kinda like fuedalism, but different.
If everyone gets taxed the same, then everyone should be paid the same. Because, you know, everyone's exactly alike.
The Corporations run the country. The Democrats and Republicans aren't doing anything other than providing a pleasant distraction for the populous. Neither party wants to change the status quo too much, but it still needs changing.
I was thinking of voting for Cobb, then the Democrats scared me into thinking of what four more years of George Bush would be. Yeah, they'd suck royally. If they got too bad, I could always leave for Canada.
Kerry's economic and social plans don't call for any more restrictions on corporations, and what few he does call for will be easily thwarted by the shills in Congress.
So now I'm back to voting for Cobb. In a swing state. I'd be scared, but when you have corporations funding studies to see how to advertise to children so they can more effectively nag their parents, we have bigger fish to fry than Shrub's Boondoggle War or Kerry's Bloated Health Care Plan.
They sell cream for that, you know. ;-)
2) Mars has all the materials we need to construct habitats. Sure, we'll have to bring one to live in until we get a more permanent structure built, but we can make cinder block-like materials and mortar, not to mention metal tools to construct them with. *It's all there*. And with our modern knowledge of materials science, we can use it.
To use your turn of phrase: Mars is covered with thousands of square miles of top-quality virgin iron ore. And aluminum. And Gold. All at temperatures that make producing high-quality metal goods very easy using carbonic acid deposition.
Not only that, but all we'll need to bring to mars is a nuclear reactor and gas processors to provide enough fuel, water, and air for as many as 100 people. (which use technology and industrial chemical reactions that we've known about for over a century).
3) Crops have been grown in simulated martian soil, and grow like gangbusters in pure CO2, so long as pressure and temperature are maintained. Not only that, but they make oxygen, and automatically regulate themselves.
So, you see, the food, fuel and air can be provided for with current technology. As for human contact: It takes 40 minutes for a signal to get from Mars to Earth. Too long for a phone conversation, but not like the six months it took for a letter to go round trip from America to Europe. Anyone can communicate with anyone on earth via voicemail, email, or even video mail.
And even if it was harder than what the pilgrims had to endure, I'd still go.
Should all descendants of every Egyptian pay every Jew reparations for slavery? It's idiotic. Why not just drop the issue and move on, preventing discrimination as much as we can?
Built to last, they are.
And there's no trick. The platform says it all. If you don't agree, don't vote for them. And tell your Republican buddies to stop giving us money.
In other words: I didn't do anything to any black people, and neither did my family as far back as the 1680s. Why the heck should my money go to pay for something I'm not even remotely close to being responsible for?
Or do I get reparations for being 1/16th Souix?
A computer world?!? WE'RE IN THE MATRIX!!! The DMV rep just said so!!!
From the day I got an interview offer it took a month for them to schedule it. Then it took a month for them to decide, and then another month before I started. We moved offices and it took a month for them to clear up the cubicles and two whole days to move 20 computers.
I think their next solution should be web based. That way, any new hardware issues can be resolved simply by bringing in a new PC. I can't think of any function performed by the DMV that can't be accomplished through a series of web forms, other than actually taking the photos without handling CF cards or something.
Is growingly a word?
If growingly means "We have the systems in place" then, yes, we're almost there. We just have to pull the trigger.
If it means "it's already uninhabitable in places and getting worse" then, no.