I don't accept the premise. The US brings in plenty of tax revenue to cover our bond holders. There is not now, nor was the ever a chance to "default" on treasury notes, just not buying that.. We may not be able to pay the airlines $200,000,000/year to fly into places with low populations, or provide cell phones and broadband internet access for low income families, pay people $10,000 to buy electric cars though... In order to keep the U.S. afloat, we need to borrow almost 10 trillion dollars over the next several years. The interest rates alone, the U.S. will fund the entire Chinese military in the next couple years. That's at the current interest rate. If China says no, where in the hell are we going to get $10,000,000,000 just to function?
Re:Economist: Republicans are at fault.
on
Debt Deal Reached
·
· Score: 1
Also, when it comes to "tax breaks" for the wealthy, allow me to vent:
Who would tax breaks go to? Half the country pays no taxes, can't really give them a break.
Everyone says "tax the rich more", but no one can tell me at what rate they currently pay and how much "they" think is fair.
I'm looking at my paycheck and i'm about 37% in federal/state/local/property/entitlement. I work roughly 4 months a year just to pay my taxes.
Let's tax the rich 100%! that would solve it.. Oh wait, wouldn't come close...
Re:Economist: Republicans are at fault.
on
Debt Deal Reached
·
· Score: 1
30 Trillion in unfunded liability. Don't get me wrong, I'm a conservative, and would vote for Clinton in a heartbeat. He did balance the budget, that was huge.. That just means that your only paying interest on your trillions of dollar credit cards which is coming fairly close to funding the entire chinese military. I was going to make a dig about the current administration extending/increasing all of Bush's policies but want to refrain from pointing fingers, just go with the current facts... On that note, I don't blame (much) the executive branch for our financial woes, I blame congress.
Re:Economist: Republicans are at fault.
on
Debt Deal Reached
·
· Score: 1
Sigh.
I usually run a stop watch to find out how fast people blame Bush for everything, it's getting too old/predictable.
The debt problem started dozens of presidents ago...
The reason I am against raising the debt ceiling is that the government is incapable of reducing it's size/spending on it's own.
I'm okay with "revenue" increase as long as we are sure that we really need to pay for the programs we run.
The fact that you can't listen to $RADIO_STATION for an hour without running into some kind of government program that I'm paying for is frustrating. Pay for what we NEED first.
I think the revolution will come after the government collapses itself. No armed rebel attacks ala Libya.. Hyper inflation, and power outage, that's the ballgame.
I do not have the title to my car, bank owns it. Wife has no income, if the car is in my name she has no financial stake so I should be safe./peaksthroughthestrawman.
I work in data storage. You would be seriously stunned by how many companies that you have never heard of keep an AMAZING amount of data on you. They pay millions to get credit card records from large financial institutions. After some time, they can build a pretty damn accurate profile of you. I always knew that this happened, but i was shocked at the level of detail they were able to obtain.
The 20 billion is AC was because it's hot, but I digress. Tax reciepts to the government are going up every year. I'm not going to speak for all Republicans but I have no problem with higher taxes but you damn sure better start spending that money on essentials. I have two main issues. That fewer and fewer even pay taxes. I recommend that all social programs be increased by 5%, and then taxed 5%. All future tax increases should be across the board. I also have a serious problem with how it is spent. I've bought cars, houses, cell phones, food, water, clothing, shelters, sewage, roads, HVAC systems, dishwasher, ethanol, wind turbines. I'm paying contractors to refurbish homes with all the green bells and whistles. I pay for others healthcare, welfare and defense. I've paid to create and over throw governments. I've built and funded hundreds (if not thousands) of schools in random countries around the world. I'm always the first to send medical supplies and assistance to every disaster world wide. There is no way you can listen to 30 minutes of radio without discovering some new way that my tax dollars are being spent. ESSENTIALS is the key. Food, water, shelter. Paying the guy next door $10,000 to by a hybrid car? Knocking $2000 of his new furnace to save energy. If this spending continues, the economy will collapse and you will be able to help NOONE. Guess you'll have to eat your hybrid.
Here is my delima. I don't understand how two well educated scientists can look at the exact same data and come up with two completely opposite results. How does that happen? My guess is that the wildcard is assumptions that are included in the models. Maybe a model with zero assumptions would help, but I doubt that is possible.
You got it all wrong. Everyone has the *right* to a new car, cell phone, owning a home, power, water, job, efficient dishwashers/heating and cooling (a minor list of the things I paid for other people to use last year)?
You silly man.. We don't have 1.6 trillion in debt, it's an *investment* that just hasn't been cashed in yet...
Of course we need to raise taxes, get that revenue up. After all, it's at all time lows.. hmm, wait a second, did i get that last part right?
Legal contact has to occur first. Traffic stop, etc.. Say you get pulled over for a speeding ticket and provided your drivers license. Get your ticket and have a nice day, OR; Get pulled over for speeding, speak no english and unable to provide a drivers license...
No one can just randomly start asking for papers (and restated in the bill), that's already illegal. The bill does not make it legal. The only argument I've seen against it is to assume that the police are racist, biggoted, homephobes who are going to ignore laws and procedures. Don't get me wrong, there is the possibility of abuse, but that can be said about any law.
That's the bummer. What do you restore it to? If they took entire UCS/HP/IBM chassis, might be a bit before they can get new hardware shipped in.
Running 30-40 VM's per blade isn't unheard of. Even if they wanted 1 virtual server and took that hardware it ran on, they could have potentially downed hundreds of VM's.
Holy crap I'm going to agree with you (to a point).
We're less healthy because we have become lazy little gameboy sloths but that's just an opinion.
Policy for the last couple of decades have been about how to divide up the apples as opposed to making it easier to grow apples. The United States is producing less and less every day.
I do like your apple analogy more than mine though, it's a good way to put the current problem in context. The only problem I see looming is what to do when you've divided up everyone else's apples...
It's something that we'll never agree to on a slashdot forum perhaps. It's a fundamental difference, neither one of us accepts the premise of the other.
I would have him quietly die in a gutter? Where in the hell did you get that from my post? In his situation, I would have been the one robbing the bank.
I didn't invent or inflict on this man any harm. I did not slip his disks nor create a growth on his chest (nothing life threatening btw). The fact that I exist does NOT make me responsible for this mans health.
I have no problem with someone asking me to do more. I have a problem with people demanding that I do more. I have a problem with laws that require me to give more than I choose or go to jail. It's not going to be long before we are unable to help anyone at all due to perceived rights.
Contrary to popular belief, you do not have the right to health care which will now be taxpayer funded. While we are at it, you don't have the right to electric cars (taxpayer funded), cell phones (tax payer funded), owning a home (taxpayer funded), etc...
We are simply going to bleed ourselves into nothing, being able to help no one due to perceived "rights".
Tax revenue 2.2 trillion. Budget 3.5 trillion. How you feel about what's fair or what's right is immaterial, politics immaterial, we tried, we're broke, plain and simple, end of story.
Here is your 1/2000 slice of an apple.
If RBC does give him assistance and drop the charges, why shouldn't I do it?
Gas is getting pretty expensive, how about I steal 1 gallon and wait for the police? Should the gas company assist me as well?
It seems like everyone is dodging the truth at the core of the matter. Life isn't fair and some folks get raw deals.
The best you can do is the best you can do with the resources you have.
Here is the hard shitty choice.
You have 1 apple. 2,000 starving people in line. Do you give the apple to one person so that he/she lives, or do you carve the apple into 2000 equal parts and let everyone starve? The ladder is the only "fair" choice.
Don't get me wrong, I think it sucks more than anything that has ever sucked before. It will suck that way until the concept of money is discarded ala some star trek fantasy world.
Yeah, what could possibly go wrong with load guarantees. Kind of sounds familiar. Didn't we have some kind of economic collapse here recently?
Uncle Sam is the cosigner for all of america.
Just say it's settled science. Telll your funding sources that there is a consensus among most scientists and call it a new particle..
Grats on your discovery.
We'll just make local news a "Right" and continue the programming through government funding.
I mean really, it can ONLY be a couple billion right? That's nothing.
We have *rights* (and therefore taxpayer funding) to cars, cell phones, houses, high speed internet, schooling, blah blah.
See, the trick is to spread it out between several funding souces so everyone pays just a tiny bit:
Local funds (oh wait, that's me).
State funds (hmm, me again).
Federal funds (well crap, i'm one of the 50% that actually pay taxes).
He (PR) rode through town in the middle of the night. No bells/guns. How exactly was he warning people in the middle of the night?
If it was a candle in the window (1 if by land), would you just be totally skrewed if it happened in the daytime?
I would like to see a poll on how many accounts people have. The mid to upper level geek will use a password management software, but for 90% of the sheep out there....
I can think of 14 accounts of credentials I have now. I've resorted to putting in some random password that meets the requirements, then hitting the "forgot password" whenever the cookie expires...
My problem is not about building a bridge.
My problem is that your building it because you beleive someone has the "right" to walk on bridges.
My problem is that you are borrowing money which you can not pay back to fund someones "right" to walk on bridges.
My problem is that after 2.4 trillion dollars in bridges, you bitch about schools not being funded.
My problem is that you are going to let the entire country go down the shitter building bridges.
When the economy collapses, niether the useful bridges, nor the worthless ones will be built.
What part of that was difficult to follow?
Slashdot Mirror
I don't accept the premise. The US brings in plenty of tax revenue to cover our bond holders. There is not now, nor was the ever a chance to "default" on treasury notes, just not buying that.. We may not be able to pay the airlines $200,000,000/year to fly into places with low populations, or provide cell phones and broadband internet access for low income families, pay people $10,000 to buy electric cars though... In order to keep the U.S. afloat, we need to borrow almost 10 trillion dollars over the next several years. The interest rates alone, the U.S. will fund the entire Chinese military in the next couple years. That's at the current interest rate. If China says no, where in the hell are we going to get $10,000,000,000 just to function?
Also, when it comes to "tax breaks" for the wealthy, allow me to vent: Who would tax breaks go to? Half the country pays no taxes, can't really give them a break. Everyone says "tax the rich more", but no one can tell me at what rate they currently pay and how much "they" think is fair. I'm looking at my paycheck and i'm about 37% in federal/state/local/property/entitlement. I work roughly 4 months a year just to pay my taxes. Let's tax the rich 100%! that would solve it.. Oh wait, wouldn't come close...
30 Trillion in unfunded liability. Don't get me wrong, I'm a conservative, and would vote for Clinton in a heartbeat. He did balance the budget, that was huge.. That just means that your only paying interest on your trillions of dollar credit cards which is coming fairly close to funding the entire chinese military. I was going to make a dig about the current administration extending/increasing all of Bush's policies but want to refrain from pointing fingers, just go with the current facts... On that note, I don't blame (much) the executive branch for our financial woes, I blame congress.
Sigh. I usually run a stop watch to find out how fast people blame Bush for everything, it's getting too old/predictable. The debt problem started dozens of presidents ago... The reason I am against raising the debt ceiling is that the government is incapable of reducing it's size/spending on it's own. I'm okay with "revenue" increase as long as we are sure that we really need to pay for the programs we run. The fact that you can't listen to $RADIO_STATION for an hour without running into some kind of government program that I'm paying for is frustrating. Pay for what we NEED first.
I think the revolution will come after the government collapses itself. No armed rebel attacks ala Libya.. Hyper inflation, and power outage, that's the ballgame.
I do not have the title to my car, bank owns it. Wife has no income, if the car is in my name she has no financial stake so I should be safe. /peaksthroughthestrawman.
If I track the Judge with GPS, would that be legal?
How are we telling them how to lead thier lives?
I work in data storage. You would be seriously stunned by how many companies that you have never heard of keep an AMAZING amount of data on you. They pay millions to get credit card records from large financial institutions. After some time, they can build a pretty damn accurate profile of you. I always knew that this happened, but i was shocked at the level of detail they were able to obtain.
The 20 billion is AC was because it's hot, but I digress. Tax reciepts to the government are going up every year. I'm not going to speak for all Republicans but I have no problem with higher taxes but you damn sure better start spending that money on essentials. I have two main issues. That fewer and fewer even pay taxes. I recommend that all social programs be increased by 5%, and then taxed 5%. All future tax increases should be across the board. I also have a serious problem with how it is spent. I've bought cars, houses, cell phones, food, water, clothing, shelters, sewage, roads, HVAC systems, dishwasher, ethanol, wind turbines. I'm paying contractors to refurbish homes with all the green bells and whistles. I pay for others healthcare, welfare and defense. I've paid to create and over throw governments. I've built and funded hundreds (if not thousands) of schools in random countries around the world. I'm always the first to send medical supplies and assistance to every disaster world wide. There is no way you can listen to 30 minutes of radio without discovering some new way that my tax dollars are being spent. ESSENTIALS is the key. Food, water, shelter. Paying the guy next door $10,000 to by a hybrid car? Knocking $2000 of his new furnace to save energy. If this spending continues, the economy will collapse and you will be able to help NOONE. Guess you'll have to eat your hybrid.
Here is my delima. I don't understand how two well educated scientists can look at the exact same data and come up with two completely opposite results. How does that happen? My guess is that the wildcard is assumptions that are included in the models. Maybe a model with zero assumptions would help, but I doubt that is possible.
You got it all wrong. Everyone has the *right* to a new car, cell phone, owning a home, power, water, job, efficient dishwashers/heating and cooling (a minor list of the things I paid for other people to use last year)? You silly man.. We don't have 1.6 trillion in debt, it's an *investment* that just hasn't been cashed in yet... Of course we need to raise taxes, get that revenue up. After all, it's at all time lows.. hmm, wait a second, did i get that last part right?
I would bet that most are the last 4 digits of your phone number or social security number. Knowing that, you can probably get into my garage.
Legal contact has to occur first. Traffic stop, etc.. Say you get pulled over for a speeding ticket and provided your drivers license. Get your ticket and have a nice day, OR; Get pulled over for speeding, speak no english and unable to provide a drivers license... No one can just randomly start asking for papers (and restated in the bill), that's already illegal. The bill does not make it legal. The only argument I've seen against it is to assume that the police are racist, biggoted, homephobes who are going to ignore laws and procedures. Don't get me wrong, there is the possibility of abuse, but that can be said about any law.
Don't forget to upgrade your dot-net framework or you'll have upgrade issues.
That's the bummer. What do you restore it to? If they took entire UCS/HP/IBM chassis, might be a bit before they can get new hardware shipped in. Running 30-40 VM's per blade isn't unheard of. Even if they wanted 1 virtual server and took that hardware it ran on, they could have potentially downed hundreds of VM's.
Holy crap I'm going to agree with you (to a point). We're less healthy because we have become lazy little gameboy sloths but that's just an opinion. Policy for the last couple of decades have been about how to divide up the apples as opposed to making it easier to grow apples. The United States is producing less and less every day. I do like your apple analogy more than mine though, it's a good way to put the current problem in context. The only problem I see looming is what to do when you've divided up everyone else's apples... It's something that we'll never agree to on a slashdot forum perhaps. It's a fundamental difference, neither one of us accepts the premise of the other.
I would have him quietly die in a gutter? Where in the hell did you get that from my post? In his situation, I would have been the one robbing the bank. I didn't invent or inflict on this man any harm. I did not slip his disks nor create a growth on his chest (nothing life threatening btw). The fact that I exist does NOT make me responsible for this mans health. I have no problem with someone asking me to do more. I have a problem with people demanding that I do more. I have a problem with laws that require me to give more than I choose or go to jail. It's not going to be long before we are unable to help anyone at all due to perceived rights. Contrary to popular belief, you do not have the right to health care which will now be taxpayer funded. While we are at it, you don't have the right to electric cars (taxpayer funded), cell phones (tax payer funded), owning a home (taxpayer funded), etc... We are simply going to bleed ourselves into nothing, being able to help no one due to perceived "rights". Tax revenue 2.2 trillion. Budget 3.5 trillion. How you feel about what's fair or what's right is immaterial, politics immaterial, we tried, we're broke, plain and simple, end of story. Here is your 1/2000 slice of an apple.
If RBC does give him assistance and drop the charges, why shouldn't I do it? Gas is getting pretty expensive, how about I steal 1 gallon and wait for the police? Should the gas company assist me as well? It seems like everyone is dodging the truth at the core of the matter. Life isn't fair and some folks get raw deals. The best you can do is the best you can do with the resources you have. Here is the hard shitty choice. You have 1 apple. 2,000 starving people in line. Do you give the apple to one person so that he/she lives, or do you carve the apple into 2000 equal parts and let everyone starve? The ladder is the only "fair" choice. Don't get me wrong, I think it sucks more than anything that has ever sucked before. It will suck that way until the concept of money is discarded ala some star trek fantasy world.
Yeah, what could possibly go wrong with load guarantees. Kind of sounds familiar. Didn't we have some kind of economic collapse here recently? Uncle Sam is the cosigner for all of america.
Just say it's settled science. Telll your funding sources that there is a consensus among most scientists and call it a new particle.. Grats on your discovery.
We'll just make local news a "Right" and continue the programming through government funding. I mean really, it can ONLY be a couple billion right? That's nothing. We have *rights* (and therefore taxpayer funding) to cars, cell phones, houses, high speed internet, schooling, blah blah. See, the trick is to spread it out between several funding souces so everyone pays just a tiny bit: Local funds (oh wait, that's me). State funds (hmm, me again). Federal funds (well crap, i'm one of the 50% that actually pay taxes).
He (PR) rode through town in the middle of the night. No bells/guns. How exactly was he warning people in the middle of the night? If it was a candle in the window (1 if by land), would you just be totally skrewed if it happened in the daytime?
I would like to see a poll on how many accounts people have. The mid to upper level geek will use a password management software, but for 90% of the sheep out there.... I can think of 14 accounts of credentials I have now. I've resorted to putting in some random password that meets the requirements, then hitting the "forgot password" whenever the cookie expires...
My problem is not about building a bridge. My problem is that your building it because you beleive someone has the "right" to walk on bridges. My problem is that you are borrowing money which you can not pay back to fund someones "right" to walk on bridges. My problem is that after 2.4 trillion dollars in bridges, you bitch about schools not being funded. My problem is that you are going to let the entire country go down the shitter building bridges. When the economy collapses, niether the useful bridges, nor the worthless ones will be built. What part of that was difficult to follow?