"Forty percent of respondents, meanwhile, incorrectly believed that the US president has the power to declare war, while 54 percent correctly answered that that power rests with Congress."
Just because the constitution says it doesn't make it true. I'd say that the 40% are correct on this one.
You know that Obama is a lawyer, right? So he want's to make more laws.
Are you also aware that Net Neutrality laws would restrict the freedom of ISPs? You can't really be both for and against freedom. Obama has historically taken a stand that it is necessary to restrict the freedom of some to enable the freedom of others. This is an anti-freedom viewpoint and it is essentially the cornerstone of his personal philosophy.
I would also like to point out that it makes good sense to let the primary law enforcement agency have a say in the wording of legislation. Of course, since I'm an Anarchist I'm all for abolishing this practice, I just don't see how it could be done.
Many non-profits obtain all their money from a single source (the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, for example). Any monetary benefit gained by Google would already be taxed. I guess that the only reason they're interested is because Google makes money. . . but I don't think that means they can't be a legitimate source of funding.
What do they plan to tax? Their revenues? Is it just that whenever there's money anywhere the IRS thinks uncle sam should get a share of it? Are they claiming that Firefox is some kind of tax shelter? I don't think that's the case. . .
How come there is no story associated with this summary?
The idea of Government is fundamentally flawed in itself. The purpose of Government is to prevent other people from exploiting you. To this end people grant authority to a governing body. The flaw is, of course, that in order to be effective the government must use the threat of force to compel obedience from people who do not chose to grant it authority.
In order to be effective, the government must do what it is intended to prevent. If we ever reached a point where the government could be effective without the need to do that, government itself would be completely un-necessary.
Turning over authority to government is essentially fighting fire with fire. I'll admit that it may reduce the problem, but history has shown that it can also increase it. In my opinion, history has shown that government has a net negative effect on freedom.
It has also shown that government is prone to corruption. In the US we have been able limit corruption by the application of copious amounts of red-tape, but this too is a dead end because there is only so much red-tape you can use before you're literally spending all day doing paperwork (ask your doctor).
Your analogy seems to have been an effective talking point, but it is just that. The government is not an airplane. The government is fundamentally flawed in concept at the most fundamental level. It will never "fly".
That's what I thought the government was supposed to do. Isn't that the role of government? To safely control people so they can't hurt themselves and others. Doesn't that mean some kind of benevolent ruler making decisions for you?
I could never quite understand how a system designed and implemented by people was supposed to be somehow less fallible than people themselves. When I bring this point up with my non-anarchist friends all they can say is "but people need to be controlled". Yeah, good luck with that.
Then we see the message the media tends to promote, which is that there are certain "special" people among us with "leadership qualities". In reality, these people are just exceptionally good liars, but we turn our lives over to them all the same because we want to believe that someone else will come along and solve our problems for us.
Why would it be any easier to change your non-sexual desires? Are sexual desires somehow special? It could be as simple as trying to understand why you have those desires and undersntading what kind of healthy lifestyle choices you can make instead.
All distructive behaviors are the same in this regard. If it's something that you do, but you regret doing it, something has to change. You can't simply accept the behavior as normal. You have to really figure out what the problem is so that you can solve it.
If you see your friend doing something that is hurting them, you need to tell them and try to help them see how it is hurting them. Just saying "it's all good" when you feel diferently is not something a friend should do.
Not all alcoholics beat their children and drive drunk. A psychological disorder is just a disorder that makes it difficult or impossible for a person to function normally. These disorders are thought to result from upbringing, life circumstances, genetic factors, diseases or any number of other more specific factors. No one really knows what causes them, but there are treatments for them that have proven mildly successful.
Of course, not every individual with a given disorder will manifest the all typical negative aspects of the disease. However, if you are a therapist, and someone comes to you for help, and they appear to have a certain psychological disorder you can't just tell them that their disorder doesn't affect everyone negatively and send them out the door. They came to you for help for a reason.
So if someone feels that their homosexuality is making it impossible for them to have the lifestyle they want, it would be unreasonable to say "well it's normal" and send them away.
"Being gay doesn't really prevent you from being part of society"
Unless you consider procreation to be a part of society. And, of course, if you realize that some men have a problem with other men hitting on them, which makes it harder to fit in. There's also the fact that gay men have a much higher rate of STD infection, especially the bad ones like hep-c and aids.
But no, lets all pretend that it has no negative effects. . .
Your customers are, for the most part, the parents of your students. You can tell, because your students are happy when class is canceled on account of the teacher being hung over to show up. When I went to college, this really upset me. After all, I was paying to be in class. If I didn't want to be there, I wouldn't have paid for it.
I'm serious. I spent maybe 10% of my time learning important stuff and the rest doing pointless busy work and listening to teachers who'd never worked a day in the real world spout nonsense.
I worked my way through school, so at least I don't have the debt to contend with. But I still wasted five years of my life. If I had it to do over again, I wouldn't do it.
I would get an inexpensive online degree or take night classes so that I could do a real job while I was in school. That way I'd have actual work experience (which counts a lot more than any degree when you're trying to make money, and is more fun and rewarding besides).
The best way to prove your claim on something is to turn it into something useful by developing it. Once you have invested in the area and start producing oil, most people will agree that it is wrong to seize what you've built there.
"Doesn't this election show that politics isn't always won by show plays the dirtiest?"
No, this election was more of the same.
"It's time to stop the cynicism and start contributing to the solutions."
There can be no political solution to this problem, because politics itself is the problem. No matter how far you travel to the east or the west, you will never take a single step north.
I doubt this has anything to do with blacks in the US. I'd say that it sums up the democratic process in general very well. Most people who vote don't know why they are voting, or what they are voting for. The ones who do know are voting based on misinformation and flagrant lies. Then after all is said and done, we sit back and wonder what went wrong.
I wonder if anyone really expected it to work at all. I hope they are really just trying to get some easy money and don't care where it comes from or whether or not it destroys everything. If people are actually stupid enough to believe democracy could possibly have a good result, there isn't any hope for any of us.
"For being an absence it sure does get people riled up as if it were a statement."
Amen to that. But you HAVE to vote! You're not accomplishing anything by not voting. You non-vote doesn't matter. Your opinion doesn't matter if you don't vote.
If these things were true, people wouldn't get so upset when I tell them I'm not voting.
Slashdot Mirror
"Forty percent of respondents, meanwhile, incorrectly believed that the US president has the power to declare war, while 54 percent correctly answered that that power rests with Congress."
Just because the constitution says it doesn't make it true. I'd say that the 40% are correct on this one.
You know that Obama is a lawyer, right? So he want's to make more laws.
Are you also aware that Net Neutrality laws would restrict the freedom of ISPs? You can't really be both for and against freedom. Obama has historically taken a stand that it is necessary to restrict the freedom of some to enable the freedom of others. This is an anti-freedom viewpoint and it is essentially the cornerstone of his personal philosophy.
I would also like to point out that it makes good sense to let the primary law enforcement agency have a say in the wording of legislation. Of course, since I'm an Anarchist I'm all for abolishing this practice, I just don't see how it could be done.
"I think the problem is the religious, who feel an obligation to protect other people's children from what's against their personal doctrines."
Because there are so many people out there who think it's perfectly okay shoot up a high school? Sorry, I don't think so.
"if you appoint a freethinker, you are guaranteed not to get re-elected."
Being re-elected is no substitute for making good decisions, unless all you care about is what people think of you.
Many non-profits obtain all their money from a single source (the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, for example). Any monetary benefit gained by Google would already be taxed. I guess that the only reason they're interested is because Google makes money. . . but I don't think that means they can't be a legitimate source of funding.
What do they plan to tax? Their revenues? Is it just that whenever there's money anywhere the IRS thinks uncle sam should get a share of it? Are they claiming that Firefox is some kind of tax shelter? I don't think that's the case. . .
How come there is no story associated with this summary?
"Anarchists never rule"
That is awesome! I love that.
The idea of Government is fundamentally flawed in itself. The purpose of Government is to prevent other people from exploiting you. To this end people grant authority to a governing body. The flaw is, of course, that in order to be effective the government must use the threat of force to compel obedience from people who do not chose to grant it authority.
In order to be effective, the government must do what it is intended to prevent. If we ever reached a point where the government could be effective without the need to do that, government itself would be completely un-necessary.
Turning over authority to government is essentially fighting fire with fire. I'll admit that it may reduce the problem, but history has shown that it can also increase it. In my opinion, history has shown that government has a net negative effect on freedom.
It has also shown that government is prone to corruption. In the US we have been able limit corruption by the application of copious amounts of red-tape, but this too is a dead end because there is only so much red-tape you can use before you're literally spending all day doing paperwork (ask your doctor).
Your analogy seems to have been an effective talking point, but it is just that. The government is not an airplane. The government is fundamentally flawed in concept at the most fundamental level. It will never "fly".
But an airplane isn't made of people. The government is. No clever arrangement of people is capable of flight.
A slug is 32.2 lbm. (the acceleration due to gravity at the earth's surface is approximately 32.2ft/s2)
That's what I thought the government was supposed to do. Isn't that the role of government? To safely control people so they can't hurt themselves and others. Doesn't that mean some kind of benevolent ruler making decisions for you?
I could never quite understand how a system designed and implemented by people was supposed to be somehow less fallible than people themselves. When I bring this point up with my non-anarchist friends all they can say is "but people need to be controlled". Yeah, good luck with that.
Then we see the message the media tends to promote, which is that there are certain "special" people among us with "leadership qualities". In reality, these people are just exceptionally good liars, but we turn our lives over to them all the same because we want to believe that someone else will come along and solve our problems for us.
Why would it be any easier to change your non-sexual desires? Are sexual desires somehow special? It could be as simple as trying to understand why you have those desires and undersntading what kind of healthy lifestyle choices you can make instead.
All distructive behaviors are the same in this regard. If it's something that you do, but you regret doing it, something has to change. You can't simply accept the behavior as normal. You have to really figure out what the problem is so that you can solve it.
If you see your friend doing something that is hurting them, you need to tell them and try to help them see how it is hurting them. Just saying "it's all good" when you feel diferently is not something a friend should do.
That's to pay back the loans she took out. She used her husband's retirement fund as well, I'd imagine that will take longer to replace.
Not all alcoholics beat their children and drive drunk. A psychological disorder is just a disorder that makes it difficult or impossible for a person to function normally. These disorders are thought to result from upbringing, life circumstances, genetic factors, diseases or any number of other more specific factors. No one really knows what causes them, but there are treatments for them that have proven mildly successful.
Of course, not every individual with a given disorder will manifest the all typical negative aspects of the disease. However, if you are a therapist, and someone comes to you for help, and they appear to have a certain psychological disorder you can't just tell them that their disorder doesn't affect everyone negatively and send them out the door. They came to you for help for a reason.
So if someone feels that their homosexuality is making it impossible for them to have the lifestyle they want, it would be unreasonable to say "well it's normal" and send them away.
"Being gay doesn't really prevent you from being part of society"
Unless you consider procreation to be a part of society. And, of course, if you realize that some men have a problem with other men hitting on them, which makes it harder to fit in. There's also the fact that gay men have a much higher rate of STD infection, especially the bad ones like hep-c and aids.
But no, lets all pretend that it has no negative effects. . .
Your customers are, for the most part, the parents of your students. You can tell, because your students are happy when class is canceled on account of the teacher being hung over to show up. When I went to college, this really upset me. After all, I was paying to be in class. If I didn't want to be there, I wouldn't have paid for it.
These are mainly non-profit and public schools you're talking about. I just though I'd point that out. . .
I'm serious. I spent maybe 10% of my time learning important stuff and the rest doing pointless busy work and listening to teachers who'd never worked a day in the real world spout nonsense.
I worked my way through school, so at least I don't have the debt to contend with. But I still wasted five years of my life. If I had it to do over again, I wouldn't do it.
I would get an inexpensive online degree or take night classes so that I could do a real job while I was in school. That way I'd have actual work experience (which counts a lot more than any degree when you're trying to make money, and is more fun and rewarding besides).
The best way to prove your claim on something is to turn it into something useful by developing it. Once you have invested in the area and start producing oil, most people will agree that it is wrong to seize what you've built there.
"Doesn't this election show that politics isn't always won by show plays the dirtiest?"
No, this election was more of the same.
"It's time to stop the cynicism and start contributing to the solutions."
There can be no political solution to this problem, because politics itself is the problem. No matter how far you travel to the east or the west, you will never take a single step north.
"If you think democracy is a bad idea, then are you an advocate
of socialism ? or what is your flavor of lying to the masses ?"
I am an anarchist.
"Please tell us how Hobbes, Locke, and Paine got it wrong ?"
They are people. People often get things wrong.
"I'll take Democracy over what is coming for the rest of the world."
I'd rather be kicked in the balls than shot in the face.
I doubt this has anything to do with blacks in the US. I'd say that it sums up the democratic process in general very well. Most people who vote don't know why they are voting, or what they are voting for. The ones who do know are voting based on misinformation and flagrant lies. Then after all is said and done, we sit back and wonder what went wrong.
I wonder if anyone really expected it to work at all. I hope they are really just trying to get some easy money and don't care where it comes from or whether or not it destroys everything. If people are actually stupid enough to believe democracy could possibly have a good result, there isn't any hope for any of us.
This wouldn't be a problem if our political system did not practically require politicians to keep secrets and lie through their teeth.
I'm all for that, as long as I also don't have to pay taxes or follow the law. . .
"For being an absence it sure does get people riled up as if it were a statement."
Amen to that. But you HAVE to vote! You're not accomplishing anything by not voting. You non-vote doesn't matter. Your opinion doesn't matter if you don't vote.
If these things were true, people wouldn't get so upset when I tell them I'm not voting.