When are you religious republicans going to realize that we didn't hate the man because he was a republican, everyone hated him because he hired dumb people who were politically tied to him instead of capable people into the government, he praised people and gave them medals for gross mistakes, he was as blind as a bat to anything which didn't fit his world-view, his world-view was that of a simpleton.
Hahahaha, I love it! I criticize the Democrats and the Republicans in the same sentence and you still assume I'm a Republican! You sir get the reward for best selective hearing.
Democrats are willing to look at statistics, research and feedback on what needs are in society and make sure that they are filled so that we all benefit.
That's pretty rich. If Democrats bothered to look at statistics they wouldn't be advocating for gun control, among other issues. Take your blinders off and realize that the Democrats are just as willing to manipulate statistics and studies to advance their political agenda as the GOP is.
You gave Bush 8 years to really show how useless and disgusting the basic republican principles are, I hope you never allow that to happen again.
I don't know who this "you" is. I didn't vote for Bush.
Republicans are no longer the party of fiscal responsibility (if they ever were), and if you think they are, then you've got a lot to learn.
What makes you think I was advocating for the Republicans? Oh, are you one of those champs that thinks we only have two parties and thus automatically assumed that my criticism of the Democrats makes me a Republican?
If you take the 2nd amendment seriously, you should be crying in your milk. It's founded on the right to overthrow the government by armed insurrection at need, and if you think that's possible, please check into an asylum.
Actually it was founded on the old common law right to keep and bear arms which was mostly intended for personal defense. It does serve as a check on a tyrannical government but to say that's the only reason it exists is inaccurate.
The US Government exerts influence in so many ways that the ideal of armed insurrection against tyranny is laughable.
Hopefully we never have to find out if your position is accurate. But the notion that the Government is all powerful thus the 2nd amendment is obsolete is pretty shaky logic, IMHO.
The 2nd amendment is mostly obsolete
Says who?
war against the US government needs to be fought with information
Who said I'm interested in fighting any war with the US government beyond the war at the ballot box every two years?
It was a lot of money for a program that never would have actually, you know, worked. There was a lot of scientists who told him that it never would, but he still persisted.
Things are only impossible until they are not. There's no underlying law of physics that says you can't intercept an incoming ICBM warhead. To be sure, it's quite the technical challenge, but I have yet to be convinced of it's impossibility.
That and the fact that it could have led to further escalation of the Cold War, and further nuclear prolification
What's the point of further nuclear proliferation if you can't deliver your warheads onto their target?
It also would have broken some treaties
The only one I'm aware of is the ABM treaty which contained a withdrawal provision (that we later exercised)
It would have probably fallen anyways, as would have the Soviet Union. A large part of Soviet Communism's downfall was internal.
Yeah, and really any President could have beaten Nazi Germany when you consider the disparity in resources/population/GDP. FDR really doesn't deserve any of the credit. It would have happened anyway.
Your missing the point. Your explaining things from the employer point of view. I'm asking the question from the American point of view. Why is our Government bringing people into this country to work when there are American citizens who are out of a job? The labor shortage argument doesn't fly anymore.
They're the ones with the hightech weapons. By all means shoot the terrorists, just avoid making more enemies by harming bystanders.
It's hard not to harm bystanders when the terrorists are hiding behind them.
Find a way to break that circle and some friends of the late Mr Nobel may have a medal for you.
You won't break that circle until the Palestinians give up on the right to return. That seems to be the one big issue that neither side is willing to compromise on.
And how successful would the US be without these businesses?
The US was successful before it was an economic superpower. We had relative peace (our soil hasn't been invaded since the War of 1812), freedom and liberty.
It's a symbiotic relationship.
It should be. Lately it feels more like a parasitic one. What's symbiotic about locating your headquarters offshore so you don't have to pay income taxes? You get all of the aforementioned benefits of the United States without having to pay for them. Seems like the definition of parasitism to me.
my only point is that you cannot simplify it into a single sentence based on gut feeling
That point I'll grant you. Like I said I'm not some leftist flower child. It just seems to me that along the way we've all tended to forget where we've come from. As a shareholder in many companies I obviously care a great deal about the bottom line -- but as an American citizen I care about a lot more than just the bottom line.
Why is it that when I call up Lenovo (a Chinese company) for support I wind up talking to somebody in Atlanta but when I call up Dell or HP (American companies) I wind up talking to New Delhi? And never mind the perceived cost savings of labor -- how much money have they lost in customer aggravation and future business that has gone elsewhere because of these outsourcing policies?
and it turns out there is actually nothing more important than the bottom line from the companies perspective.
Actually it turns out that ignoring the long term for short term gain is a surefire way to run your business into the ground. Tell me, how is Dell going to be doing in another generation or two when there's no American middle class left to buy their products?
Look at the legacy of the Reagan/Bush/Clinton/Bush administrations. The reality does not reflect your arguments. Roll back regulation, roll back enforcement
Fixed that for you. Trying to blame it all on GWB is fundamentally dishonest. Reagan started the trend. Clinton was happy to go along with it.
Dell has no obligation to the United States? Really? How successful do you suppose his business venture would have been if he has undertaking it in a country plagued with violence (Mexico), one where he needed to bribe the local officials to set up shop (most of Africa) or one where the state will assassinate you if you don't go along with it's geopolitical ambitions (Russia)?
The United States is the best country in the World to do business in. Is it really asking that much that our companies give a little bit back?
"Peace will come when the Arabs love their children more than they hate us." -- Golda Meir, Former PM of Israel
Offtopic but I do love that quote. It's refreshing to see someone on the Israeli side for a change because lately it seems like the likes of Hamas have been winning the propaganda war.
Here I was thinking that our society is supposed to be built on competition
Ah, the dog eat dog extreme of the far right. Eventually people will wake up and realize that it's no better than the "from each according to his ability to each according to his need" extreme of the far left.
I wasn't advocating for a socialist solution. I was bemoaning the fact that the Michael Dell's of the world grew up with all of the advantages that the United States offers and can't even bother to employ American workers to answer their goddamn tech support numbers. They've taken all of the advantages that American society offered while contributing as little as possible in return. You may respect that but I don't -- and it's this extreme that business has shifted to in the last few decades that has emboldened the far-left into seeking further expansions of the nanny state that will eventually erode our competitiveness on the global stage.
Read up about welfare capitalism sometime. Read up about the CEOs of yesteryear that sought a square deal for their workers and in so doing helped to create a market for their products. Everybody won to a certain extent. Now we've traded that all away for the cheapest labor or the cheapest stamped plastic POS product that breaks every 12 months.
why should a company be forced into 'purchasing' the less skilled labor?
At no point in my post did I advocate for forcing anybody into doing anything. I was bemoaning what we've become -- not advocating for any specific solution. So nice way to distract from my underlying point.
Why mark you troll for "hippie liberal douche" when this comment is enough? You sound more like a communist that demands people buy what YOU want them to buy. Free will and choice be damned!
Oh go fuck yourself. I didn't demand that people buy what I want them to buy and I didn't advocate for legislating Wally World out of existence. All I said was that if you buy that cheap shit from China then in one way or another you are part of the problem. I buy that cheap shit myself when there is no alternative but if there is an alternative and I can afford it then I'm going to take it. Odds are that alternative will cost me more money but odds are that it will also last a lot longer and I won't be replacing in a year when it breaks.
unless it's in the context to the posters arrogant and idiotic philosophy of anti-freedoms and repressions.
The anti-freedom stems from those who are selling this country out to a communist dictatorship to save a buck. Funny that you would call me a communist for making a plea to buy stuff made here in America as opposed to buying stuff made in a communist dictatorship.
I really don't understand why a company should "hire locally" first when its not in its best interest to do so.
I didn't used to see why either but somebody who is wiser than I am put it this way: Michael Dell is too cheap to pay for the country that created him
In other words, the United States (for all it's pluses and minuses) got Microsoft/Dell/etc going, why aren't they giving back to the United States? I'm not some hippie liberal douche but I tend to believe that there are more important things than the bottom line. We owe it to future generations not to undercut our own population in the perpetual search for lower wages.
I would also say that this applies to consumers as well as to CEOs. If you aren't willing to buy anything more expensive than the cheap plastic shit sold at Wal-Mart then you are part of the problem.
(And before I get modded troll the 'hippie liberal douche' remark is a South Park reference)
Slashdot Mirror
I can think of at least one good reason to like human pilots. Would you rather have a computer trying to pull that off or a human being?
sorta like watching the p0rn channel without a cable descrambler when you were a little kid
Didn't we all live for the days when Skinamax would have their free week long previews? ;)
When are you religious republicans going to realize that we didn't hate the man because he was a republican, everyone hated him because he hired dumb people who were politically tied to him instead of capable people into the government, he praised people and gave them medals for gross mistakes, he was as blind as a bat to anything which didn't fit his world-view, his world-view was that of a simpleton.
Hahahaha, I love it! I criticize the Democrats and the Republicans in the same sentence and you still assume I'm a Republican! You sir get the reward for best selective hearing.
Democrats are willing to look at statistics, research and feedback on what needs are in society and make sure that they are filled so that we all benefit.
That's pretty rich. If Democrats bothered to look at statistics they wouldn't be advocating for gun control, among other issues. Take your blinders off and realize that the Democrats are just as willing to manipulate statistics and studies to advance their political agenda as the GOP is.
You gave Bush 8 years to really show how useless and disgusting the basic republican principles are, I hope you never allow that to happen again.
I don't know who this "you" is. I didn't vote for Bush.
Republicans are no longer the party of fiscal responsibility (if they ever were), and if you think they are, then you've got a lot to learn.
What makes you think I was advocating for the Republicans? Oh, are you one of those champs that thinks we only have two parties and thus automatically assumed that my criticism of the Democrats makes me a Republican?
If you take the 2nd amendment seriously, you should be crying in your milk. It's founded on the right to overthrow the government by armed insurrection at need, and if you think that's possible, please check into an asylum.
Actually it was founded on the old common law right to keep and bear arms which was mostly intended for personal defense. It does serve as a check on a tyrannical government but to say that's the only reason it exists is inaccurate.
The US Government exerts influence in so many ways that the ideal of armed insurrection against tyranny is laughable.
Hopefully we never have to find out if your position is accurate. But the notion that the Government is all powerful thus the 2nd amendment is obsolete is pretty shaky logic, IMHO.
The 2nd amendment is mostly obsolete
Says who?
war against the US government needs to be fought with information
Who said I'm interested in fighting any war with the US government beyond the war at the ballot box every two years?
Um, Gore WON the popular vote by more than half a million votes
That means exactly nothing in this country.
he couldn't have run that bad of campaign...
Which explains why he won.
It was a lot of money for a program that never would have actually, you know, worked. There was a lot of scientists who told him that it never would, but he still persisted.
Things are only impossible until they are not. There's no underlying law of physics that says you can't intercept an incoming ICBM warhead. To be sure, it's quite the technical challenge, but I have yet to be convinced of it's impossibility.
That and the fact that it could have led to further escalation of the Cold War, and further nuclear prolification
What's the point of further nuclear proliferation if you can't deliver your warheads onto their target?
It also would have broken some treaties
The only one I'm aware of is the ABM treaty which contained a withdrawal provision (that we later exercised)
It would have probably fallen anyways, as would have the Soviet Union. A large part of Soviet Communism's downfall was internal.
Yeah, and really any President could have beaten Nazi Germany when you consider the disparity in resources/population/GDP. FDR really doesn't deserve any of the credit. It would have happened anyway.
nuff said.. why do people still try to attach GNU/ to Linux? It makes no sense.
Oh god. Can't we stick to something non-controversial like GWB's legacy, gun control, abortion or the Middle East? Nothing good will come of this....
Your missing the point. Your explaining things from the employer point of view. I'm asking the question from the American point of view. Why is our Government bringing people into this country to work when there are American citizens who are out of a job? The labor shortage argument doesn't fly anymore.
So why should a company be forced to fire the more skilled labor just because they are not locals?
Why should the United States be bringing in outside workers when our own workforce is unemployed?
They're the ones with the hightech weapons. By all means shoot the terrorists, just avoid making more enemies by harming bystanders.
It's hard not to harm bystanders when the terrorists are hiding behind them.
Find a way to break that circle and some friends of the late Mr Nobel may have a medal for you.
You won't break that circle until the Palestinians give up on the right to return. That seems to be the one big issue that neither side is willing to compromise on.
And how successful would the US be without these businesses?
The US was successful before it was an economic superpower. We had relative peace (our soil hasn't been invaded since the War of 1812), freedom and liberty.
It's a symbiotic relationship.
It should be. Lately it feels more like a parasitic one. What's symbiotic about locating your headquarters offshore so you don't have to pay income taxes? You get all of the aforementioned benefits of the United States without having to pay for them. Seems like the definition of parasitism to me.
my only point is that you cannot simplify it into a single sentence based on gut feeling
That point I'll grant you. Like I said I'm not some leftist flower child. It just seems to me that along the way we've all tended to forget where we've come from. As a shareholder in many companies I obviously care a great deal about the bottom line -- but as an American citizen I care about a lot more than just the bottom line.
Why is it that when I call up Lenovo (a Chinese company) for support I wind up talking to somebody in Atlanta but when I call up Dell or HP (American companies) I wind up talking to New Delhi? And never mind the perceived cost savings of labor -- how much money have they lost in customer aggravation and future business that has gone elsewhere because of these outsourcing policies?
and it turns out there is actually nothing more important than the bottom line from the companies perspective.
Actually it turns out that ignoring the long term for short term gain is a surefire way to run your business into the ground. Tell me, how is Dell going to be doing in another generation or two when there's no American middle class left to buy their products?
Alan Greenspan was a disciple and bedmate of hers.
Thank you for ruining my appetite.
Look at the legacy of the Reagan/Bush/Clinton/Bush administrations. The reality does not reflect your arguments. Roll back regulation, roll back enforcement
Fixed that for you. Trying to blame it all on GWB is fundamentally dishonest. Reagan started the trend. Clinton was happy to go along with it.
Dell has no obligation to the state beyond that.
Dell has no obligation to the United States? Really? How successful do you suppose his business venture would have been if he has undertaking it in a country plagued with violence (Mexico), one where he needed to bribe the local officials to set up shop (most of Africa) or one where the state will assassinate you if you don't go along with it's geopolitical ambitions (Russia)?
The United States is the best country in the World to do business in. Is it really asking that much that our companies give a little bit back?
"Peace will come when the Arabs love their children more than they hate us." -- Golda Meir, Former PM of Israel
Offtopic but I do love that quote. It's refreshing to see someone on the Israeli side for a change because lately it seems like the likes of Hamas have been winning the propaganda war.
Jesus, use enough line breaks in your post?
it is not allowed to hire any dirty foreign brown people. I thought we'd got past that xenophobic attitude.
And I thought we'd got past playing the race card as a way to distract people from the point that someone else was trying to make.
Here I was thinking that our society is supposed to be built on competition
Ah, the dog eat dog extreme of the far right. Eventually people will wake up and realize that it's no better than the "from each according to his ability to each according to his need" extreme of the far left.
I wasn't advocating for a socialist solution. I was bemoaning the fact that the Michael Dell's of the world grew up with all of the advantages that the United States offers and can't even bother to employ American workers to answer their goddamn tech support numbers. They've taken all of the advantages that American society offered while contributing as little as possible in return. You may respect that but I don't -- and it's this extreme that business has shifted to in the last few decades that has emboldened the far-left into seeking further expansions of the nanny state that will eventually erode our competitiveness on the global stage.
Read up about welfare capitalism sometime. Read up about the CEOs of yesteryear that sought a square deal for their workers and in so doing helped to create a market for their products. Everybody won to a certain extent. Now we've traded that all away for the cheapest labor or the cheapest stamped plastic POS product that breaks every 12 months.
why should a company be forced into 'purchasing' the less skilled labor?
At no point in my post did I advocate for forcing anybody into doing anything. I was bemoaning what we've become -- not advocating for any specific solution. So nice way to distract from my underlying point.
Why mark you troll for "hippie liberal douche" when this comment is enough? You sound more like a communist that demands people buy what YOU want them to buy. Free will and choice be damned!
Oh go fuck yourself. I didn't demand that people buy what I want them to buy and I didn't advocate for legislating Wally World out of existence. All I said was that if you buy that cheap shit from China then in one way or another you are part of the problem. I buy that cheap shit myself when there is no alternative but if there is an alternative and I can afford it then I'm going to take it. Odds are that alternative will cost me more money but odds are that it will also last a lot longer and I won't be replacing in a year when it breaks.
unless it's in the context to the posters arrogant and idiotic philosophy of anti-freedoms and repressions.
The anti-freedom stems from those who are selling this country out to a communist dictatorship to save a buck. Funny that you would call me a communist for making a plea to buy stuff made here in America as opposed to buying stuff made in a communist dictatorship.
I really don't understand why a company should "hire locally" first when its not in its best interest to do so.
I didn't used to see why either but somebody who is wiser than I am put it this way: Michael Dell is too cheap to pay for the country that created him
In other words, the United States (for all it's pluses and minuses) got Microsoft/Dell/etc going, why aren't they giving back to the United States? I'm not some hippie liberal douche but I tend to believe that there are more important things than the bottom line. We owe it to future generations not to undercut our own population in the perpetual search for lower wages.
I would also say that this applies to consumers as well as to CEOs. If you aren't willing to buy anything more expensive than the cheap plastic shit sold at Wal-Mart then you are part of the problem.
(And before I get modded troll the 'hippie liberal douche' remark is a South Park reference)
So you are surprised that there is hostility towards conservative ideas here on Slashdot?
Fixed that for you