An american ship fired a missile at a comercial passenger plane and killed 290 people. Bad comunications and no idea what the plane was. FAA will at least provide information about the flight
That was my exact point, the FAA can be an information clearing house.
Corporations, unions and other associations should be required to fully disclose any money they spend on political speech so their stockholders/members are aware of where their money is going
As I said before I don't believe corporations or unions would donate or spend a dime on political speech, except when it directly affects them. As a stockholder I wouldn't want the corporation I own stocks in to support someone I oppose. The same with my trade union. There should be no "the AFL-CIO supported this candidate"
The Senate R's filibustered a bill that would have required that a month or two ago.
The bill was an attempt to get around the Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. If corporations had to tell stockholders who they donated to the stockholders may not like it. Personally as you should be able to guess I believe the USSC ruled wrong, however as they did rule that way it's likely they would rule a law requiring full disclosure was unconstitutional too.
Are you not going to have any product consistency across your stores. Pricing? Dress Codes? Starting pay for employees? Product Placement? Vendor preferences? A return policy?
A bureaucracy isn't needed for that. All that's needed is standard company wide policies.
Regardless of how many producers there are mass production requires a consistency of supply and that requires a bureaucracy to set a minimum standards for components.
Let me rephrase the question, how many things need to mass produced? I already gave one example, semi-conductors. What are these components you're talking about? And can't any standards be approved by consensus? No bureaucracy needed. When IBM came out with the PC, it had used already available components and standards. When the Woz, Steve Wozniak, built his Apple he didn't need a bureaucracy. Neither did the hackers in MIT's Tech Model Railroad Club. When they hacked a nifty program they placed a copy on a bulletin board, such as Spacewar!. Anyone could take it and make improvements, those improvements would then be posted too.
There is a Verizon substation 2 blocks from my house - less than half a mile. FiOS isn't even "coming soon"
Verizon isn't in my state, Minnesota, but Qwest is offering Fiber to the neighborhood. 7mps downloads cost $30/mo, $20/mo for the first 6 months. And 40mps is $70/mo with the first 6 months being $30/mo. I want to see if I can get my ISP to offer access through Qwest, currently I get my access from them through ComCast but it costs $15 more.
Great, we need bigger not smaller government. NOT!!!
The federal government already gave cable and phone companies $200 Billion to upgrade their infrastructure. What did these businesses do? They padded their pockets.
I cannot understand why people find this "expensive."
Because, despite how much people use they see people in other nations paying far less for more speed. The US can't be much of a leader with higher costs.
If you own 10 stores it is very unlikely you can be successful without a bureaucracy of some sort.
If it were me, each store manager would be responsible for that store, they would then report to me.
It would be very difficult to mass produce anything without bureacracy.
And just how many things have to be mass produced by one producer? Like I said, with a few exceptions I don't think large businesses are needed. A fab plant for semi-conductors can cost hundreds of dollars if not billions, but Apple, Dell, Gateway, and other businesses were started as small businesses. Some in garages or homes.
It should be pointed out that Ted Stevens was acquitted of his charges
Ted Stevens was convicted of the charges he faced. But because the DA didn't share all the information gathered with his attorneys the conviction was overturned. The trial judge even appointed a special prosecutor to investigate whether the district attorneys broke the laws.
I'm not saying that a lawmaker can't do things that are illegal as an individual
But you did say it. Not in the same way as above "as an individual", but I copied and pasted what I replied to: "government officials can't do something illegal because they make the laws which define what is legal."
many things which would be illegal for individuals to do are often excepted for political leaders
Politicians do that all the tyme. They even give the government waivers to laws they pass. For instance in the US the largest polluter is the government. I don't know how much weight it carries, it is a Marxist site after all, but Political Affairs has this: U.S. Military – The World's Largest Polluter. The Alexis de Tocqueville Institution, which has the liberal idea of liberty and small government asks the question America's largest polluter – guess who and concludes it's the United States government.
A good current example is how Nancy Pelosi doesn't have to go through the scanners whenever she has to fly between Washington DC and San Francisco.
Because she's third in line to be president of the USA, until January, she gets an Airforce jet for her trips. But I bet if she had to go through security like almost every other flier she'd put a stop to the scanners and pat-downs.
I'm sorry I misspelled the name Charles Rangle. I didn't know I had to bend over so hard to the grammar Nazis here.
Someone posted a complaint? I must of missed it. Not knowing the correct name or spelling I used Google then copied and pasted it.
One thing that Wyden is famous for here is that he holds a town hall meeting in every county of the state at least once a year and pays attention to their concerns.
And how are those townhall meeting paid for? Out of pocket, contributions, or taxpayers? Each has problems, out of pocket means only the wealthy can afford it. Taxpayers paying means freeloaders can game the system. And contributions possibility means the candidate is beholden to contributors, but if those contributors are voters in the district what's wrong with that?
Oh, and please notice that as I said earlier, I don't believe corporations and unions should have the same rights of freedom speech, not politically. Nor should industry trade groups. But I don't have a problem with individuals paying voluntarily, none when Ross Perot ran for president, or when Meg Whitman spent $109 million of her own money for the governorship of California. When her campaign spending topped $140 million many pundits wailed about the "corrosive effect on basic democratic principles." And who won the race? Jerry Brown, her democratic opponent.
Yes, everything has them. Even not enacting any regulation at all has them, like monopolies abusing their powers to stifle competition and drive up prices.
Except it was government that created those monopolies. Governments gave telephone companies exclusive rights of way or easements to string phone lines. The same applies to cable and power companies. But perhaps the biggest monopoly is patents.
Or in this case, huge insurance premiums because there are no rules shielding them from random litigation.
Large organizations and fat law and regulation books aren't needed for that.
Are you suggesting we start regulating commercial reentries after the first space tourists get blown out of the sky by a missile defense system?
That already happened: Iran Air Flight 655. And as I said to the reply above yours, perhaps a legitimate function of the FAA is as a clearing house for air traffic, where flights are registered in a database that others can check for potential flight conflicts. Licensing is not needed for that.
FAA-AST is working with the upcoming companies to avoid unintended consequences, they're not working in a vacuum.
Yea, and possibly to limit competition.
Do you honestly think the military would allow a Falcon 9 to launch from the Cape, without having some documentation of how they plan to re-enter?
One, that is a separate issue. Sure the owner of a facility has the right to make requirements for the use of the facility. But the FAA does not own the Cape or it's launching facilities, the US Airforce owns parts and NASA owns parts. If however SpaceX were to launch from AZ's or NM's spaceport, the only involvement of the FAA is potential air traffic. Now I suppose that that is a reasonable excuse for the FAA, to keep track of air traffic.
Bureaucracies always seek to expand their power and drain resources from where they can do good.
Please do enlighten with a better way to run large complex orginizations.
And what large complex organizations might those be? If you mean governmental organizations, I oppose large government, and want to shrink it not expand it. With a few exceptions I also oppose large corporations, such as too big to fail banks and too big to fail auto makers.
I wouldn't call SpaceX a 'big business,' at least not in their field.
SpaceX isn't much of an established company in the field but it does have big and wealthy names behind it.
having a defined procedure increases the ability of new companies to compete by decreasing their liability.
HAHA!!! Insurance exists for risk. There are also places away from population centers where launches can be done. All licensing does is reduce competition. Ask all those who homesteaded the airwaves early last century. When large corporations asked the feds to license broadcasting the government obliged putting many people off of the airwaves.
Flying was also risky but the links I provided, showed licensing wasn't required for many years. Of course you shrug off the analogy though, even though they say 3000 people died on 9-11.
Too much regulation can stifle an industry, this is certainly true, but that doesn't mean the correct answer is to have none instead.
Ever hear of the unintended consequences? Licensing and regulations should only come into being after a problem is identified, and then address that problem.
having met many of the people in the FAA Office of Commercial Space, and as someone who cares about seeing an economically sustainable space system develop, I'm damn glad those people are there.
It just more bureaucracy and big government. Of course big businesses like it because it reduces their competition.
creating a solid legal framework for licensing and regulating commercial launches and re-entries is absolutely critical for getting anything thats not a pork-filled government project into space. Otherwise the entire industry is likely to shut down after the first accident.
Like when aircraft were first built, they had to be licensed so people did worry they would crash. AHAH! According to wiki's Pilot licensing and certification article pilot licensing started with the Aero Club of America certificates which "were not mandatory and were more for prestige and show". That was around 1905, after aircraft were in the sky. Add according to the FAA aircraft licensing started after the International Air Navigation Convention, held in 1919. Then licensing wasn't required though nations came together for licensing cross border flying. The FAA page goes on to say "The earliest legal requirement for the N marking is found in the first general amendments to the Air Commerce Regulations on March 22,1927."
When they use their wealth to gain more attention from my representatives than I can get then they're abridging my rights.
You don't have the right to have a representative pay attention to you. What you do have the right to do is seek out another person who will listen. And if you're a citizen and are old enough you have the right run against a rep who will not listen to you.
My reps certainly didn't listen to me, or the majority of voters. Both representatives and senators voted for the health care insurance reform bill despite the fact that most people opposed it. What did Nancy Pelosi say? She would pass it no matter what the people thought. Like the fruit cake she is she said we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in it. That is her personally saying that in the video, not a substitute or actor.
Now tell me, who was she listening too? Certainly not voters.
Until I read this article I don't think I ever heard of TopView. By then I was using Macs most of the tyme. I only used PCs and DOS for programming. For papers, desktop publishing, and drawing it was all Mac.
Well, this experiment in mob rule that we call democracy isn't working so well either, judging by what we've elected over the past couple decades, and how they've screwed over the very people who elected them.:(
I like the way Winston Churchill put it: "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried." Partially because of mob rule we have bad laws.
By "qualified pool" I didn't necessarily mean by merit, but by citizens of voting age (something like jury duty, except this would be congress duty).
I don't know about everywhere in the US but in states like Florida people are added to the potential jury pool by registering to vote. I was called to show up twice. When I went I was hoping to be called to serve on a jury for a drug offense or other victimless crime. I believe in Jully Informed Juries and Jury Nullification and wanted to send the message that these laws were bad and unconstitutional. Unfortunately for 2 days each tyme all I did was sit there waiting to be called for questioning.
If you can't tell, I've become somewhat disaffected with the entire concept of democracy; as was pointed out centuries ago, it starts falling apart as soon as the voter realises that he can vote himself largesse from the public treasury.
Oh, I agree but no government leads to chaos. Some say anarchy can work but I don't see how. So instead I try to limit the size, and power, of government.
Given that this is a list of "Windows' Failed Rivals", OS/2 rightfully isn't on that list... IBM continued to release new OS/2 versions for nearly a decade after its initial release.
I'm not GP but I thought the same thing. DESQview was a gui that ran multiple DOS programs to run at the same tyme allowing task switching. The only place it is at the end of IBM's TopView's section: "TopView wasn’t officially discontinued until mid-1990, but by that point just about everyone who found the idea intriguing had switched to Quarterdeck’s DESQview." A few article comments mention it though.
If a law says how much a person can spend on a campaign their rights are being violated. How difficult is that to understand?
Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Abridge: verb
to produce a shorter form of a book, play etc by making cuts in the original
As to those pensions, even at max they should reflect how long someone served
I believe there shouldn't be any pension for elected offices, it's not a career choice. Congressional pay should only pay for travel from the district the person was elected in to Washington DC and living expenses while there for session. With sessions being only every other year and limited to 90 days $10,000 maybe $20,000 should cover it.
I had an idea too, that rather than being elected, legislators should be randomly chosen from a pool of qualified candidates. (Didn't the ancient Greek system do something like that?)
No, that's a meritocracy. Well parts of Greece may of been meritocracies, but Ancient Athens was democratic.
What's ironic is that Socrates was sentenced to death in Athens because he opposed democracy. And reading Plato's The Republic it has many similarities to Confucius's Analects advocating rule by "proper men" or "gentlemen".
How in the world does this solve the problem of media corporations having the ability - unlike every other corporation under your regime - to run politically slanted content under the guise of news right up until the end of the election?
It does solve that, what opening the airwaves does is it allows more voices to be broadcast. Just as the web allows relatively cheap and easy websites, open airwaves will allow relatively cheap and easy radio stations. An example I used years ago was a station dedicated to model railroads where I start broadcasting a call-in show. Maybe I do it as a hobby an hour or two a week, or maybe I try to make it a career and business getting hobby shops to sponsor the show.
Of course doing that now, broadcasting pirate radio, is an invitation to have armed government employees bust down my door.
The Web and print are already this open, but most people get their news from big media corps' sites.
And how many are there? ABC, CBS, Fox, NBC, PBS, and others. Then there's Alternet, Indymedia, and wikipedia.
Why? Better production quality. (Not necessarily the content, just the presentation.)
What? Only large organizations can put together quality presentations?
First, there is a difference between being educated and being informed.
See my reply to riverat1 above yours.
Second, you request a "Citation" in reference to my assertion that a person with lots of "4"s would end up being president. Allow me to illustrate.
That is not a citation. At most it is a theoretical hypothesis. I can make up my own.
Now, don't get me wrong, I don't think our current two-party system is very good, but I wouldn't rush to solve the problems by throwing our entire system.
I didn't throw the whole system out. I didn't suggest a dictatorship or king, or getting rid of all government. All I suggested was changing how the president and vice president were elected. Well not all, I have proposed other amendments, such as limiting congressional sessions to 90 days every other year. Politics should not be a career, unlike how it is now.
Actually Thomas Jefferson once said something about there being a revolution every generation or something like that. Unless people have to fight for freedom freedom loses it's meaning to them. They take it for granted, even when there's subterfuge or mission creep wearing freedom away.
Falcon
Oh, and in case I haven't already told you, I fear government far more than any corporation or terrorist. Neither Union Carbide's Bhopal disaster nor Bangalore's terrorist attack killed or maimed as many people as governments have.
Slashdot Mirror
An american ship fired a missile at a comercial passenger plane and killed 290 people. Bad comunications and no idea what the plane was. FAA will at least provide information about the flight
That was my exact point, the FAA can be an information clearing house.
Falcon
Corporations, unions and other associations should be required to fully disclose any money they spend on political speech so their stockholders/members are aware of where their money is going
As I said before I don't believe corporations or unions would donate or spend a dime on political speech, except when it directly affects them. As a stockholder I wouldn't want the corporation I own stocks in to support someone I oppose. The same with my trade union. There should be no "the AFL-CIO supported this candidate"
The Senate R's filibustered a bill that would have required that a month or two ago.
The bill was an attempt to get around the Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. If corporations had to tell stockholders who they donated to the stockholders may not like it. Personally as you should be able to guess I believe the USSC ruled wrong, however as they did rule that way it's likely they would rule a law requiring full disclosure was unconstitutional too.
Falcon
Are you not going to have any product consistency across your stores. Pricing? Dress Codes? Starting pay for employees? Product Placement? Vendor preferences? A return policy?
A bureaucracy isn't needed for that. All that's needed is standard company wide policies.
Regardless of how many producers there are mass production requires a consistency of supply and that requires a bureaucracy to set a minimum standards for components.
Let me rephrase the question, how many things need to mass produced? I already gave one example, semi-conductors. What are these components you're talking about? And can't any standards be approved by consensus? No bureaucracy needed. When IBM came out with the PC, it had used already available components and standards. When the Woz, Steve Wozniak, built his Apple he didn't need a bureaucracy. Neither did the hackers in MIT's Tech Model Railroad Club. When they hacked a nifty program they placed a copy on a bulletin board, such as Spacewar!. Anyone could take it and make improvements, those improvements would then be posted too.
Falcon
There is a Verizon substation 2 blocks from my house - less than half a mile. FiOS isn't even "coming soon"
Verizon isn't in my state, Minnesota, but Qwest is offering Fiber to the neighborhood. 7mps downloads cost $30/mo, $20/mo for the first 6 months. And 40mps is $70/mo with the first 6 months being $30/mo. I want to see if I can get my ISP to offer access through Qwest, currently I get my access from them through ComCast but it costs $15 more.
Falcon
Great, we need bigger not smaller government. NOT!!!
The federal government already gave cable and phone companies $200 Billion to upgrade their infrastructure. What did these businesses do? They padded their pockets.
Falcon
I cannot understand why people find this "expensive."
Because, despite how much people use they see people in other nations paying far less for more speed. The US can't be much of a leader with higher costs.
Who would ever need more than 640K RAM?
Falcon
If you own 10 stores it is very unlikely you can be successful without a bureaucracy of some sort.
If it were me, each store manager would be responsible for that store, they would then report to me.
It would be very difficult to mass produce anything without bureacracy.
And just how many things have to be mass produced by one producer? Like I said, with a few exceptions I don't think large businesses are needed. A fab plant for semi-conductors can cost hundreds of dollars if not billions, but Apple, Dell, Gateway, and other businesses were started as small businesses. Some in garages or homes.
Falcon
It should be pointed out that Ted Stevens was acquitted of his charges
Ted Stevens was convicted of the charges he faced. But because the DA didn't share all the information gathered with his attorneys the conviction was overturned. The trial judge even appointed a special prosecutor to investigate whether the district attorneys broke the laws.
I'm not saying that a lawmaker can't do things that are illegal as an individual
But you did say it. Not in the same way as above "as an individual", but I copied and pasted what I replied to: "government officials can't do something illegal because they make the laws which define what is legal."
many things which would be illegal for individuals to do are often excepted for political leaders
Politicians do that all the tyme. They even give the government waivers to laws they pass. For instance in the US the largest polluter is the government. I don't know how much weight it carries, it is a Marxist site after all, but Political Affairs has this: U.S. Military – The World's Largest Polluter. The Alexis de Tocqueville Institution, which has the liberal idea of liberty and small government asks the question America's largest polluter – guess who and concludes it's the United States government.
A good current example is how Nancy Pelosi doesn't have to go through the scanners whenever she has to fly between Washington DC and San Francisco.
Because she's third in line to be president of the USA, until January, she gets an Airforce jet for her trips. But I bet if she had to go through security like almost every other flier she'd put a stop to the scanners and pat-downs.
I'm sorry I misspelled the name Charles Rangle. I didn't know I had to bend over so hard to the grammar Nazis here.
Someone posted a complaint? I must of missed it. Not knowing the correct name or spelling I used Google then copied and pasted it.
Falcon
One thing that Wyden is famous for here is that he holds a town hall meeting in every county of the state at least once a year and pays attention to their concerns.
And how are those townhall meeting paid for? Out of pocket, contributions, or taxpayers? Each has problems, out of pocket means only the wealthy can afford it. Taxpayers paying means freeloaders can game the system. And contributions possibility means the candidate is beholden to contributors, but if those contributors are voters in the district what's wrong with that?
Oh, and please notice that as I said earlier, I don't believe corporations and unions should have the same rights of freedom speech, not politically. Nor should industry trade groups. But I don't have a problem with individuals paying voluntarily, none when Ross Perot ran for president, or when Meg Whitman spent $109 million of her own money for the governorship of California. When her campaign spending topped $140 million many pundits wailed about the "corrosive effect on basic democratic principles." And who won the race? Jerry Brown, her democratic opponent.
Falcon
Yes, everything has them. Even not enacting any regulation at all has them, like monopolies abusing their powers to stifle competition and drive up prices.
Except it was government that created those monopolies. Governments gave telephone companies exclusive rights of way or easements to string phone lines. The same applies to cable and power companies. But perhaps the biggest monopoly is patents.
Or in this case, huge insurance premiums because there are no rules shielding them from random litigation.
Large organizations and fat law and regulation books aren't needed for that.
Are you suggesting we start regulating commercial reentries after the first space tourists get blown out of the sky by a missile defense system?
That already happened: Iran Air Flight 655. And as I said to the reply above yours, perhaps a legitimate function of the FAA is as a clearing house for air traffic, where flights are registered in a database that others can check for potential flight conflicts. Licensing is not needed for that.
Falcon
FAA-AST is working with the upcoming companies to avoid unintended consequences, they're not working in a vacuum.
Yea, and possibly to limit competition.
Do you honestly think the military would allow a Falcon 9 to launch from the Cape, without having some documentation of how they plan to re-enter?
One, that is a separate issue. Sure the owner of a facility has the right to make requirements for the use of the facility. But the FAA does not own the Cape or it's launching facilities, the US Airforce owns parts and NASA owns parts. If however SpaceX were to launch from AZ's or NM's spaceport, the only involvement of the FAA is potential air traffic. Now I suppose that that is a reasonable excuse for the FAA, to keep track of air traffic.
Falcon
You say that like it's a bad thing.
Bureaucracies always seek to expand their power and drain resources from where they can do good.
Please do enlighten with a better way to run large complex orginizations.
And what large complex organizations might those be? If you mean governmental organizations, I oppose large government, and want to shrink it not expand it. With a few exceptions I also oppose large corporations, such as too big to fail banks and too big to fail auto makers.
Falcon
I wouldn't call SpaceX a 'big business,' at least not in their field.
SpaceX isn't much of an established company in the field but it does have big and wealthy names behind it.
having a defined procedure increases the ability of new companies to compete by decreasing their liability.
HAHA!!! Insurance exists for risk. There are also places away from population centers where launches can be done. All licensing does is reduce competition. Ask all those who homesteaded the airwaves early last century. When large corporations asked the feds to license broadcasting the government obliged putting many people off of the airwaves.
Flying was also risky but the links I provided, showed licensing wasn't required for many years. Of course you shrug off the analogy though, even though they say 3000 people died on 9-11.
Too much regulation can stifle an industry, this is certainly true, but that doesn't mean the correct answer is to have none instead.
Ever hear of the unintended consequences? Licensing and regulations should only come into being after a problem is identified, and then address that problem.
Falcon
having met many of the people in the FAA Office of Commercial Space, and as someone who cares about seeing an economically sustainable space system develop, I'm damn glad those people are there.
It just more bureaucracy and big government. Of course big businesses like it because it reduces their competition.
creating a solid legal framework for licensing and regulating commercial launches and re-entries is absolutely critical for getting anything thats not a pork-filled government project into space. Otherwise the entire industry is likely to shut down after the first accident.
Like when aircraft were first built, they had to be licensed so people did worry they would crash. AHAH! According to wiki's Pilot licensing and certification article pilot licensing started with the Aero Club of America certificates which "were not mandatory and were more for prestige and show". That was around 1905, after aircraft were in the sky. Add according to the FAA aircraft licensing started after the International Air Navigation Convention, held in 1919. Then licensing wasn't required though nations came together for licensing cross border flying. The FAA page goes on to say "The earliest legal requirement for the N marking is found in the first general amendments to the Air Commerce Regulations on March 22,1927."
Falcon
Since you can't understand, or refuse to do so perhaps because you're trolling, this is my last reply.
Falcon
When they use their wealth to gain more attention from my representatives than I can get then they're abridging my rights.
You don't have the right to have a representative pay attention to you. What you do have the right to do is seek out another person who will listen. And if you're a citizen and are old enough you have the right run against a rep who will not listen to you.
My reps certainly didn't listen to me, or the majority of voters. Both representatives and senators voted for the health care insurance reform bill despite the fact that most people opposed it. What did Nancy Pelosi say? She would pass it no matter what the people thought. Like the fruit cake she is she said we have to pass the health care bill so that you can find out what is in it. That is her personally saying that in the video, not a substitute or actor.
Now tell me, who was she listening too? Certainly not voters.
Falcon
TopView was unusable junk, in my experience.
Until I read this article I don't think I ever heard of TopView. By then I was using Macs most of the tyme. I only used PCs and DOS for programming. For papers, desktop publishing, and drawing it was all Mac.
Falcon
ZFS is, until BtrFS hits truly enterprise stable, the only FS for large disks
What about HFS+? It can work with large drives, up to 8EB.
Is because it's an Apple format?
Falcon
I've disagreed with you before but I agree here.
Falcon
Well, this experiment in mob rule that we call democracy isn't working so well either, judging by what we've elected over the past couple decades, and how they've screwed over the very people who elected them. :(
I like the way Winston Churchill put it: "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried." Partially because of mob rule we have bad laws.
By "qualified pool" I didn't necessarily mean by merit, but by citizens of voting age (something like jury duty, except this would be congress duty).
I don't know about everywhere in the US but in states like Florida people are added to the potential jury pool by registering to vote. I was called to show up twice. When I went I was hoping to be called to serve on a jury for a drug offense or other victimless crime. I believe in Jully Informed Juries and Jury Nullification and wanted to send the message that these laws were bad and unconstitutional. Unfortunately for 2 days each tyme all I did was sit there waiting to be called for questioning.
If you can't tell, I've become somewhat disaffected with the entire concept of democracy; as was pointed out centuries ago, it starts falling apart as soon as the voter realises that he can vote himself largesse from the public treasury.
Oh, I agree but no government leads to chaos. Some say anarchy can work but I don't see how. So instead I try to limit the size, and power, of government.
Falcon
Given that this is a list of "Windows' Failed Rivals", OS/2 rightfully isn't on that list... IBM continued to release new OS/2 versions for nearly a decade after its initial release.
I'm not GP but I thought the same thing. DESQview was a gui that ran multiple DOS programs to run at the same tyme allowing task switching. The only place it is at the end of IBM's TopView's section: "TopView wasn’t officially discontinued until mid-1990, but by that point just about everyone who found the idea intriguing had switched to Quarterdeck’s DESQview." A few article comments mention it though.
Falcon
No, they're not drowned out by law.
If a law says how much a person can spend on a campaign their rights are being violated. How difficult is that to understand?
Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Abridge: verb
to produce a shorter form of a book, play etc by making cuts in the original
Limiting speech is abridging that speech.
Falcon
As to those pensions, even at max they should reflect how long someone served
I believe there shouldn't be any pension for elected offices, it's not a career choice. Congressional pay should only pay for travel from the district the person was elected in to Washington DC and living expenses while there for session. With sessions being only every other year and limited to 90 days $10,000 maybe $20,000 should cover it.
I had an idea too, that rather than being elected, legislators should be randomly chosen from a pool of qualified candidates. (Didn't the ancient Greek system do something like that?)
No, that's a meritocracy. Well parts of Greece may of been meritocracies, but Ancient Athens was democratic.
What's ironic is that Socrates was sentenced to death in Athens because he opposed democracy. And reading Plato's The Republic it has many similarities to Confucius's Analects advocating rule by "proper men" or "gentlemen".
Falcon
How in the world does this solve the problem of media corporations having the ability - unlike every other corporation under your regime - to run politically slanted content under the guise of news right up until the end of the election?
It does solve that, what opening the airwaves does is it allows more voices to be broadcast. Just as the web allows relatively cheap and easy websites, open airwaves will allow relatively cheap and easy radio stations. An example I used years ago was a station dedicated to model railroads where I start broadcasting a call-in show. Maybe I do it as a hobby an hour or two a week, or maybe I try to make it a career and business getting hobby shops to sponsor the show.
Of course doing that now, broadcasting pirate radio, is an invitation to have armed government employees bust down my door.
The Web and print are already this open, but most people get their news from big media corps' sites.
And how many are there? ABC, CBS, Fox, NBC, PBS, and others. Then there's Alternet, Indymedia, and wikipedia.
Why? Better production quality. (Not necessarily the content, just the presentation.)
What? Only large organizations can put together quality presentations?
Falcon
First, there is a difference between being educated and being informed.
See my reply to riverat1 above yours.
Second, you request a "Citation" in reference to my assertion that a person with lots of "4"s would end up being president. Allow me to illustrate.
That is not a citation. At most it is a theoretical hypothesis. I can make up my own.
Now, don't get me wrong, I don't think our current two-party system is very good, but I wouldn't rush to solve the problems by throwing our entire system.
I didn't throw the whole system out. I didn't suggest a dictatorship or king, or getting rid of all government. All I suggested was changing how the president and vice president were elected. Well not all, I have proposed other amendments, such as limiting congressional sessions to 90 days every other year. Politics should not be a career, unlike how it is now.
Actually Thomas Jefferson once said something about there being a revolution every generation or something like that. Unless people have to fight for freedom freedom loses it's meaning to them. They take it for granted, even when there's subterfuge or mission creep wearing freedom away.
Falcon
Oh, and in case I haven't already told you, I fear government far more than any corporation or terrorist. Neither Union Carbide's Bhopal disaster nor Bangalore's terrorist attack killed or maimed as many people as governments have.