Arguments for or against BI don't really mean much until you actually test the theory out. There have already been BI experiments and one of them was in a town in Manitoba Canada back in the 70's. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mincome. The experiment was to observe the effects on productivity and the labour force or rather: if people would just sit around on their assess if they knew that they would be taken care of. It turned out, that in the 5 years it ran there was a slight drop in work hours but mostly by new mothers wishing to spend time with their babies and teenagers focussing on their education. Also, there were fewer hospital visits and fewer consultations with mental health professionals.
The experiment only ran for 5 years so it doesn't really give us much information on the long term effects. But I think it does show us that there was no drastic collapse of our social and moral fabric, instead it was strengthened. People didn't morph into the welfare bums overnight that some would argue is the "obvious" consequence of BI.
...ummm citation needed. There was actually a BI experiment run in Canada in the 70's. It showed that while there was a drop in the labour force it mostly consisted of mothers who were staying home to look after children and teenagers who were focusing on their education. BTW. this whole "welfare bum" argument is so fucking tired. As if welfare is this golden ticket to drinking and smoking all day, watching TV and making babies. The funny thing is, that while people with mindset may exist (though certainly a minority) I sure as shit wouldn't want them working for me! They're better off where they are, spending what little welfare money they get in the local community.
I understand Viacom's concern about loss of income from iTunes but I doubt that it would be too great. Maybe they're just realizing that people who might want shell out two bucks(per show) for the convenience of iTunes will still do so. With YouTube you don't have that convenience(in most cases), you get an episode broken up into several clips *if* somebody even cared to upload it. They also probably don't want to be seen as "bad guys" cracking down on filesharing.
Why can't one live in America? It's a truly great country that people should feel privliged to live in.
IANAY but if you're thinking of leaving because of the current political situation then you really shouldn't. This is a really hot topic that many people are very passionate about and it would be a real shame if they all just gave up and left, leaving the country to those whom they think are ruining it.
An interesting question then to pose is what happens when your new country goes down the same path? Do you emmigrate again? When do you make a stand? People have had it easy for a while and have not had to do anything for their basic human rights. Now these rights are being chipped away at and you're going to have to do something.From what I see and hear, many people, if not the majority, feel the same on the important issues such as civil liberties. Something can be done about it and even if one doesn't feel like they are able to, there are many people who do feel able and need your support.
But really people.... If you have enough energy and patience to get a passport, plane tickets, pack up your things, find a place to live, navigate through a country's immigration laws(in itself a sometimes Herculean task), get a job, learn a new language, adopt to a new culture, etc... you can attend/organize a few local meetings and educate yourself in what needs to be changed and how best to go about it. You can do what little it takes to make yourself heard.
...is not cloning. Cloning just gives you a twin of the "donor" animal and takes the risk out of animal husbandry by providing consistency. The word itself serves to scare/thrill the uninformed, making journalists cream their pants and putting marketing executives off their lunch. The quality of the animal as food for us, in terms of nutritional, health or asthetic values, is affected by all sorts of variables after the animal is born. So what we should be looking at is how these animals which feed us are raised. Are they couped up or are they able to move around? Are they kept in an environment which demands the heavy use of antibiotics? Are they fed a natural diet or are they given only corn? Are they slaughtered cleanly? Are they trucked/flown to markets thousands of miles away or do they stay in the community? Whether or not the animal is a clone doesn't really play into that.
BTW. People shouldn't complain about organic food being so expensive, instead they should be asking why is non-organic food so cheap...
Wow, this totally reminds of that company which markets it's baby formula to the poorest of the poor. Oh wait, what did that article say?
"Ventria hopes to add its protein powder to existing infant products."
I'll grant that their intentions are good but they sure as shit are misplaced. People whose children are dying from diarrhea don't need to go out and buy products that contain protiens to lessen the effects of it. Especially if the use of that product was in some way responsible for their condition. Despite what the article says I'm sure that the firms selling infant products are very interested in this as it could possibly extend the life of the "consumers", allowing them to consume more. It has already been shown that these companies don't care if some GMO ingredients get mixed in with their products. Especially if this product is to be sold where there are few laws regulating such things and the target market is inadequately educated on basic nutrition let alone GMOs.
Slashdot Mirror
Arguments for or against BI don't really mean much until you actually test the theory out. There have already been BI experiments and one of them was in a town in Manitoba Canada back in the 70's. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mincome. The experiment was to observe the effects on productivity and the labour force or rather: if people would just sit around on their assess if they knew that they would be taken care of. It turned out, that in the 5 years it ran there was a slight drop in work hours but mostly by new mothers wishing to spend time with their babies and teenagers focussing on their education. Also, there were fewer hospital visits and fewer consultations with mental health professionals.
The experiment only ran for 5 years so it doesn't really give us much information on the long term effects. But I think it does show us that there was no drastic collapse of our social and moral fabric, instead it was strengthened. People didn't morph into the welfare bums overnight that some would argue is the "obvious" consequence of BI.
The claim that BI works is wrong
...ummm citation needed. There was actually a BI experiment run in Canada in the 70's. It showed that while there was a drop in the labour force it mostly consisted of mothers who were staying home to look after children and teenagers who were focusing on their education.
BTW. this whole "welfare bum" argument is so fucking tired. As if welfare is this golden ticket to drinking and smoking all day, watching TV and making babies. The funny thing is, that while people with mindset may exist (though certainly a minority) I sure as shit wouldn't want them working for me! They're better off where they are, spending what little welfare money they get in the local community.
Amen Brother! ;)
I understand Viacom's concern about loss of income from iTunes but I doubt that it would be too great. Maybe they're just realizing that people who might want shell out two bucks(per show) for the convenience of iTunes will still do so. With YouTube you don't have that convenience(in most cases), you get an episode broken up into several clips *if* somebody even cared to upload it.
They also probably don't want to be seen as "bad guys" cracking down on filesharing.
Why can't one live in America? It's a truly great country that people should feel privliged to live in.
IANAY but if you're thinking of leaving because of the current political situation then you really shouldn't. This is a really hot topic that many people are very passionate about and it would be a real shame if they all just gave up and left, leaving the country to those whom they think are ruining it.
An interesting question then to pose is what happens when your new country goes down the same path? Do you emmigrate again? When do you make a stand? People have had it easy for a while and have not had to do anything for their basic human rights. Now these rights are being chipped away at and you're going to have to do something.From what I see and hear, many people, if not the majority, feel the same on the important issues such as civil liberties. Something can be done about it and even if one doesn't feel like they are able to, there are many people who do feel able and need your support.
But really people.... If you have enough energy and patience to get a passport, plane tickets, pack up your things, find a place to live, navigate through a country's immigration laws(in itself a sometimes Herculean task), get a job, learn a new language, adopt to a new culture, etc... you can attend/organize a few local meetings and educate yourself in what needs to be changed and how best to go about it. You can do what little it takes to make yourself heard.
...is not cloning. Cloning just gives you a twin of the "donor" animal and takes the risk out of animal husbandry by providing consistency. The word itself serves to scare/thrill the uninformed, making journalists cream their pants and putting marketing executives off their lunch.
The quality of the animal as food for us, in terms of nutritional, health or asthetic values, is affected by all sorts of variables after the animal is born. So what we should be looking at is how these animals which feed us are raised. Are they couped up or are they able to move around? Are they kept in an environment which demands the heavy use of antibiotics? Are they fed a natural diet or are they given only corn? Are they slaughtered cleanly? Are they trucked/flown to markets thousands of miles away or do they stay in the community?
Whether or not the animal is a clone doesn't really play into that.
BTW. People shouldn't complain about organic food being so expensive, instead they should be asking why is non-organic food so cheap...
Mike Tyson ;)
Wow, this totally reminds of that company which markets it's baby formula to the poorest of the poor. Oh wait, what did that article say?
"Ventria hopes to add its protein powder to existing infant products."
I'll grant that their intentions are good but they sure as shit are misplaced. People whose children are dying from diarrhea don't need to go out and buy products that contain protiens to lessen the effects of it. Especially if the use of that product was in some way responsible for their condition.
Despite what the article says I'm sure that the firms selling infant products are very interested in this as it could possibly extend the life of the "consumers", allowing them to consume more. It has already been shown that these companies don't care if some GMO ingredients get mixed in with their products. Especially if this product is to be sold where there are few laws regulating such things and the target market is inadequately educated on basic nutrition let alone GMOs.
This was discussed in an episode of the CBC radio program "Quirks and Quarks" a week or two ago.
We must avoid a Lagrange point gap!
No, this is a government trying to curb rampant unemployment. People aren't content when the jobless rates start to reach 22%.
Finally, an excellent excuse to not cut the lawn.
Maybe Michael Moore should pay them a visit