then you'll be talking about the ideas that are actually being discussed
I don't think there are any ideas being discussed. Just people talking past each other.
The summary clearly contrasts "socialism" with "capitalism".
Capitalism: Private ownership of capital.
So if "socialism" doesn't mean NON-private ownership, then what does it mean? If we can't even agree on the meaning of the most basic terms, then discussion seems pointless.
I understand that what young people want is "Capitalism, but with other people paying for my stuff". But that is not really an "idea".
No. If you draw a Venn diagram, socialism would be a big circle, and communism would be a smaller circle embedded within it.
Communism is socialism, but socialism is not necessarily communism.
Communism is socialism violently imposed by the seizure of capital by the proletariat without compensation to the original owners. But that is not the only path to socialism. The Fabians believed in incremental socialism, with compensated government takeovers of industries. This was the original goal of the British Labour Party.
Every country in the world has a mixed economy, with some socialism, and some private production. In America, the government builds roads, bridges, and airports. North Korea has private vegetable markets. Cuba has small private restaurants (which can't hire more than 2 people).
You can go too far in either direction. North Korea and Cuba are 90% socialist, and are impoverished. Somalia has almost no government spending on roads and ports, and is also impoverished.
The "sweet spot" is about 30-40% socialism and 60-70% capitalism. That is enough for infrastructure and a social safety net, but not enough to stifle innovation and economic growth.
For instance, Sweden, Norway, and Finland are definitely socialist countries.
No they aren't. They are capitalist countries with slightly higher spending on social programs. If you call that "socialism" then the word has lost all meaning.
An American is more likely to work for the government than a Swede. The Swedish post office is privatized, and their education system is more privatized than America. They have LOWER per capita government spending on healthcare: America spends more money per person on Medicare+Medicaid+VA to cover 30% of the population than Sweden spends to cover 100%. Just because America's system is stupid and wasteful doesn't make it "less socialist".
Norway's Statoil is an example of socialism, but that is a special situation of a massive public resource owned by a small population. Very few other countries have that benefit.
Socialism: Government ownership of the means of production.
That is what "socialism" means. That is the only thing it means. It has been tried many times, and has never worked well.
But when "young people" say they like socialism, that is NOT what they mean. They mean we should be like Denmark.
The problem is that Denmark is a capitalist country. In many ways they are more capitalist than America. Even their post office is privatized. They rate higher than America on the ease of doing business index.
They have fairly generous tax payer funded social benefits, but so does Greece. Nobody talks about the "Greek Model", but it is basically the same as the "Danish Model" except Greece is populated by Greeks instead of Danes. The "Danish Model" doesn't transplant well. It didn't work in Greece, and it didn't work in Detroit either.
When young people say they want socialism, they really mean they want someone else to pay off their student loans.
Indeed. The root problem is that America consumes too much and invests too little. Tariffs will not change this, and by lowering wages and raising prices, make it even harder.
Fewer Americans will design smart phones. More will sew t-shirts.
But Donald Trump has made one change to America that may have long term positive effects: He has turned many liberals into champions of free trade.
I didn't realize there were so many fish in the ocean in that part of the world.
There isn't. This camera is not just randomly placed in the ocean. It is attached to a large object (the data container) that acts as an artificial reef, attracting fish that school around and below it.
I'm with you up to the "keep it locked" bit...keeping it locked up slows your access to it, and that delay could be critical or even fatal.
Statistically, your gun is WAY more likely to be used by a family member, either shooting another family member, or even more likely shooting themselves. You can make your own decision for your situation, but for most people, locking is better.
A shotgun is probably the best choice in home defense weapons for most folks.
Totally agree. If we had a lot more shotguns, and a lot fewer handguns, many lives could be saved. But keep in mind that shotgun shells have a shorter shelf life than rifle and pistol ammo, especially in high humidity. Replace your shells at least once a year.
Let's look at the facts: 1. In America, suicides are twice as common as homicides. 2. Only 10% of people that survive a suicide attempt go on to successfully kill themselves in later attempts. 3. Women are more likely to attempt suicide, but men are more likely to succeed (in America, 3 dead men for every woman). China is the only country in the world where the female suicide death rate exceeds the male rate. 3. Guns are not the most common method for attempting suicide. But in America they are the most common method of successful suicides. Drug overdose is the most common method, but is only successful 3% of the time. Gun suicides are successful 85% of the time. 4. Gun owning households have significantly higher suicide rates. 5. Gun suicides, in particular, tend to be "on impulse" rather than planned. 6. The TYPE of gun matters. Handguns are used in suicides much more often than either rifles or shotguns.
It is unlikely that people using guns to kill themselves would have done so successfully with a different method, since other methods require more planning and preparation, and have much higher failure rates.
If you choose to keep a gun in your home, you should choose a rifle or shotgun (I own one of each), not a handgun. Keep it locked.
Between 1983 and 2003 there were 36 suicides by aircraft in the United States. All of them were by pilots who would have had access to any "ignition key". Most likely this ground crew guy would have also had access to the key. It is not like the key would be kept in an underground safe with an armed guard. Most likely the pilot would hand it off to the ground crew as they exit the plane.
Sooner or later an incident would happen, such as an emergency landing crashing into a parked plane that couldn't be moved in time because the key was unavailable. Then the FAA would require a spare key to be kept in the cockpit (maybe in the glove compartment?) for "safety".
We should not over react to a single one-off incident.
People tend to focus on things that are in the news, and ignore far more common problems. America has about 120 suicides per day. Some of those harm other people, such as "suicide by car crash". These happen everyday, not once per century.
I'm also reminded of the sprayer on the end of my garden hose, which mostly produces a stream of very large drops, and also produces a mist around the sprayer which cools me off on a hot day..
In addition to glyphosate, Roundup also contains surfactants that inhibit misting. A garden hose is typically about 40 PSI. Roundup sprayers are much lower pressure.
Insecticide sprayers use very high pressure and tiny nozzles, because they need the mist to reach the underside of the leaves, where bugs are more likely to be. But with herbicides, that is unnecessary, and misting is just wasteful, as well as potentially harmful.
Roundup is a liquid, not a powder, and the applicators are designed to produce droplets, not an atomized mist that can be inhaled. If he was breathing it, he was doing something wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
then you'll be talking about the ideas that are actually being discussed
I don't think there are any ideas being discussed. Just people talking past each other.
The summary clearly contrasts "socialism" with "capitalism".
Capitalism: Private ownership of capital.
So if "socialism" doesn't mean NON-private ownership, then what does it mean? If we can't even agree on the meaning of the most basic terms, then discussion seems pointless.
I understand that what young people want is "Capitalism, but with other people paying for my stuff". But that is not really an "idea".
Isn't that communism?
No. If you draw a Venn diagram, socialism would be a big circle, and communism would be a smaller circle embedded within it.
Communism is socialism, but socialism is not necessarily communism.
Communism is socialism violently imposed by the seizure of capital by the proletariat without compensation to the original owners. But that is not the only path to socialism. The Fabians believed in incremental socialism, with compensated government takeovers of industries. This was the original goal of the British Labour Party.
Like roads and bridges ?
Yes. Roads and bridges are capital.
Every country in the world has a mixed economy, with some socialism, and some private production. In America, the government builds roads, bridges, and airports. North Korea has private vegetable markets. Cuba has small private restaurants (which can't hire more than 2 people).
You can go too far in either direction. North Korea and Cuba are 90% socialist, and are impoverished. Somalia has almost no government spending on roads and ports, and is also impoverished.
The "sweet spot" is about 30-40% socialism and 60-70% capitalism. That is enough for infrastructure and a social safety net, but not enough to stifle innovation and economic growth.
For instance, Sweden, Norway, and Finland are definitely socialist countries.
No they aren't. They are capitalist countries with slightly higher spending on social programs. If you call that "socialism" then the word has lost all meaning.
An American is more likely to work for the government than a Swede. The Swedish post office is privatized, and their education system is more privatized than America. They have LOWER per capita government spending on healthcare: America spends more money per person on Medicare+Medicaid+VA to cover 30% of the population than Sweden spends to cover 100%. Just because America's system is stupid and wasteful doesn't make it "less socialist".
Norway's Statoil is an example of socialism, but that is a special situation of a massive public resource owned by a small population. Very few other countries have that benefit.
Also what is your definition of socialism?
Socialism: Government ownership of the means of production.
That is what "socialism" means. That is the only thing it means. It has been tried many times, and has never worked well.
But when "young people" say they like socialism, that is NOT what they mean. They mean we should be like Denmark.
The problem is that Denmark is a capitalist country. In many ways they are more capitalist than America. Even their post office is privatized. They rate higher than America on the ease of doing business index.
They have fairly generous tax payer funded social benefits, but so does Greece. Nobody talks about the "Greek Model", but it is basically the same as the "Danish Model" except Greece is populated by Greeks instead of Danes. The "Danish Model" doesn't transplant well. It didn't work in Greece, and it didn't work in Detroit either.
When young people say they want socialism, they really mean they want someone else to pay off their student loans.
The Publish or perish system is really at fault.
So then what do we replace it with?
he lacks the charisma to make a compelling journal entry.
Writing a good paper has little to do with charisma.
Tip: We aren't.
Indeed. The root problem is that America consumes too much and invests too little. Tariffs will not change this, and by lowering wages and raising prices, make it even harder.
Fewer Americans will design smart phones. More will sew t-shirts.
But Donald Trump has made one change to America that may have long term positive effects: He has turned many liberals into champions of free trade.
I didn't realize there were so many fish in the ocean in that part of the world.
There isn't. This camera is not just randomly placed in the ocean. It is attached to a large object (the data container) that acts as an artificial reef, attracting fish that school around and below it.
Identifying criminal malware authors is the obvious application
How often do you have the source code to malware?
Honest question: Does each crow have to be individually trained, or can new crows learn by watching how the already trained crows get free food?
For instance, the number one reason is because you want to.
Most smokers do not want to smoke, and wish they had never started.
The number one reason for smoking is addiction.
Most smokers want to quit, and have tried multiple times
I'm with you up to the "keep it locked" bit...keeping it locked up slows your access to it, and that delay could be critical or even fatal.
Statistically, your gun is WAY more likely to be used by a family member, either shooting another family member, or even more likely shooting themselves. You can make your own decision for your situation, but for most people, locking is better.
A shotgun is probably the best choice in home defense weapons for most folks.
Totally agree. If we had a lot more shotguns, and a lot fewer handguns, many lives could be saved. But keep in mind that shotgun shells have a shorter shelf life than rifle and pistol ammo, especially in high humidity. Replace your shells at least once a year.
Let's look at the facts:
1. In America, suicides are twice as common as homicides.
2. Only 10% of people that survive a suicide attempt go on to successfully kill themselves in later attempts.
3. Women are more likely to attempt suicide, but men are more likely to succeed (in America, 3 dead men for every woman). China is the only country in the world where the female suicide death rate exceeds the male rate.
3. Guns are not the most common method for attempting suicide. But in America they are the most common method of successful suicides. Drug overdose is the most common method, but is only successful 3% of the time. Gun suicides are successful 85% of the time.
4. Gun owning households have significantly higher suicide rates.
5. Gun suicides, in particular, tend to be "on impulse" rather than planned.
6. The TYPE of gun matters. Handguns are used in suicides much more often than either rifles or shotguns.
It is unlikely that people using guns to kill themselves would have done so successfully with a different method, since other methods require more planning and preparation, and have much higher failure rates.
If you choose to keep a gun in your home, you should choose a rifle or shotgun (I own one of each), not a handgun. Keep it locked.
Guns and suicide
Guns, suicide, and public policy
List of countries by suicide rate
Between 1983 and 2003 there were 36 suicides by aircraft in the United States. All of them were by pilots who would have had access to any "ignition key". Most likely this ground crew guy would have also had access to the key. It is not like the key would be kept in an underground safe with an armed guard. Most likely the pilot would hand it off to the ground crew as they exit the plane.
Sooner or later an incident would happen, such as an emergency landing crashing into a parked plane that couldn't be moved in time because the key was unavailable. Then the FAA would require a spare key to be kept in the cockpit (maybe in the glove compartment?) for "safety".
We should not over react to a single one-off incident.
People tend to focus on things that are in the news, and ignore far more common problems. America has about 120 suicides per day. Some of those harm other people, such as "suicide by car crash". These happen everyday, not once per century.
Endanger a whole lot of other people just because you are having issues.
Give the guy a break. At least he used an empty plane. Better than EgyptAir 990, or Malaysia 370. Those guys took hundreds of innocent lives.
I'm also reminded of the sprayer on the end of my garden hose, which mostly produces a stream of very large drops, and also produces a mist around the sprayer which cools me off on a hot day..
In addition to glyphosate, Roundup also contains surfactants that inhibit misting. A garden hose is typically about 40 PSI. Roundup sprayers are much lower pressure.
Insecticide sprayers use very high pressure and tiny nozzles, because they need the mist to reach the underside of the leaves, where bugs are more likely to be. But with herbicides, that is unnecessary, and misting is just wasteful, as well as potentially harmful.
I never had to show my photo ID to any of my teachers or professors.
A photo ID is required for the SAT, ACT, and GRE.
Bullshit. It's about using the law enforcing religion by the back dor.
Saying it is not culture, but religion, is silly. Religion is culture.
Robotic weed sprayers would use less product, I could see Monsanto bean counters objecting to that.
They can object all they want, but Monsanto doesn't get a veto. Nobody needs their permission to build and market a robot.
Also, the Roundup patent is expired, and it is now a low margin generic product.
Roundup is approved for organic vegetables in the US and Canada.
No it isn't.
The best approach is to simply cut the weeds
Many weeds will regrow from the root.
Glyphosate kills the entire plant.
Roundup is a liquid, not a powder, and the applicators are designed to produce droplets, not an atomized mist that can be inhaled. If he was breathing it, he was doing something wrong.
We could save six times as many innocent lives banning alcohol
We tried banning alcohol, and deaths went up, not down.
"Broadband" means my wife and daughter can stream two different movies, and I can still read email and get work done.
Even at HD quality, 10 Mbps is good enough for that.