Just think for a minute: What kind of wet-dream would it be for the government's "War On Some Drugs & Poor People" types to be able to make it mandatory that everyone's implants time-release constant levels of medications & proteins that would prevent a person from getting "high" from illegal substances? Or even make them violently-ill? They already make pills that make someone violently ill if they drink alcohol to treat alcoholics.
Looking back over the past, do you really trust them not to go that far. or try like hell to? Especially after a few decades?
Who gets to control the implant(s)? Can the control be overridden/hacked? How do you secure that control? How can you be sure that what they tell you it can do is all it can do?
Frankly, without so much security and personal control protections built in that it almost makes it useless for emergency-type patient-unconscious-or-unresponsive scenarios, this concept scares the crap out of me.
Just imagine soldiers and ordinary people with implants to make steroids inside the muscles and painkillers dripped directly the bloodstream without all those icky syringes!
I'm imagining an entire populace government-healthcare-mandated to have these laser-controlled nanofactories that can, besides their publicized abilities, also produce mild or heavy tranquilizers, or other mind/mood-altering drugs.
People protesting? Flash a laser and they're not so interested any more...can't really remember what it was they were mad about. Violent mob? Flash, and they fall unconscious. Government/police wants to question someone? Flash, and they get a dose of sodium pentathol or other similar drug. Government wants to set-up someone? Flash, and they get a nice big dose of rohypnol ("rufies") and star in an embarrassing video they don't/can't remember.
"A more likely punishment is a throttled connection, where connection speeds are severely degraded for a set period. The agreement specifically mentions 256 -640 kbps as an example."
This is an interesting point.
For many, the "throttling punishment" speeds are above the actual speeds they normally receive due to massive subscriber overselling.
ISP/Throttled customer call:
---
Customer: "Hello?"
ISP: "Hello, this is $DRONE from $ISP, we have received a notice from $MAFIAA/LAWFIRM concerning copyright infringement activity occurring on your connection. In accordance with our new TOS we have no choice but to enact throttling of your connection."
Customer: "What!? What are you throttling my connection down to?"
ISP: "We will be forced to throttle your connection to 640kbps."
Customer: "Wow, thanks! I haven't got anywhere near that speed in the 3 years I've been a customer! Can I get more of this "punishment" if I torrent some more movies and music?"
That makes me wonder how many Delawarians are going to find a new career... the kind where they work for an out-of-state entity, placing bets or making moves in casino gaming. Does the state have a way to verify that isn't happening? The money could flow into a Delaware resident's bank account, and then be moved to anyone else on the planet as "payment for services rendered". Too easy to get past that limitation, which means a ton of people will be trying it... and most of them will pull it off.
What typically happens in any type of gambling situation with government-restricted location/participants is that organized crime will move in and set up a cozy deal with the local LE and politicians, and any random people trying to "get a piece of the action" without joining/paying the organization's operation will get their kneecaps introduced to a Louisville Slugger. If they're lucky.
'll call you, and raise you a "it'll destroy civilization" if we don't do it.
Oh, bullshit!
Seriously. Stop with the "OMG we're all gonna DIE!!!11".
It almost sounds like your saying "we have to destroy civilization to save civilization", which currently wouldn't be far from the truth, as most of the Western nation's economies are desperately struggling, and many scrambling to avoid collapse
Even the worst-case climate change scenarios modeled so far don't come anywhere close to "destroying civilization". To reach an extinction-level of damage would take many, many thousands of years, even using data from the most pessimistic models. It also doesn't take into account continued scientific and technical progress and assumes none occurs. It is FUD and scare-mongering.
Look, there's nothing wrong with having reasonable rules about not screwing up the planet that are reasonably effective AND that don't cripple entire industries and/or bankrupt struggling national economies as well as slam the poor, while crippling the advancement of technology and civilization.
But, there seems to be a vocal radical subset that sees this as an opportunity to use such regulation as a weapon against Western capitalist industrial and energy production capacity as part of their ideological agenda. It's not even like they make a lot of effort to hide it. If one visits the websites of these various groups and organizations, it quickly becomes quite obvious. Many state openly that is one of their goals.
That pisses me off. *I* want effective, reasonable, and fair environmental protections and policies, but these agenda-driven assholes muddy and skew the discussion so much that it makes truly productive policy discussions and reasonable, fair decisions impossible, and often impede the adoption of good policies.
So, then we end up with effectively *less* effective environmental policies that actually protect the environment *less* in favor of their ideological agenda. Quit damaging our environment to push your damned ideology!
They do this because when they are open about their agendas and goals and tell people what their actual views are and the kind of policies they want to enact and *give people choices*, most people reject them and their ideology. They refuse to accept the notion that their ideas might just be wrong, and fall back on a variation of "everyone else is stupid, we're smarter than everyone else, therefor we must force our views and policies on them for their own good no matter what it takes, as the ends justify the means" to justify their deceptions and lies.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
By the way, I thought I'd also take time to educate you about the error in your sig, as long as I was here educating you in recent history with my other post.
The word you want there is "FUBAR". It's an unofficial (obviously) slang acronym that came out of the military ranks in WW2. It means "Fucked Up Beyond All Recognition/Any Repair/All Reason". It is closely related to other unofficial military slang acronyms that also came out of WW2, like SNAFU (Situation Normal, All Fucked Up), SUSFU (Situation Unchanged, Still Fucked Up), and TARFU (Totally And Royally Fucked Up).
Just an FYI for your future reference; When posting criticisms of other people's thinking on a news/tech site for nerds, you may want to at least make sure your sig doesn't discredit your own abilities.
The decision doesn't grant the government power to compel you to buy things, only the power to penalize (tax) you if you don't.
Very different things
I understand your point. In an academic legal sense, yes, I agree. However, in practical terms, it's a distinction without a difference. How else would the government "compel" someone except by penalizing non-compliance? "Do this or else!"
In this case the penalties come through taxation and even imprisonment. Try telling the IRS to go pound sand, whether it's about taxes owed on income or penalties assessed through ACA rules, and see where you end up! I'd certainly call a heavily-armed SWAT/IRS raid pretty strong compulsion.
Starting a post with childish condescension; Check.
...if all it takes to "trample" the "principles upon which the nation was based"
"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in peopleâ(TM)s minds." - Samuel Adams
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." - Thomas Jefferson
...is a law that requires people to have medical insurance,
It is legislation that grants government a power over the citizens it was not granted in the Constitution and had never before tried to exercise; the ability to compel private citizens to purchase a product from another set of private citizens. Will we all have to buy/go into debt for a Chevy Volt next? How about when a "right-winger" is POTUS and theoretically made you buy something you found totally objectionable and a violation of your ethics & principles under the same power?
...then those were some weak-ass "principles" to begin with.
Oh, I see your problem!
Somehow, you got all turned-around on your way up from Mom's basement for more Cheetos and Mt. Dew, and wound up in a capitalism-based democratic republic, you silly!
Wouldn't want you having to suffer with any of those "weak-ass 'principles'" like freedom of speech/press, or freedom from warrant-less searchesseizures, or arrest and imprisonment without cause/charge or due process, for any longer than you have to, you poor, poor deary!
The DPRK is that way ===>
The "principles" that hold this country together were never "The Constitution" or some Burkean fantasy of the Right. The principles that have always held this country together are the ones that say, "We're all in this together" and "Let's get this done" and "Things work better when people aren't selfish assholes".
Yeah, everyone knows that the country was founded on the principles of collectivism and central government planning & control, and not religious freedom, individual liberty, and limited Federal power. Why, just the other day I thought I saw a painting of George Washington wearing a "Mao" T-shirt. Or was it Thomas Jefferson in a Che T-shirt?
Well, thanks once again Ratzo, for illustrating my points for me in such stark manner.
I certainly feel good knowing that the same US government that is going to such lengths for nothing more than retribution and to "make an example out of" Assange, all this effort and political intrigue and US foreign relations capital expended, against a *single individual*, who dared expose data he had no hand in originally obtaining and had no legal obligation to not publish...
-Is the *same* US government that is now in charge of my healthcare, and also in charge of the healthcare of all those politically opposed to the incumbent party, no matter which party is in power. This should give pause no matter what side of the political spectrum you're on. Your team won't always be in power, and what happens when "those other *evil* guys" get in office?
But thank God your right to be overly dramatic has been upheld.
Maybe. But apparently you can be taxed for exercising it.
Heh. Nice!
Of course, someone who has no truly deeply-held beliefs in individual freedom, the rule of law, or the principles upon which the nation *was* based, will find those that do have such beliefs "overly dramatic" when they protest their trampling. So it has always been with those who think like he does.
Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
More hysteria -- I often wonder where such thinking comes from. Now I've got a front row seat.
Oh, I'm sorry, I thought that whole thing about the POTUS now being able to imprison or kill US citizens without due process, not to mention the TLA fiascos, GPS tracking, warrant-less searches and data/voice snooping, and everything else that nearly everybody on Slashdot has howled about for a decade under both GWB and Obama (including me) when they were announced actually happened!
Whew! Thanks!
I feel much better now that I know that was all hysteria.
Mass hysteria too, apparently. Good thing everybody will have insurance for the therapy they'll need.
Well, with Obamacare, NDAA, PATRIOT Act, DHS/TSA, etc etc etc now a fact, your first line about driving becomes:
Remember, in the New USA your continued existence as a non-imprisoned and still-living, breathing, human being is a Privilege, not a Right and can be revoked at any time without due process.
I weep for my country, for it is dead. We now have a "ruling regime", not a government of, by, and for the People. And because I know God is just, I also tremble in fear for my country.
Oh, the old "it'll wreck the economy" and "hurt the poor" arguments. I'll call you, and raise you a "it'll destroy civilization" argument if we don't do it.
Higher gas prices won't wreck the economy. There are alternatives. People don't have to drive monster SUVs. Don't have to live in McMansions and commute 100 miles to work every day. There are a bunch of easy things we could do to save gas if we got serious about it.
If the environment is wrecked, that will wreck the economy more surely than any tiny price increase. You'd suddenly realize just how petty a $1 or even a $5 increase in the price of a gallon of gas is compared to millions of homeless people forced to move to higher ground thanks to rising sea levels, and more hungry millions swarming over the land because the weather made our crops fail. Civilizations have fallen over crop failures.
So, all you've got to refute with is wild hand-waving and environmental scare-mongering.
Not to mention you're effectively saying that those poor people who suffer and lose their lives to fulfill your anti-Capitalist enviro-whacko agenda are acceptable "collateral damage".
Of course, it wouldn't affect the rich. They can pay whatever is charged for energy and gasoline. The impact of higher oil prices is steeply regressive. It always hurts the poorest first and hardest.
You just ooze the milk of human kindness and mercy for the less-fortunate, don't you?
I'd say he's better suited to handle a bowl of Mac & Cheese
Whereas you've proven yourself to be barely capable of posting a coherent thought on an internet message board. Truly your assessment of other people's ability must be something special.
Don't be too hard on him. My assessment skills concerning abilities is clearly off as well.
Prior to reading your post, I would have sworn that someone addicted to smoking bath salts could never become lucid enough to post a legible sentence on Slashdot, yet here you are...
Suburbs have been eating up farmland like crazy these past decades. Killing the suburb and exurb growth is probably the way to keep farms producing in rural areas.
Killing the suburbs through higher oil/transportation costs will make both those in the suburbs AND those on farms move to urban areas. There may be more land available to clear and to farm, but nobody will be able to afford to live out there and clear the land, then farm it, and then ship it into the urban areas to feed everyone. The price will come in human lives, particularly the working-poor and those on Social Security retirement/disability.
Try getting a sig without an error in every word, then someone might take your seriously. Also, a brain.
Well, at least your post shows you have "brains" enough to attack him personally for his sig while completely avoiding refuting anything the OP posted.
Higher oil prices are the answer. They are the only external force that will cause Joe 6-Pack to care about better city planning, public transportation and the like.
So, you want poor people to pay more for food, medicine, housing, energy, and clothing, besides not being able to afford to get to work, the doctor's, the kid's school(s)?
That's the effects higher oil prices have. Not just higher gasoline prices. Nobody who advocates for higher oil prices ever mentions that or offers any practical solutions, if they'll even talk about it at all.
It won't only affect those living outside urban areas or the rich. It will take a real toll in human lives. Mostly the working poor and those on Social Security.
You just ooze the milk of human kindness, don't you?
If you move everyone into urban areas, then good luck raising your own chickens, cows, pigs, and growing all your grains, fruits, and vegetables in downtown $YOURCITY.
Let the rest of us know how that works out for you.
slashdotters seem to want to say "no no don't go there" as if that would stop it from ever occurring.
How does one go about seeming to want to say something? Is that like wanting to seem like you're thinking something?
Just...Wow!
From your screen name I'm assuming you're female here.
I've never seen you, have no idea who or where you are, have no idea how young/old you may be, don't know your ideological/political beliefs, nor have any clue whether you are physically attractive or not.
But, and please don't take this the wrong way, for that brilliant line in your post *alone*, I'd ask you out to dinner and count myself a very fortunate man if you accepted, even if you bore a strong resemblance to Ms Quasimodo!
That was simply a beautiful thing from an obviously beautiful mind. I'm still chuckling!:)
"...As always, more money and power for the government!" That's a policy decisions. This is science. Different things.
I have no doubts that they've measured a sea level rise. I'm not doubting that. I *do* have doubts about what they attribute it to, and the likely consequences. Neither are simple or scientifically settled.
What science am I incorrect on? Enlighten me, O Wise One!
Detroit is a case of the local economy not thinking about more the one industry. The MARKET caused that problem, not the government. The government was left with thousand of citizen with no where to turn.
Maybe you missed my mention of it in posts in other discussions, but I live here just a short drive from the Detroit city limits. This is local for me. I've watched Detroit slowly being destroyed by corrupt Progressive Democrat politicians, labor unions, and Progressive policies over almost my whole life since the early 1960s when the city and county governments were completely taken over by massively-corrupt Progressive Democrats.
Did you know that Detroit was the earliest test-tube for the "Sustainable Development" set of government programs and policies currently being promoted for every US city? Worked well, hasn't it?
Well, get ready for it to come to a city near you. It's on the way, if the Progressive Democrats get their way. Check your own and nearby medium-to-large city's websites for links to "Sustainable Development".
Even in the '80s, long before the recent national economic mess and auto bailouts, Detroit was a disaster area and hellhole. The only thing that kept it from becoming the 3rd-world hellhole it has become now were the auto companies. The recent economic mess and auto bailouts just pushed it nearly into "Somalia" territory. Bears are starting to repopulate Detroit, and there are roving packs of wild dogs, both of which are roaming the streets unafraid in broad daylight.
To take a quote from the movie "The Outlaw Josie Wales";
"Don't piss down *my* back and tell *me* it's raining!"
Here, check out this video. As bad as things look in Detroit in that video, I can tell you it's worse even than the video shows, as bad as that is.
Because (a) the government IS the people, and (b) corporations are sociopathic. Corps will take and take and take so long as their short-term profit is projected to increase. Unless you make it 100% bold-faced illegal, they'll do it (and sometimes even then).
I just have to add to my other reply.
By your logic, that means that the government needs to take all the wealth and freedoms from the people, *that the people currently have*, before the corporations do (despite the fact that only the government may use lethal force and imprisonment) because:
Someone is going to call the shots.
This is just so wrong on so many levels one doesn't even know where to begin...
Wow, jut wow. Watching you stack up the logical fallacies sis amazing. So, How much science and logic does one need to study before they become so mind numbingly bad at it?
It it's that bad, you should be able to completely destroy my points...
But so far, I'm seeing nothing but ad hominem and hand-waving.
Do you have anything worthwhile to contribute to the discussion to refute me with, or can I call this one good?
funny, you're earlier post flies in the face of logic and science. It clearly shows you spouting off about thinkg you knwo nothing about, and railing against the government because of a market problem.
Logic is useless if you are vapid.
Well, I see a problem when people complain about corruption and corporate greed, but seem to completely ignore that there are two halves to the problem, being that corporations, the rich, etc can only get away with doing the bad things they do with willing accomplices in the government.
You will never remove one without removing both.
Each empowers the other.
Different factions of corporations and special interests exert various levels of control over various parts of government that are divided into competing fiefdoms of various political powers themselves. They all struggle among themselves for supremacy while both enrich themselves on the backs of the people and slowly remove ever more freedom and choice. Your wealth, your freedoms, and control over you and your activities & behaviors are what they use for barter.
When you give government more of your wealth and freedoms, you give the corrupt forces and people inside *and* outside of government your wealth and freedom. Your wealth gets divided up and divvied out to the various campaign donors, favored corporations, etc etc, while the various power blocs in government use your loss of freedoms to exert more control, which in turn provides them something else they can sell to the powerful outside government.
The key first step to breaking this "revolving wheel of shit" is to greatly reduce (not eliminate, not anarchy-levels or anything, reduce) the amount of wealth and control the government (and the corrupt people in it) has.
Why not go after the corporations first?
Well, first you need a government that isn't in their pockets already, because the most powerful political faction in government at the time will simply use it as an opportunity to cripple or eliminate the corporations and special interests that fund their power-competitors within the government.
Second, people need to eat while this all goes down. Destroying/crippling the corporations and what you call "1%-ers" will really put us in deep shit with the economy. What good are government food stamps if the store is boarded up? They also need to pay the rent/mortgage, make the car payment, etc.
Third, eliminating the ability of domestic corporate/special interests to buy influence without first greatly reducing that which the government and politicians were selling in the first place...your wealth and freedoms...will simply cause them to seek a market elsewhere. Most likely foreign corporations and special interests, as they won't be much affected by what we do to our corporations and special interests domestically.
Once you've gotten the government reined in to the point that there's a decent chance that the corrupting forces outside government can actually be held to account without simply slipping a few megadollars to the right government shlubs and walking, then you start cleaning that mess up.
Slashdot Mirror
I see my post got modded "Troll".
To those who think I'm trolling, I'm not.
Just think for a minute: What kind of wet-dream would it be for the government's "War On Some Drugs & Poor People" types to be able to make it mandatory that everyone's implants time-release constant levels of medications & proteins that would prevent a person from getting "high" from illegal substances? Or even make them violently-ill? They already make pills that make someone violently ill if they drink alcohol to treat alcoholics.
Looking back over the past, do you really trust them not to go that far. or try like hell to? Especially after a few decades?
Who gets to control the implant(s)? Can the control be overridden/hacked? How do you secure that control? How can you be sure that what they tell you it can do is all it can do?
Frankly, without so much security and personal control protections built in that it almost makes it useless for emergency-type patient-unconscious-or-unresponsive scenarios, this concept scares the crap out of me.
Strat
Just imagine soldiers and ordinary people with implants to make steroids inside the muscles and painkillers dripped directly the bloodstream without all those icky syringes!
I'm imagining an entire populace government-healthcare-mandated to have these laser-controlled nanofactories that can, besides their publicized abilities, also produce mild or heavy tranquilizers, or other mind/mood-altering drugs.
People protesting? Flash a laser and they're not so interested any more...can't really remember what it was they were mad about. Violent mob? Flash, and they fall unconscious. Government/police wants to question someone? Flash, and they get a dose of sodium pentathol or other similar drug. Government wants to set-up someone? Flash, and they get a nice big dose of rohypnol ("rufies") and star in an embarrassing video they don't/can't remember.
There's huge potential for abuse here.
Strat
Who knew? I'm a Century Link DSL customer.
"A more likely punishment is a throttled connection, where connection speeds are severely degraded for a set period. The agreement specifically mentions 256 -640 kbps as an example."
This is an interesting point.
For many, the "throttling punishment" speeds are above the actual speeds they normally receive due to massive subscriber overselling.
ISP/Throttled customer call:
---
Customer: "Hello?"
ISP: "Hello, this is $DRONE from $ISP, we have received a notice from $MAFIAA/LAWFIRM concerning copyright infringement activity occurring on your connection. In accordance with our new TOS we have no choice but to enact throttling of your connection."
Customer: "What!? What are you throttling my connection down to?"
ISP: "We will be forced to throttle your connection to 640kbps."
Customer: "Wow, thanks! I haven't got anywhere near that speed in the 3 years I've been a customer! Can I get more of this "punishment" if I torrent some more movies and music?"
ISP: "Ummm..."
---
Strat
Can anyone recommend me a VPN service hosted in Venezuela or any other country on hostile terms with the US?
Sure!
DHSKicksInMyDoor.net
Seems to be getting more and more popular these days...
Strat
That makes me wonder how many Delawarians are going to find a new career... the kind where they work for an out-of-state entity, placing bets or making moves in casino gaming. Does the state have a way to verify that isn't happening? The money could flow into a Delaware resident's bank account, and then be moved to anyone else on the planet as "payment for services rendered". Too easy to get past that limitation, which means a ton of people will be trying it... and most of them will pull it off.
What typically happens in any type of gambling situation with government-restricted location/participants is that organized crime will move in and set up a cozy deal with the local LE and politicians, and any random people trying to "get a piece of the action" without joining/paying the organization's operation will get their kneecaps introduced to a Louisville Slugger. If they're lucky.
Strat
'll call you, and raise you a "it'll destroy civilization" if we don't do it.
Oh, bullshit!
Seriously. Stop with the "OMG we're all gonna DIE!!!11".
It almost sounds like your saying "we have to destroy civilization to save civilization", which currently wouldn't be far from the truth, as most of the Western nation's economies are desperately struggling, and many scrambling to avoid collapse
Even the worst-case climate change scenarios modeled so far don't come anywhere close to "destroying civilization". To reach an extinction-level of damage would take many, many thousands of years, even using data from the most pessimistic models. It also doesn't take into account continued scientific and technical progress and assumes none occurs. It is FUD and scare-mongering.
Look, there's nothing wrong with having reasonable rules about not screwing up the planet that are reasonably effective AND that don't cripple entire industries and/or bankrupt struggling national economies as well as slam the poor, while crippling the advancement of technology and civilization.
But, there seems to be a vocal radical subset that sees this as an opportunity to use such regulation as a weapon against Western capitalist industrial and energy production capacity as part of their ideological agenda. It's not even like they make a lot of effort to hide it. If one visits the websites of these various groups and organizations, it quickly becomes quite obvious. Many state openly that is one of their goals.
That pisses me off. *I* want effective, reasonable, and fair environmental protections and policies, but these agenda-driven assholes muddy and skew the discussion so much that it makes truly productive policy discussions and reasonable, fair decisions impossible, and often impede the adoption of good policies.
So, then we end up with effectively *less* effective environmental policies that actually protect the environment *less* in favor of their ideological agenda. Quit damaging our environment to push your damned ideology!
They do this because when they are open about their agendas and goals and tell people what their actual views are and the kind of policies they want to enact and *give people choices*, most people reject them and their ideology. They refuse to accept the notion that their ideas might just be wrong, and fall back on a variation of "everyone else is stupid, we're smarter than everyone else, therefor we must force our views and policies on them for their own good no matter what it takes, as the ends justify the means" to justify their deceptions and lies.
Strat
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
By the way, I thought I'd also take time to educate you about the error in your sig, as long as I was here educating you in recent history with my other post.
The word you want there is "FUBAR". It's an unofficial (obviously) slang acronym that came out of the military ranks in WW2. It means "Fucked Up Beyond All Recognition/Any Repair/All Reason". It is closely related to other unofficial military slang acronyms that also came out of WW2, like SNAFU (Situation Normal, All Fucked Up), SUSFU (Situation Unchanged, Still Fucked Up), and TARFU (Totally And Royally Fucked Up).
Just an FYI for your future reference; When posting criticisms of other people's thinking on a news/tech site for nerds, you may want to at least make sure your sig doesn't discredit your own abilities.
Or, not.
Strat
The decision doesn't grant the government power to compel you to buy things, only the power to penalize (tax) you if you don't.
Very different things
I understand your point. In an academic legal sense, yes, I agree. However, in practical terms, it's a distinction without a difference. How else would the government "compel" someone except by penalizing non-compliance? "Do this or else!"
In this case the penalties come through taxation and even imprisonment. Try telling the IRS to go pound sand, whether it's about taxes owed on income or penalties assessed through ACA rules, and see where you end up! I'd certainly call a heavily-armed SWAT/IRS raid pretty strong compulsion.
Strat
Son,
Starting a post with childish condescension; Check.
...if all it takes to "trample" the "principles upon which the nation was based"
"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in peopleâ(TM)s minds." - Samuel Adams
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." - Thomas Jefferson
...is a law that requires people to have medical insurance,
It is legislation that grants government a power over the citizens it was not granted in the Constitution and had never before tried to exercise; the ability to compel private citizens to purchase a product from another set of private citizens. Will we all have to buy/go into debt for a Chevy Volt next? How about when a "right-winger" is POTUS and theoretically made you buy something you found totally objectionable and a violation of your ethics & principles under the same power?
...then those were some weak-ass "principles" to begin with.
Oh, I see your problem!
Somehow, you got all turned-around on your way up from Mom's basement for more Cheetos and Mt. Dew, and wound up in a capitalism-based democratic republic, you silly!
Wouldn't want you having to suffer with any of those "weak-ass 'principles'" like freedom of speech/press, or freedom from warrant-less searchesseizures, or arrest and imprisonment without cause/charge or due process, for any longer than you have to, you poor, poor deary!
The DPRK is that way ===>
The "principles" that hold this country together were never "The Constitution" or some Burkean fantasy of the Right. The principles that have always held this country together are the ones that say, "We're all in this together" and "Let's get this done" and "Things work better when people aren't selfish assholes".
Yeah, everyone knows that the country was founded on the principles of collectivism and central government planning & control, and not religious freedom, individual liberty, and limited Federal power. Why, just the other day I thought I saw a painting of George Washington wearing a "Mao" T-shirt. Or was it Thomas Jefferson in a Che T-shirt?
Well, thanks once again Ratzo, for illustrating my points for me in such stark manner.
Strat
I certainly feel good knowing that the same US government that is going to such lengths for nothing more than retribution and to "make an example out of" Assange, all this effort and political intrigue and US foreign relations capital expended, against a *single individual*, who dared expose data he had no hand in originally obtaining and had no legal obligation to not publish...
-Is the *same* US government that is now in charge of my healthcare, and also in charge of the healthcare of all those politically opposed to the incumbent party, no matter which party is in power. This should give pause no matter what side of the political spectrum you're on. Your team won't always be in power, and what happens when "those other *evil* guys" get in office?
Strat
Heh. Nice!
Of course, someone who has no truly deeply-held beliefs in individual freedom, the rule of law, or the principles upon which the nation *was* based, will find those that do have such beliefs "overly dramatic" when they protest their trampling. So it has always been with those who think like he does.
Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
Strat
More hysteria -- I often wonder where such thinking comes from. Now I've got a front row seat.
Oh, I'm sorry, I thought that whole thing about the POTUS now being able to imprison or kill US citizens without due process, not to mention the TLA fiascos, GPS tracking, warrant-less searches and data/voice snooping, and everything else that nearly everybody on Slashdot has howled about for a decade under both GWB and Obama (including me) when they were announced actually happened!
Whew! Thanks!
I feel much better now that I know that was all hysteria.
Mass hysteria too, apparently. Good thing everybody will have insurance for the therapy they'll need.
Strat
Well, with Obamacare, NDAA, PATRIOT Act, DHS/TSA, etc etc etc now a fact, your first line about driving becomes:
Remember, in the New USA your continued existence as a non-imprisoned and still-living, breathing, human being is a Privilege, not a Right and can be revoked at any time without due process.
I weep for my country, for it is dead. We now have a "ruling regime", not a government of, by, and for the People. And because I know God is just, I also tremble in fear for my country.
Strat
Oh, the old "it'll wreck the economy" and "hurt the poor" arguments. I'll call you, and raise you a "it'll destroy civilization" argument if we don't do it.
Higher gas prices won't wreck the economy. There are alternatives. People don't have to drive monster SUVs. Don't have to live in McMansions and commute 100 miles to work every day. There are a bunch of easy things we could do to save gas if we got serious about it.
If the environment is wrecked, that will wreck the economy more surely than any tiny price increase. You'd suddenly realize just how petty a $1 or even a $5 increase in the price of a gallon of gas is compared to millions of homeless people forced to move to higher ground thanks to rising sea levels, and more hungry millions swarming over the land because the weather made our crops fail. Civilizations have fallen over crop failures.
So, all you've got to refute with is wild hand-waving and environmental scare-mongering.
Not to mention you're effectively saying that those poor people who suffer and lose their lives to fulfill your anti-Capitalist enviro-whacko agenda are acceptable "collateral damage".
Of course, it wouldn't affect the rich. They can pay whatever is charged for energy and gasoline. The impact of higher oil prices is steeply regressive. It always hurts the poorest first and hardest.
You just ooze the milk of human kindness and mercy for the less-fortunate, don't you?
Strat
I'd say he's better suited to handle a bowl of Mac & Cheese and that's as far as I'd go with his qualifications and skill set. lol
That depends.
Not if it's made from Wisconsin cheese. He seems to have problems handling things associated with and/or occurring in Wisconsin lately.
Strat
Don't be too hard on him. My assessment skills concerning abilities is clearly off as well.
Prior to reading your post, I would have sworn that someone addicted to smoking bath salts could never become lucid enough to post a legible sentence on Slashdot, yet here you are...
Strat
Suburbs have been eating up farmland like crazy these past decades. Killing the suburb and exurb growth is probably the way to keep farms producing in rural areas.
Killing the suburbs through higher oil/transportation costs will make both those in the suburbs AND those on farms move to urban areas. There may be more land available to clear and to farm, but nobody will be able to afford to live out there and clear the land, then farm it, and then ship it into the urban areas to feed everyone. The price will come in human lives, particularly the working-poor and those on Social Security retirement/disability.
Strat
Try getting a sig without an error in every word, then someone might take your seriously. Also, a brain.
Well, at least your post shows you have "brains" enough to attack him personally for his sig while completely avoiding refuting anything the OP posted.
That's something, I suppose...
Um, congratulations? :/
Strat
Higher oil prices are the answer. They are the only external force that will cause Joe 6-Pack to care about better city planning, public transportation and the like.
So, you want poor people to pay more for food, medicine, housing, energy, and clothing, besides not being able to afford to get to work, the doctor's, the kid's school(s)?
That's the effects higher oil prices have. Not just higher gasoline prices. Nobody who advocates for higher oil prices ever mentions that or offers any practical solutions, if they'll even talk about it at all.
It won't only affect those living outside urban areas or the rich. It will take a real toll in human lives. Mostly the working poor and those on Social Security.
You just ooze the milk of human kindness, don't you?
Strat
Move out of the sticks, hayseed!
If you move everyone into urban areas, then good luck raising your own chickens, cows, pigs, and growing all your grains, fruits, and vegetables in downtown $YOURCITY.
Let the rest of us know how that works out for you.
Strat
Just...Wow!
From your screen name I'm assuming you're female here.
I've never seen you, have no idea who or where you are, have no idea how young/old you may be, don't know your ideological/political beliefs, nor have any clue whether you are physically attractive or not.
But, and please don't take this the wrong way, for that brilliant line in your post *alone*, I'd ask you out to dinner and count myself a very fortunate man if you accepted, even if you bore a strong resemblance to Ms Quasimodo!
That was simply a beautiful thing from an obviously beautiful mind. I'm still chuckling! :)
Bravo!
Strat
The /. summary got it from the summary??
Yo Dawg, I heard you like summaries...
Strat
"...As always, more money and power for the government!"
That's a policy decisions.
This is science. Different things.
I have no doubts that they've measured a sea level rise. I'm not doubting that. I *do* have doubts about what they attribute it to, and the likely consequences. Neither are simple or scientifically settled.
What science am I incorrect on? Enlighten me, O Wise One!
Detroit is a case of the local economy not thinking about more the one industry. The MARKET caused that problem, not the government. The government was left with thousand of citizen with no where to turn.
Maybe you missed my mention of it in posts in other discussions, but I live here just a short drive from the Detroit city limits. This is local for me. I've watched Detroit slowly being destroyed by corrupt Progressive Democrat politicians, labor unions, and Progressive policies over almost my whole life since the early 1960s when the city and county governments were completely taken over by massively-corrupt Progressive Democrats.
Did you know that Detroit was the earliest test-tube for the "Sustainable Development" set of government programs and policies currently being promoted for every US city? Worked well, hasn't it?
Well, get ready for it to come to a city near you. It's on the way, if the Progressive Democrats get their way. Check your own and nearby medium-to-large city's websites for links to "Sustainable Development".
Even in the '80s, long before the recent national economic mess and auto bailouts, Detroit was a disaster area and hellhole. The only thing that kept it from becoming the 3rd-world hellhole it has become now were the auto companies. The recent economic mess and auto bailouts just pushed it nearly into "Somalia" territory. Bears are starting to repopulate Detroit, and there are roving packs of wild dogs, both of which are roaming the streets unafraid in broad daylight.
To take a quote from the movie "The Outlaw Josie Wales";
"Don't piss down *my* back and tell *me* it's raining!"
Here, check out this video. As bad as things look in Detroit in that video, I can tell you it's worse even than the video shows, as bad as that is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hhJ_49leBw
Strat
Wow, jut wow. Watching you stack up the logical fallacies sis amazing. So, How much science and logic does one need to study before they become so mind numbingly bad at it?
It it's that bad, you should be able to completely destroy my points...
But so far, I'm seeing nothing but ad hominem and hand-waving.
Do you have anything worthwhile to contribute to the discussion to refute me with, or can I call this one good?
Strat
" I prefer logic and science "
funny, you're earlier post flies in the face of logic and science. It clearly shows you spouting off about thinkg you knwo nothing about, and railing against the government because of a market problem.
Logic is useless if you are vapid.
Well, I see a problem when people complain about corruption and corporate greed, but seem to completely ignore that there are two halves to the problem, being that corporations, the rich, etc can only get away with doing the bad things they do with willing accomplices in the government.
You will never remove one without removing both.
Each empowers the other.
Different factions of corporations and special interests exert various levels of control over various parts of government that are divided into competing fiefdoms of various political powers themselves. They all struggle among themselves for supremacy while both enrich themselves on the backs of the people and slowly remove ever more freedom and choice. Your wealth, your freedoms, and control over you and your activities & behaviors are what they use for barter.
When you give government more of your wealth and freedoms, you give the corrupt forces and people inside *and* outside of government your wealth and freedom. Your wealth gets divided up and divvied out to the various campaign donors, favored corporations, etc etc, while the various power blocs in government use your loss of freedoms to exert more control, which in turn provides them something else they can sell to the powerful outside government.
The key first step to breaking this "revolving wheel of shit" is to greatly reduce (not eliminate, not anarchy-levels or anything, reduce) the amount of wealth and control the government (and the corrupt people in it) has.
Why not go after the corporations first?
Well, first you need a government that isn't in their pockets already, because the most powerful political faction in government at the time will simply use it as an opportunity to cripple or eliminate the corporations and special interests that fund their power-competitors within the government.
Second, people need to eat while this all goes down. Destroying/crippling the corporations and what you call "1%-ers" will really put us in deep shit with the economy. What good are government food stamps if the store is boarded up? They also need to pay the rent/mortgage, make the car payment, etc.
Third, eliminating the ability of domestic corporate/special interests to buy influence without first greatly reducing that which the government and politicians were selling in the first place...your wealth and freedoms...will simply cause them to seek a market elsewhere. Most likely foreign corporations and special interests, as they won't be much affected by what we do to our corporations and special interests domestically.
Once you've gotten the government reined in to the point that there's a decent chance that the corrupting forces outside government can actually be held to account without simply slipping a few megadollars to the right government shlubs and walking, then you start cleaning that mess up.
Strat