A fantastic comment modded down. So sad. We truly are living in the age of reputation. Even a scoundrel should be applauded when he speaks truth to power. Not that you are a scoundrel, but that the person who modded down this comment is probably doing so because of your username and reputation rather than the comment itself (or it's a ZOG astroturfer, which is always a possibility).
Your comment is right on the money. Most people, on both sides of the aisle, have become accustomed to and have developed a taste for legislation from the bench. I have been guilty of that in the past. In addition, witch hunts are as popular as ever and the media, being fairly controlled at this point, decides truth. Tribalism is growing stronger; it's obvious to anyone who has been actually watching to see. Even your comment is downvoted, because someone assumed, based on your background, that it supports the side they don't like. The merit of the content was not even a consideration. The majority of people are not even using that part of their brain on a routine basis.
Real talk: where do we go from here? I don't have strong tribal feelings; never have. I feel allegiance to righteousness and truth. All men are my allies unless they determine to be an adversary. Social structures like cities and countries are a logistical boon, especially as a hedge against tyranny, and loyalty has value but only within reason. That's why it was: God then country. First loyalty is to truth and righteousness, then country. But today, it doesn't work like that, Is it because God is dead? I though a-theism was all about "good without God". Did the secularization of the West miss that step? I digress.
Is there a solution, or should I just stuff some gold under my mattress until I can run off with enough to live the rest of my days on an island or secluded in the woods, separate from the unhuman modern world (ironically, in less human world myself)?
Thank you, you're very kind. (Wow, don't get to say *that* here very often!)
The only solution I see is to try to find those who are at least willing to listen, and attempt to find things we can agree on and work on those things while searching for the next thing(s) we can agree to work together on.
We need to work starting from the most basic of principles, those simple principles we learn in kindergarten and pre-school, things which are the least difficult to agree upon, and gradually work from there to build bridges to those whose minds are open enough to logic and reason to make it possible.
We must keep in mind that it is identity politics and "intersectionality" which are the enemies, not those who are their victims.
Except people from both sides have been hit and mentioned several times in this comments section..
But those who have been hit were covered under the Act.
That is clearly not the case here from a plain reading of the Act. O'Rielley is a Presidential appointee, and appointees are explicitly excluded from the Act. --- Subsection (b)
(ii) an employee appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, whose position is located within the United States, who determines policies to be pursued by the United States in relations with foreign powers or in the nationwide administration of Federal laws. --- He is an appointee. He used no taxpayer funds. He simply made a statement. The Act specifically exempts appointees.
This is simply political grandstanding.
It's also rank with the stench of fear and desperation on the part of Democrats.
You can see for yourself exactly what it says, with no worry that the reporter is spinning it.
The problem is that's just the text of the law and we are in a post-factual world where only tribal loyalty and money matters, and there is no objective truth.
The words of the law and their meanings will be reinterpreted or even totally ignored as necessary to achieve the political goals sought. These people believe that the ends justify the means. They are the type of people that have always existed to cheer-lead the rise of authoritarianism and tyranny through history.
The AMA keeps introducing advances that they won't let us have.
But The Phone Company will!
As a matter of fact, it'll soon be be mandatory!
This has been in the works literally for decades. This breakthrough topples one of the final barriers. They've even gotten to somebody close to the POTUS!
Well, that would make sense if it were not for the fact that after every one of those "tax breaks for the wealthiest members of society" get passed, the wealthiest members of society did not end up paying a greater share of federal revenue.
But, those are just, like, the facts, man.
It doesn't *feel* right to the tribal, identity-politics-driven, "yeah, we'll get those guys!" instincts that push many to behave like the ends justify the means. It enables one to dehumanize those who disagree and make them "the other". It's a short trip from there to camps and mass State-sanctioned murder.
Both the mega-corps and the government want us divided into hostile demographic groups. It makes it easier to market to those groups in a targeted manner and to control the population while enriching themselves at the population's expense and grabbing ever-more power for themselves.
All governments are horrible because they're all composed of people who wanted to be in government. I don't know why anyone would trust them to do anything that could reasonably be accomplished some other way.
No, coral as a whole is not going to go extinct. But some species will (some already have [thenewslens.com]) - many others will not be able to adapt rapidly enough, given the current pace of change.
Specific, individual coral species come & go in the normal course of things. It's how they adapt. There are countless numbers of individual species of coral, many found in only one location. When conditions such as average water temperatures, pH, salinity, etc, etc change, old species die and new species emerge. This cycle has been going on for millions of years through changes more extreme and rapid than anything projected for the next 100-200 years.
But on more human timescales, it seems all but certain we'll lose most of a major World Heritage site and one of the Seven Natural Wonders of the world. We lost 27% of it in 2016, and we're set to lose up to another third after 2017. I took my kids diving there last year, while there was still something left worth seeing, and the deterioration I've personally witnessed since the 80s and 90s was heartbreaking.
Look, I get it. I grew up in Florida and did my share of scuba diving as well. Trust nature. Coral grows back over the old coral. That's how coral builds reefs. It happens a lot and it doesn't take that long for another layer of living coral to form over the old. Coral and barnacles are a lot alike. If you've ever kept a boat in salt water you know how fast barnacles grow. Coral grows just as fast. The GBR may not be at it's prettiest for a couple seasons, but it will be back.
And what you describe of the government's choices of actions and inactions is horrible. Governments, regardless of type, are all horrible at just about everything they do because they are all composed of people who wanted to be in government, and it's why we should only allow a government to do the very minimum we must.
So all the creatures/plants that go extinct are fictitious? Don't bother with your life finds a way line that is from a Hollywood movie (where most people learn about science now days of course)
Coral has been around for a very, very, very long time.
Coral are among some of the oldest lifeforms on the planet alive today. It has survived environmental extremes far greater than anything humans have been around for.
Coral adapts to rapid changes such as temperature or chemistry in just this way; There is a large die-off and then it adapts and comes back. It has done so for millions of years. It will likely still be doing so after humans are long gone.
Hey, it's great that Australia is taking action on things like fertilizer run-off. That affects far more than just the coral reefs in the ocean. It's just that many people portray coral die-offs as "OMG!! all the coral will die and be gone foreverrrr!!" and that simply is not true. If humans succeed in destroying the environment enough to truly kill all the coral, pretty much everything else will already be dead.
No law is enforceable in a nation of many millions if most of the population ignores it.
Except that's when the enforcement is greatest, for the greatest profit, and the greatest harm.
Think about it, millions of captive laborers, all slaving to the glory of the Great Pharoah.
It's a new paradigm. And technology will make it so.
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them...you create a nation of lawbreakers -- and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden." -- "Dr, Floyd" -- Atlas Shrugged - Ayn Rand
When upholding the 1998 extension in Eldred v. Ashcroft, the Supreme Court did so on grounds that it was harmonizing the copyright term to that of a major market for U.S. works, specifically distinguishing it from the sort of "legislative misbehavior" that commons advocates would refer to as "perpetual copyright on the installment plan." At the time, the European Union had recently extended the term from life plus 50 years to life plus 70 years to reflect the trend to start a family later, as the rationale for life plus 50 in the first place [copyrightalliance.org] had been the life of those heirs whom the author knew personally.
So to what major market would a third successive extension be billed as harmonizing? No good answer would probably mean the third strike shows "legislative misbehavior."
All excellent points, but in the end only one thing matters.
The people's willingness to obey copyright laws.
They can pass whatever laws they like but copyright is impossible to enforce unless most people are willing to follow it's restrictions. As the copyright cartels have bemoaned since forever, the more they strengthen/extend copyright laws, the more people that violate copyright.
The US alone has ~310 million people. If even half decide to ignore copyright law it's done. The US government hasn't got the means to investigate, charge, and prosecute ~150 million-plus people if it wanted to.
No law is enforceable in a nation of many millions if most of the population ignores it.
Problem students from a problem home. Once AGAIN parents are important. A properly functioning society is hard to build from broken pieces, and right now broken families are producing broken children. We're living the result.
One of the major obstacles to solving it is government-mandated, forced charity.
There used to be all sorts of mutual aid societies, benevolent organizations, civic clubs, church/synagogue/mosque (yes, mosque!) groups who aided people in their community. In that way communities got to know each other. Everybody knew each other's kids. It was not unusual for one of the adults to spank someone else's kid, and the kid would beg for the adult not to tell his parents, as he'd get another spanking for making another adult have to spank him in the first place. Kids learned quickly that bad behavior was not tolerated and had negative consequences anywhere they went and by anybody they were around, and that the 'rents would be getting an earful.
Then politicians started buying votes with great-sounding social programs. These crowded out, and in many cases, forced out private social charity groups. This destroyed a large part of the social fabric.
Today in many towns and cities, government will go as far as arresting people for feeding the hungry. I mean not just "ya gotta get the permits and licenses", there *are none* to be had. It is not permitted. Only government-run agencies/departments/etc or approved NGOs are permitted. "Sorry, no budget for street feedings this fiscal cycle, but you local churches and neighborhood people can't legally help, and we'll arrest and charge you with a crime if you do."
More political grandstanding. DeBlasio and the others know the FCC regulations and Federal law in general supersedes any and all State and local laws. As soon as some local or State court rules against some ISP on local/State "NN" laws or regs, the first Federal court they appeal it to will dismiss it rule the laws/regs in question as not within State or local powers.
No, it's not obvious. OK so you knew, and a possible interpretation of what you said is correct.
Now that you point it out, I can see where somebody might misinterpret.
A good portion of US debt is money "borrowed" from things like Social Security, the Federal Reserve, and other federal programs and funds, etc, effectively leaving them with just an IOU.
This is naivete speaking. While there certainly may be "room" for people, the resources simply do not exist.
Dense Metro areas have high real estate prices, expensive food, and expensive transit. There are no farms (though farm-scrapers might be a thing coming soon.) When you live in a city, you are in competition with others for living space, jobs and places to eat.
When you live in rural butt-fuckin-nowhere, those same competitions exist, but now instead of being of the "I can pick from a shoebox, a shoebox, or a shoebox" in the city, you have only the largest most inefficient buildings, city layouts, and no transit resources to speak of.
So it may cost someone in SFO, YVR, or NYC 2000$ to live in a piece of shit 200sq ft shoebox branded as "luxury", often the lack of having to pay for a car, and the ability to have just about everything delivered makes up for that cost. Where as rural areas need you to buy the 5000sq ft mcmansion that costs $1500/mo in mortgage payments on top of $5000/mo in car, fuel and maintenance costs. Plus you have to drive everywhere, so you lose a lot of personal time to be with your family.
So when it comes to resources, the planet maximum was about 4 billion. We're at 8+ Billion. We're going to start seeing wars over clean water, and we've seen first-hand what this looks like in California already, where the farmers plant highly inefficient crops (almonds) , because they're the most profitable, but suck the water supply dry. California at least has the option to use desalinized water for non-irrigation (using it on crops will reduce the size of them, and eventually render the soil useless.)
LOL!
You kids!
Listen boys and girls, they've been predicting the "population bomb" since a guy named Malthus opened his trap 200 years ago. Humans just keep expanding their ability to support more humans far faster than there's more humans. Even now we have far more than enough resources for everyone.
"Enough" isn't the problem.
It's mostly about getting the people who have control over those without enough to allow the resources to get to those in need instead of either forbidding it or stealing what's sent.
As far as other resources, it won't be that long in a history sense before humans start harvesting resources from and processing many of them, at least partially, in space. Twenty, maybe thirty years max before it starts. Once it begins rolling in earnest it will snowball quickly. The solar power and countless asteroids and other bodies of all sorts of compositions passing near to be tapped alone will bring a cornucopia of resources to our disposal.
We just have to prevent our various governments and corporations from turning us all into slaves in the meantime.
Most of the debt is actually borrowed against the future value of social security, or some such financial nonsense.
Honestly I don't understand how it works
They print some documents essentially stating they're borrowing money from one pocket to put in the other and then saying they're now that much richer. It works the same as suddenly adding a bunch of new coins to a fixed-coin-number cryptocurrency after people have bought in.
It essentially robs everyone holding that currency of some amount of it's actual value. The beauty for governments is they can create money like this and use it for whatever, and they don't have to pass a tax increase and the people aren't required to write a check or even have money in a bank or other institution, etc. It robs the money straight from their wallet by devaluing the money in it, largely without them even being aware of the theft.
Money and value are separate. A $20 1-ounce gold coin from around 1860 would buy a fine suit. Today, that ounce of gold will still buy a fine suit but is now worth many, many more dollars as is the fine suit. The money is now worth far less. It's one of the biggest reasons Kleptocracies *love* fiat currencies.
That's, OK, you're on our "assholes to try to stop doing business with" list.
maximum lol you go ahead and stop doing any business with the us and see how long you last
[MIB 'Bug' voice]
"Your proposal is acceptable."
[/MIB 'Bug' voice]
Just remember who the nations are that own all the US debt. If enough nations call a sufficient amount of those securities etc in, the US is in very serious trouble. There's already a strong push on to switch to the Chinese Yuan as the international currency of trade as well. The US needs to be very careful right now. The US Dollar, the economy, stocks & bonds, etc...are all built on fiction.
Reality must and will come one way or another in the not-too-distant future. It's going to be messy, as at this point it's nearly certain, and in addition, even if those in power cared and tried to do something, the best they could do at this point is soften things a tiny bit.
This is the good side of DNA databases. This data can also be abused. It's an awesome power and power is very corrupting. This needs serious regulation...ironclad. But of course that wont happen.
It WILL happen once private individuals and corporations start collecting "abandoned DNA samples" from the rich and powerful and start doing some tracking and analysis of their own. After all, what's good for the goose...
Personally I think it would be a great idea to post flyers all around the local area near court buildings explaining jury nullification to educate the public and potential jurors.
Saw this in SL,UT: posters posted on every pole explaining it.
Well, Bravo! to the Magic Underwear folks! (I keed, I keed!)
And where, exactly, does it say "if the system does not work, kill them". I've managed to miss that every time I've read the Constitution....
That's because it is elsewhere, not in the Constitution.
When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed. Still - Facebook gets off scot free? How is that ok?
Because FB has been and continues to be a strong supporter of the political Left and the US DNC. They have political "armor".
It was all political fun & games when they did the same stuff on behalf of the DNC and HRC.
The hypocrisy/double-standard levels are over 9000.
Strat
A shame they didn't name the new company "The Aristocrats
I'm sure that Guthrie Govan, Marco Minneman, and Brian Beller would be quite upset.
https://youtu.be/EJmPFBWukq0
Strat
A fantastic comment modded down. So sad. We truly are living in the age of reputation. Even a scoundrel should be applauded when he speaks truth to power.
Not that you are a scoundrel, but that the person who modded down this comment is probably doing so because of your username and reputation rather than the comment itself (or it's a ZOG astroturfer, which is always a possibility).
Your comment is right on the money. Most people, on both sides of the aisle, have become accustomed to and have developed a taste for legislation from the bench. I have been guilty of that in the past. In addition, witch hunts are as popular as ever and the media, being fairly controlled at this point, decides truth. Tribalism is growing stronger; it's obvious to anyone who has been actually watching to see. Even your comment is downvoted, because someone assumed, based on your background, that it supports the side they don't like. The merit of the content was not even a consideration. The majority of people are not even using that part of their brain on a routine basis.
Real talk: where do we go from here? I don't have strong tribal feelings; never have. I feel allegiance to righteousness and truth. All men are my allies unless they determine to be an adversary. Social structures like cities and countries are a logistical boon, especially as a hedge against tyranny, and loyalty has value but only within reason. That's why it was: God then country. First loyalty is to truth and righteousness, then country. But today, it doesn't work like that, Is it because God is dead? I though a-theism was all about "good without God". Did the secularization of the West miss that step? I digress.
Is there a solution, or should I just stuff some gold under my mattress until I can run off with enough to live the rest of my days on an island or secluded in the woods, separate from the unhuman modern world (ironically, in less human world myself)?
Thank you, you're very kind. (Wow, don't get to say *that* here very often!)
The only solution I see is to try to find those who are at least willing to listen, and attempt to find things we can agree on and work on those things while searching for the next thing(s) we can agree to work together on.
We need to work starting from the most basic of principles, those simple principles we learn in kindergarten and pre-school, things which are the least difficult to agree upon, and gradually work from there to build bridges to those whose minds are open enough to logic and reason to make it possible.
We must keep in mind that it is identity politics and "intersectionality" which are the enemies, not those who are their victims.
Strat
Except people from both sides have been hit and mentioned several times in this comments section..
But those who have been hit were covered under the Act.
That is clearly not the case here from a plain reading of the Act. O'Rielley is a Presidential appointee, and appointees are explicitly excluded from the Act.
---
Subsection (b)
(ii) an employee appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, whose position is located within the United States, who determines policies to be pursued by the United States in relations with foreign powers or in the nationwide administration of Federal laws.
---
He is an appointee. He used no taxpayer funds. He simply made a statement. The Act specifically exempts appointees.
This is simply political grandstanding.
It's also rank with the stench of fear and desperation on the part of Democrats.
Strat
You can see for yourself exactly what it says, with no worry that the reporter is spinning it.
The problem is that's just the text of the law and we are in a post-factual world where only tribal loyalty and money matters, and there is no objective truth.
The words of the law and their meanings will be reinterpreted or even totally ignored as necessary to achieve the political goals sought. These people believe that the ends justify the means. They are the type of people that have always existed to cheer-lead the rise of authoritarianism and tyranny through history.
Strat
The AMA keeps introducing advances that they won't let us have.
But The Phone Company will!
As a matter of fact, it'll soon be be mandatory!
This has been in the works literally for decades. This breakthrough topples one of the final barriers. They've even gotten to somebody close to the POTUS!
https://youtu.be/s2NNZdigSXg
Strat
Well, that would make sense if it were not for the fact that after every one of those "tax breaks for the wealthiest members of society" get passed, the wealthiest members of society did not end up paying a greater share of federal revenue.
But, those are just, like, the facts, man.
It doesn't *feel* right to the tribal, identity-politics-driven, "yeah, we'll get those guys!" instincts that push many to behave like the ends justify the means. It enables one to dehumanize those who disagree and make them "the other". It's a short trip from there to camps and mass State-sanctioned murder.
Both the mega-corps and the government want us divided into hostile demographic groups. It makes it easier to market to those groups in a targeted manner and to control the population while enriching themselves at the population's expense and grabbing ever-more power for themselves.
All governments are horrible because they're all composed of people who wanted to be in government. I don't know why anyone would trust them to do anything that could reasonably be accomplished some other way.
Strat
No, coral as a whole is not going to go extinct. But some species will (some already have [thenewslens.com]) - many others will not be able to adapt rapidly enough, given the current pace of change.
Specific, individual coral species come & go in the normal course of things. It's how they adapt. There are countless numbers of individual species of coral, many found in only one location. When conditions such as average water temperatures, pH, salinity, etc, etc change, old species die and new species emerge. This cycle has been going on for millions of years through changes more extreme and rapid than anything projected for the next 100-200 years.
But on more human timescales, it seems all but certain we'll lose most of a major World Heritage site and one of the Seven Natural Wonders of the world. We lost 27% of it in 2016, and we're set to lose up to another third after 2017. I took my kids diving there last year, while there was still something left worth seeing, and the deterioration I've personally witnessed since the 80s and 90s was heartbreaking.
Look, I get it. I grew up in Florida and did my share of scuba diving as well. Trust nature. Coral grows back over the old coral. That's how coral builds reefs. It happens a lot and it doesn't take that long for another layer of living coral to form over the old. Coral and barnacles are a lot alike. If you've ever kept a boat in salt water you know how fast barnacles grow. Coral grows just as fast. The GBR may not be at it's prettiest for a couple seasons, but it will be back.
And what you describe of the government's choices of actions and inactions is horrible. Governments, regardless of type, are all horrible at just about everything they do because they are all composed of people who wanted to be in government, and it's why we should only allow a government to do the very minimum we must.
Strat
So all the creatures/plants that go extinct are fictitious? Don't bother with your life finds a way line that is from a Hollywood movie (where most people learn about science now days of course)
Coral has been around for a very, very, very long time.
Coral are among some of the oldest lifeforms on the planet alive today. It has survived environmental extremes far greater than anything humans have been around for.
Coral adapts to rapid changes such as temperature or chemistry in just this way; There is a large die-off and then it adapts and comes back. It has done so for millions of years. It will likely still be doing so after humans are long gone.
Hey, it's great that Australia is taking action on things like fertilizer run-off. That affects far more than just the coral reefs in the ocean. It's just that many people portray coral die-offs as "OMG!! all the coral will die and be gone foreverrrr!!" and that simply is not true. If humans succeed in destroying the environment enough to truly kill all the coral, pretty much everything else will already be dead.
Strat
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them...you create a nation of lawbreakers -- and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden." -- "Dr, Floyd" -- Atlas Shrugged - Ayn Rand
When upholding the 1998 extension in Eldred v. Ashcroft, the Supreme Court did so on grounds that it was harmonizing the copyright term to that of a major market for U.S. works, specifically distinguishing it from the sort of "legislative misbehavior" that commons advocates would refer to as "perpetual copyright on the installment plan." At the time, the European Union had recently extended the term from life plus 50 years to life plus 70 years to reflect the trend to start a family later, as the rationale for life plus 50 in the first place [copyrightalliance.org] had been the life of those heirs whom the author knew personally.
So to what major market would a third successive extension be billed as harmonizing? No good answer would probably mean the third strike shows "legislative misbehavior."
All excellent points, but in the end only one thing matters.
The people's willingness to obey copyright laws.
They can pass whatever laws they like but copyright is impossible to enforce unless most people are willing to follow it's restrictions. As the copyright cartels have bemoaned since forever, the more they strengthen/extend copyright laws, the more people that violate copyright.
The US alone has ~310 million people. If even half decide to ignore copyright law it's done. The US government hasn't got the means to investigate, charge, and prosecute ~150 million-plus people if it wanted to.
No law is enforceable in a nation of many millions if most of the population ignores it.
Strat
Microsoft is slime and no amount of PR spin is going to change that.
I'm sorry, but I must strongly disagree with that characterization of Microsoft!
You slander all decent slime with your insult, Sir!
Strat
Problem students from a problem home. Once AGAIN parents are important. A properly functioning society is hard to build from broken pieces, and right now broken families are producing broken children. We're living the result.
One of the major obstacles to solving it is government-mandated, forced charity.
There used to be all sorts of mutual aid societies, benevolent organizations, civic clubs, church/synagogue/mosque (yes, mosque!) groups who aided people in their community. In that way communities got to know each other. Everybody knew each other's kids. It was not unusual for one of the adults to spank someone else's kid, and the kid would beg for the adult not to tell his parents, as he'd get another spanking for making another adult have to spank him in the first place. Kids learned quickly that bad behavior was not tolerated and had negative consequences anywhere they went and by anybody they were around, and that the 'rents would be getting an earful.
Then politicians started buying votes with great-sounding social programs. These crowded out, and in many cases, forced out private social charity groups. This destroyed a large part of the social fabric.
Today in many towns and cities, government will go as far as arresting people for feeding the hungry. I mean not just "ya gotta get the permits and licenses", there *are none* to be had. It is not permitted. Only government-run agencies/departments/etc or approved NGOs are permitted. "Sorry, no budget for street feedings this fiscal cycle, but you local churches and neighborhood people can't legally help, and we'll arrest and charge you with a crime if you do."
Strat
More political grandstanding. DeBlasio and the others know the FCC regulations and Federal law in general supersedes any and all State and local laws. As soon as some local or State court rules against some ISP on local/State "NN" laws or regs, the first Federal court they appeal it to will dismiss it rule the laws/regs in question as not within State or local powers.
Strat
No, it's not obvious. OK so you knew, and a possible interpretation of what you said is correct.
Now that you point it out, I can see where somebody might misinterpret.
A good portion of US debt is money "borrowed" from things like Social Security, the Federal Reserve, and other federal programs and funds, etc, effectively leaving them with just an IOU.
Strat
This is naivete speaking. While there certainly may be "room" for people, the resources simply do not exist.
Dense Metro areas have high real estate prices, expensive food, and expensive transit. There are no farms (though farm-scrapers might be a thing coming soon.) When you live in a city, you are in competition with others for living space, jobs and places to eat.
When you live in rural butt-fuckin-nowhere, those same competitions exist, but now instead of being of the "I can pick from a shoebox, a shoebox, or a shoebox" in the city, you have only the largest most inefficient buildings, city layouts, and no transit resources to speak of.
So it may cost someone in SFO, YVR, or NYC 2000$ to live in a piece of shit 200sq ft shoebox branded as "luxury", often the lack of having to pay for a car, and the ability to have just about everything delivered makes up for that cost. Where as rural areas need you to buy the 5000sq ft mcmansion that costs $1500/mo in mortgage payments on top of $5000/mo in car, fuel and maintenance costs. Plus you have to drive everywhere, so you lose a lot of personal time to be with your family.
So when it comes to resources, the planet maximum was about 4 billion. We're at 8+ Billion. We're going to start seeing wars over clean water, and we've seen first-hand what this looks like in California already, where the farmers plant highly inefficient crops (almonds) , because they're the most profitable, but suck the water supply dry. California at least has the option to use desalinized water for non-irrigation (using it on crops will reduce the size of them, and eventually render the soil useless.)
LOL!
You kids!
Listen boys and girls, they've been predicting the "population bomb" since a guy named Malthus opened his trap 200 years ago. Humans just keep expanding their ability to support more humans far faster than there's more humans. Even now we have far more than enough resources for everyone.
"Enough" isn't the problem.
It's mostly about getting the people who have control over those without enough to allow the resources to get to those in need instead of either forbidding it or stealing what's sent.
As far as other resources, it won't be that long in a history sense before humans start harvesting resources from and processing many of them, at least partially, in space. Twenty, maybe thirty years max before it starts. Once it begins rolling in earnest it will snowball quickly. The solar power and countless asteroids and other bodies of all sorts of compositions passing near to be tapped alone will bring a cornucopia of resources to our disposal.
We just have to prevent our various governments and corporations from turning us all into slaves in the meantime.
Strat
Obviously I meant all the foreign debt, other nations being...uh...foreign, and all.
Strat
Most of the debt is actually borrowed against the future value of social security, or some such financial nonsense.
Honestly I don't understand how it works
They print some documents essentially stating they're borrowing money from one pocket to put in the other and then saying they're now that much richer. It works the same as suddenly adding a bunch of new coins to a fixed-coin-number cryptocurrency after people have bought in.
It essentially robs everyone holding that currency of some amount of it's actual value. The beauty for governments is they can create money like this and use it for whatever, and they don't have to pass a tax increase and the people aren't required to write a check or even have money in a bank or other institution, etc. It robs the money straight from their wallet by devaluing the money in it, largely without them even being aware of the theft.
Money and value are separate. A $20 1-ounce gold coin from around 1860 would buy a fine suit. Today, that ounce of gold will still buy a fine suit but is now worth many, many more dollars as is the fine suit. The money is now worth far less. It's one of the biggest reasons Kleptocracies *love* fiat currencies.
Strat
[MIB 'Bug' voice]
"Your proposal is acceptable."
[/MIB 'Bug' voice]
Just remember who the nations are that own all the US debt. If enough nations call a sufficient amount of those securities etc in, the US is in very serious trouble. There's already a strong push on to switch to the Chinese Yuan as the international currency of trade as well. The US needs to be very careful right now. The US Dollar, the economy, stocks & bonds, etc...are all built on fiction.
Reality must and will come one way or another in the not-too-distant future. It's going to be messy, as at this point it's nearly certain, and in addition, even if those in power cared and tried to do something, the best they could do at this point is soften things a tiny bit.
Strat
This is the good side of DNA databases. This data can also be abused. It's an awesome power and power is very corrupting. This needs serious regulation...ironclad. But of course that wont happen.
It WILL happen once private individuals and corporations start collecting "abandoned DNA samples" from the rich and powerful and start doing some tracking and analysis of their own. After all, what's good for the goose...
Strat
It's just our 12-dimensional overlords toying with us.
We'll have to give Buckaroo Bonzai a power-up. He's only gotten up to the eighth dimension. :)
Strat
Perhaps they actually meant the bleeding edge of modern technology, like quantum computers.
Strat
Hey, maybe we're on the verge of (re?)discovering magic is real and something we can harness!
Well, Bravo! to the Magic Underwear folks! (I keed, I keed!)
Strat
And where, exactly, does it say "if the system does not work, kill them". I've managed to miss that every time I've read the Constitution....
That's because it is elsewhere, not in the Constitution.
When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of