I mean, they raise taxes on cigarettes, and are suddenly horrified to find that people do not buy cigarettes in New York. Now, what do you think the enlightened liberals do up there? Do you think they set the tax at a more reasonable level? No... they call out the cops and pass even -more- laws designed to try and ban people from cigarettes from out of state.
Hmm, I would think that it is good thing if people quit smoking? Maybe they didn't want to collect more money with this tax, what if they tried to decrease smoking? Price is one way to alter peoples behaviour.
But I'm from Finland, the promised land of progressive taxing (where mixture of socialism and capitalism actually works), so I guess I'm a bit biased;-)
Maybe the ways of working should be changed. Introduce Scrum to your company, for example, keep the people actually *doing* the job in control of the job to be done.
Ordering people to do more than they are capable of leads to lower quality and lower morale. Add idiotic managers (or co-workers) into it and decrease the efficiency by multiple degrees. Usually the people are ICT-companies' only asset. If they ruin that, well, they ruin the company.
It's still the coders who actually do the job that provides actual *value* for the user/customer. Hmm, how much direct value Google's CEO or CFO provides to the customer? None (even the indirect value is minimal).
Also, Americans have low taxes, but they have to get insurances in order to cover medical help and large savings in order to get higher education for their children. How do you do that if you are unemployed or happen to born into a poor family (which is not very uncommon these days)?
Here in Finland it is stated in the legislation that everyone has the right to choose his/her place of work. Any contract violating this fundamental right is automatically void. Thus all non-compete contracts are null. Of course you may not take advantage of your (insider) knowledge should you suddenly choose to work for the closest competitor.
I have to agree and say that higher taxes do not cripple individual possibilities and competitiveness. For example here in Finland the overall tax rate (income taxes, VAT, taxing on fuel etc. combined) is the second or third highest in the world (close to 51%) and still Finland has been ranked number one in competitiveness in the world ahead of USA, see http://www.research.fi/en/performance/the_competitiveness_of_finland
Scandinavia is a good example that socialism works without removing individual rights, possibilities or the right to choose which services to use.
For example, is there a better way to provide equal possibilities to everyone than free education (including higher education)? The socialist system is aimed to provide equal standing point for everyone, despite their origins or wealth.
Slashdot Mirror
I mean, they raise taxes on cigarettes, and are suddenly horrified to find that people do not buy cigarettes in New York. Now, what do you think the enlightened liberals do up there? Do you think they set the tax at a more reasonable level? No... they call out the cops and pass even -more- laws designed to try and ban people from cigarettes from out of state.
Hmm, I would think that it is good thing if people quit smoking? Maybe they didn't want to collect more money with this tax, what if they tried to decrease smoking? Price is one way to alter peoples behaviour.
But I'm from Finland, the promised land of progressive taxing (where mixture of socialism and capitalism actually works), so I guess I'm a bit biased ;-)
Maybe the ways of working should be changed. Introduce Scrum to your company, for example, keep the people actually *doing* the job in control of the job to be done.
Ordering people to do more than they are capable of leads to lower quality and lower morale. Add idiotic managers (or co-workers) into it and decrease the efficiency by multiple degrees. Usually the people are ICT-companies' only asset. If they ruin that, well, they ruin the company. It's still the coders who actually do the job that provides actual *value* for the user/customer. Hmm, how much direct value Google's CEO or CFO provides to the customer? None (even the indirect value is minimal).
Also, Americans have low taxes, but they have to get insurances in order to cover medical help and large savings in order to get higher education for their children. How do you do that if you are unemployed or happen to born into a poor family (which is not very uncommon these days)?
Hello? Anyone heard of the Right to Work . It is, um, kind of related to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Here in Finland it is stated in the legislation that everyone has the right to choose his/her place of work. Any contract violating this fundamental right is automatically void. Thus all non-compete contracts are null. Of course you may not take advantage of your (insider) knowledge should you suddenly choose to work for the closest competitor.
I have to agree and say that higher taxes do not cripple individual possibilities and competitiveness. For example here in Finland the overall tax rate (income taxes, VAT, taxing on fuel etc. combined) is the second or third highest in the world (close to 51%) and still Finland has been ranked number one in competitiveness in the world ahead of USA, see http://www.research.fi/en/performance/the_competitiveness_of_finland
Scandinavia is a good example that socialism works without removing individual rights, possibilities or the right to choose which services to use.
For example, is there a better way to provide equal possibilities to everyone than free education (including higher education)? The socialist system is aimed to provide equal standing point for everyone, despite their origins or wealth.