What makes less sense is nationalized health care. People in America talk like it's a great thing. Have you BEEN to Canada? My grandfather got sick while on a trip to Canada. He went to the hospital and they told him, "Take the 1 1/2 hour trip back over the border and get treatment in New York. It's not worth the lesser healthcare that you'd receive here."
Well, first off, just giving up is plain boring. However, you never gave any response to my original question (at least not one that made any sense) of "Why should someone making more pay more?"
As for toys and such...I don't have many. I live pretty frugally. I don't care about "stuff." In fact, I'd prefer less of it. I am not happy about the fact that people who do well and work hard to get where they are are penalized because of that fact. The entitlement mentality Americans have of, "Oh man! I deserve a big piece of the pie too!" is extremely annoying. (And, yes, I'm purposely being a bit harsh in my view to give you a good counterpoint to argue from. I do realize not everybody gets the same opportunities and that is something we DO have to resolve.)
As for how we can enrich the community and society. Well, I'm probably opening myself up for ridicule, but given my faith I regularly donate money (and time) to various causes. However, I get to choose where that money goes which I much prefer than handing it over to a mismanaged, bloated organization.
My house is on a bigger plot of land? I'm already paying more property taxes as a result. That's taken care of. I'm referring to income taxes. Why should I pay more just because I make more.
And...WTF does this mean?
Next, if you're wealthy, likely it isn't just by the sweat of your own brow, but also by others working for you. It's called a community, or a society. Furthermore, very likely you earn more than anyone working for you. Your reward for participating in that society is greater than theirs.
Right. So you're arguing for my point. By being wealthy, I'm supplying other people with jobs. There's no reason that I should be penalized by HELPING others. Your "point" is not a point.
Not on different roads, but almost certainly in different cars, and almost certainly if so inclined, they travel further. Since some portion of our national budget is spent securing our energy supply, if you're using a larger share of that energy supply, you're driving a larger share of that budget.
You're making assumptions here. First off, gas is already taxed. You haven't addressed why wealthy should pay higher INCOME tax. Secondly, who cares if they are in different cars? More than likely, wealthy are in newer cars (that THEY paid for with their own money) and those cars are probably more in better condition, thereby costing less money with respect to energy consumption.
You did not argue anything and did not begin addressing my question. Try again.
Eduction does not necessarily imply success. It generally does, but not necessarily.
And, no, drive is not everything. You can have a ton of drive, but if you can't sell your business, or if you can't manage people...you're not going to get far.
And, you sort of missed my main point that tax rebates won't result in education opportunities anyway.
I used to work for the FAA and believe me there IS waste to be cut. You could lay-off 75% of the "web-surfing" staff who do almost-nothing, and still get the same amount of work done with the remaining staff. I imagine the entire government is rife with similar levels of 75% wasted labor that could be laid-off, thereby reducing U.S. labor costs to 25-30% current levels.
The irony that you made this post on Wednesday at 11:52AM is overwhelming.
Sounds about right to me... the top 5% of wage earners earn about 60% of the wages in the country, so it seems fair that they should be paying 60% of the taxes.
So again, why shouldn't we be clamouring (sic) for rich people and corporations to be paying up like the rest of us?
People do clamor. The thing is, the rich are rich for a reason. It's because they actually take the time to learn about money. So, the thing is, even if taxes are raised against the rich, the rich will react and figure out how to get around those as best as they can. This is why our tax system is complete garbage. It's PURPOSELY kept crazy.
And, of course, when the rich aren't paying taxes, someone has to. So, who does that? Why...poor and middle class of course! It's a vicious cycle.
I personally agree with another poster - take the crap spending out of the government and let people keep the money they make. Of course, that kind of actually makes some sense, so it's not going to happen. (Maybe when I'm president...)
Then everyone benefits through better average levels of education in the country
Nice in theory, but a couple problems.
1. Eduction != Success. Drive, the ability to relate to people, personal accountability - those are typical qualities for success. Education can definitely help, but it's no guarantee.
2. Giving tax rebates in the first place is a problem. The problem is that poor people won't use that tax rebate to send their kids to college. Heck, many poor people are happy if their kid makes it through high school. Instead, the poor will spend that money on something they want to make themselves feel better. They won't save it, they won't invest it. Nope. It will be spent. (And, yes, I realize this is a generalization. Some poor people just run into some really tough times. I'm just basing this given the work I've done with the poor.) There's a reason the rich are rich and the poor are poor. What would be better is if our schools educated children on money (because parents sure as heck aren't always doing it). But...we have enough trouble with basic math and science as it is. Hrm...
So you're happy for rich corporations or individuals to get tax rebates (I don't know much about the US tax system, or any tax system to be fair, so I just have to go by people whining about the rich being made even richer through political corruption), but you don't want poorer people to get any breaks? Nice.
And...yes...actually. I don't condone political corruption - that's bad. However, in my opinion, if a rich person has made it to the top through legal means, then he or she has every right to all the money they are making. They shouldn't be penalized just because they did better than every other Schmoe out there.
I know you've been modded funny...but...I wish more people thought like your post says.
I personally feel that way. I want to make it on my own. I don't want handouts for something I haven't even done. Sheesh. Take some pride, people. Get off your butt and do something.
It abandons the tight state-sensitive behavior of contextual menus because it's continually displayed and so can't restrict itself to only providing options for specific objects, but retains much of the clutter of menus because it has to display actions associated with multiple objects.
It abandons the scannability and location-sensitive behavior of menus because you only see actions related to the high-level of the window. You can't scan it to learn the range of actions available from the program.
That's a lot of big words and mumbo-jumbo. And whether or not the ribbon is what you say it is (not even going to bother reading through most of it since you're trying to sound impressive), feedback from NEW users has been very good. Yes, older users have something new to learn. But...overall...the Ribbon does a much better job than what currently exists.
Well, sure. Steering wheels are an excellent interface. They provide fine-grained control, are easy to use and make sense.
The menu system that many MS apps employed previously were definitely not the best option. Ribbon is trying something new. I applaud MS for actually taking a chance for once.
So...what's wrong with the ribbon? You're not used to it? In various tests against people who hadn't had experience with either, users learned the ribbon far faster than the convoluted menu system that the ribbon replaced.
Honestly...it sounds like HP's drivers are what suck for you. Not Vista's fault that HP can't code straight. (I have the same problem with my HP drivers, BTW.)
Seriously, the only people claiming vista is fine with no performance problems are the people who don't use vista as their main machine. Try spending a day at work on a Vista machine. You'll see what we're talking about.
Wrong.
I use Vista as my main machine. All the time. I develop on it, game on it, whatever. It works fine (I'd venture "great" but I don't want the wrath of/.ers).
1. Internet Explorer != Vista. IE sucks. Get Firefox. You'll be happier.
2. Latest Updates install quick. Plus, if you're spending a "day at work" then someone is pushing those updates at night for you. You don't see it.
3. Ctrl-C + Ctrl-V is fine for me. Maybe not for you, but you haven't given system specs or anything.
Re:blah the emporer has his new clothes on again.
on
The Walking House
·
· Score: 1
Floods only give her more places to go.;)
Yeah! Well...let's see how your sailboat does during a drought! That's right Mr. Smarty-Pants. Whatcha gonna do now!!!
I have to agree about the wasted screen space. Now that they have that bar on the left (with the links to all your pages items), it makes the home page itself quite a bit smaller. And, I don't want to have to click on each one of those items to see them in their full glory. I liked the home page to have quick bits of information and I could deicde what I wanted to read.
Hopefully they will listen and let users revert back.
That's awesome that that's worked out for you. That wasn't the case for my used car. That's why I go new.
Sure, it might be more hassle, but it's certainly cheaper, and you never have to worry about theft when your car's a piece of crap.
Yes, but when you do as much driving as I do, you can't afford to have a piece of crap fall apart on you. The "my car broke down" excuse does not a happy client make.
Plus, I like my dates to *want* to get into my car.
Well, to that extreme - no. However, I have had a number of friends fall into similar traps. Granted, a new car could have just as many problems (and I've seen that happen too). But, a new car typically comes with a warranty.
As for doing better research, you are right (overall). The initial cost of the car wasn't a bad price. But the environment I was driving it in hurt it a lot (ton of snow/ice/etc).
As for learning about cars myself...I really don't have the time, quite honestly. Between the many other things I do, cars is not something high on my priority list. Basically, I thought I had a good mechanic, and I didn't. It's the unfortunate side-effect of moving too much.
The part that I was more focused on is the fact that people call cars an investment. Unless you're buying a fancy car to show at car shows and win money with (or resell when it gains value) - you aren't getting an investment.
There's a simple rule to buying cars. Never buy a new one. You'll invariably be conned out of thousands over silly cosmetic details. Buy used, and put your pocket before your pride. You might need what's in there later on.
Really? Never? Hmmm...let's see...
The first car I bought was a used car. It was $8,000 at purchase price. Not too bad given milage/condition/etc (and I had it inspected by my own mechanic). However, over the next two and half years, I spent ANOTHER $8,000 getting the stupid thing fixed up, etc, etc. There were weird problems that kept cropping up. I kept holding out thinking, "This will be the last thing I need to fix." Of course, that wasn't the case. The breaks giving out (while I was driving) was the last straw.
Instead, I bought a Toyota for $13,500, brand new, and I haven't had a single problem (except for a flat tire) since then. That was almost 4 years ago. I have a warranty, I know all the problems with my car (no shady history), and I keep a good record of all the mechanical work I do on my car (get regular oil changes, etc). I will *never* buy a used car ever again.
Additionally, someone will probably respond and say, "Your car depreciates in value so fast...it's a bad investment." Um. What? When is a car an investment? Last time I checked, anything that DEPRECIATES in value at all is not a real good investment. My car exists to get me to the places I need to go, and I need to feel safe and comfortable while doing so. That's it. I'm not trying to make money off my car. I will drive it into the ground (or until it starts costing me a lot).
Emotional responses to the outwards appearance of a vehicle is why it should be harder to get a drivers license.
Wait. What?
Hate to break it to you, Mr. Narpak. People are kind of emotional. Some are less emotional than others, but people are emotional. The stupidest things can set them off.
In general, it seems that people with money tend to have more arrogance, and that extends throughout their social life, including driving.
Or maybe that's just your own personal perception. (My guess is you don't consider yourself "rich.")
Most people, whether they like to admit it or not, are relatively arrogant. I've had "rich" people (AKA people with nice cars) cut me off just as much as I've had "that guy in the old, beat-up station wagon" cut me off.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, sense. Such a rare and precious commodity.
What makes less sense is nationalized health care. People in America talk like it's a great thing. Have you BEEN to Canada? My grandfather got sick while on a trip to Canada. He went to the hospital and they told him, "Take the 1 1/2 hour trip back over the border and get treatment in New York. It's not worth the lesser healthcare that you'd receive here."
Unfortunately, the grass is always greener...
Well, first off, just giving up is plain boring. However, you never gave any response to my original question (at least not one that made any sense) of "Why should someone making more pay more?"
As for toys and such...I don't have many. I live pretty frugally. I don't care about "stuff." In fact, I'd prefer less of it. I am not happy about the fact that people who do well and work hard to get where they are are penalized because of that fact. The entitlement mentality Americans have of, "Oh man! I deserve a big piece of the pie too!" is extremely annoying. (And, yes, I'm purposely being a bit harsh in my view to give you a good counterpoint to argue from. I do realize not everybody gets the same opportunities and that is something we DO have to resolve.)
As for how we can enrich the community and society. Well, I'm probably opening myself up for ridicule, but given my faith I regularly donate money (and time) to various causes. However, I get to choose where that money goes which I much prefer than handing it over to a mismanaged, bloated organization.
My house is on a bigger plot of land? I'm already paying more property taxes as a result. That's taken care of. I'm referring to income taxes. Why should I pay more just because I make more.
And...WTF does this mean?
Next, if you're wealthy, likely it isn't just by the sweat of your own brow, but also by others working for you. It's called a community, or a society. Furthermore, very likely you earn more than anyone working for you. Your reward for participating in that society is greater than theirs.
Right. So you're arguing for my point. By being wealthy, I'm supplying other people with jobs. There's no reason that I should be penalized by HELPING others. Your "point" is not a point.
Not on different roads, but almost certainly in different cars, and almost certainly if so inclined, they travel further. Since some portion of our national budget is spent securing our energy supply, if you're using a larger share of that energy supply, you're driving a larger share of that budget.
You're making assumptions here. First off, gas is already taxed. You haven't addressed why wealthy should pay higher INCOME tax. Secondly, who cares if they are in different cars? More than likely, wealthy are in newer cars (that THEY paid for with their own money) and those cars are probably more in better condition, thereby costing less money with respect to energy consumption.
You did not argue anything and did not begin addressing my question. Try again.
I'll correct myself...
Eduction does not necessarily imply success. It generally does, but not necessarily.
And, no, drive is not everything. You can have a ton of drive, but if you can't sell your business, or if you can't manage people...you're not going to get far.
And, you sort of missed my main point that tax rebates won't result in education opportunities anyway.
I used to work for the FAA and believe me there IS waste to be cut. You could lay-off 75% of the "web-surfing" staff who do almost-nothing, and still get the same amount of work done with the remaining staff. I imagine the entire government is rife with similar levels of 75% wasted labor that could be laid-off, thereby reducing U.S. labor costs to 25-30% current levels.
The irony that you made this post on Wednesday at 11:52AM is overwhelming.
Sounds about right to me... the top 5% of wage earners earn about 60% of the wages in the country, so it seems fair that they should be paying 60% of the taxes.
Why? Just because they make more?
So again, why shouldn't we be clamouring (sic) for rich people and corporations to be paying up like the rest of us?
People do clamor. The thing is, the rich are rich for a reason. It's because they actually take the time to learn about money. So, the thing is, even if taxes are raised against the rich, the rich will react and figure out how to get around those as best as they can. This is why our tax system is complete garbage. It's PURPOSELY kept crazy.
And, of course, when the rich aren't paying taxes, someone has to. So, who does that? Why...poor and middle class of course! It's a vicious cycle.
I personally agree with another poster - take the crap spending out of the government and let people keep the money they make. Of course, that kind of actually makes some sense, so it's not going to happen. (Maybe when I'm president...)
I'm no where NEAR 250K in income but even I can understand why I can pay proportionally more than someone making 1/2 my salary.
Why? Why should someone making more pay more? That has never made sense to me. Not even a little bit.
Does someone who is wealthy receive more services because they pay more? Is someone who is wealthy drive on different roads?
Then everyone benefits through better average levels of education in the country
Nice in theory, but a couple problems.
1. Eduction != Success. Drive, the ability to relate to people, personal accountability - those are typical qualities for success. Education can definitely help, but it's no guarantee.
2. Giving tax rebates in the first place is a problem. The problem is that poor people won't use that tax rebate to send their kids to college. Heck, many poor people are happy if their kid makes it through high school. Instead, the poor will spend that money on something they want to make themselves feel better. They won't save it, they won't invest it. Nope. It will be spent. (And, yes, I realize this is a generalization. Some poor people just run into some really tough times. I'm just basing this given the work I've done with the poor.) There's a reason the rich are rich and the poor are poor. What would be better is if our schools educated children on money (because parents sure as heck aren't always doing it). But...we have enough trouble with basic math and science as it is. Hrm...
So you're happy for rich corporations or individuals to get tax rebates (I don't know much about the US tax system, or any tax system to be fair, so I just have to go by people whining about the rich being made even richer through political corruption), but you don't want poorer people to get any breaks? Nice.
And...yes...actually. I don't condone political corruption - that's bad. However, in my opinion, if a rich person has made it to the top through legal means, then he or she has every right to all the money they are making. They shouldn't be penalized just because they did better than every other Schmoe out there.
I know you've been modded funny...but...I wish more people thought like your post says.
I personally feel that way. I want to make it on my own. I don't want handouts for something I haven't even done. Sheesh. Take some pride, people. Get off your butt and do something.
Okay, rant mode off.
It abandons the tight state-sensitive behavior of contextual menus because it's continually displayed and so can't restrict itself to only providing options for specific objects, but retains much of the clutter of menus because it has to display actions associated with multiple objects.
It abandons the scannability and location-sensitive behavior of menus because you only see actions related to the high-level of the window. You can't scan it to learn the range of actions available from the program.
That's a lot of big words and mumbo-jumbo.
And whether or not the ribbon is what you say it is (not even going to bother reading through most of it since you're trying to sound impressive), feedback from NEW users has been very good. Yes, older users have something new to learn. But...overall...the Ribbon does a much better job than what currently exists.
Well, sure. Steering wheels are an excellent interface. They provide fine-grained control, are easy to use and make sense.
The menu system that many MS apps employed previously were definitely not the best option. Ribbon is trying something new. I applaud MS for actually taking a chance for once.
So...what's wrong with the ribbon? You're not used to it? In various tests against people who hadn't had experience with either, users learned the ribbon far faster than the convoluted menu system that the ribbon replaced.
Honestly...it sounds like HP's drivers are what suck for you. Not Vista's fault that HP can't code straight. (I have the same problem with my HP drivers, BTW.)
Seriously, the only people claiming vista is fine with no performance problems are the people who don't use vista as their main machine. Try spending a day at work on a Vista machine. You'll see what we're talking about.
Wrong.
I use Vista as my main machine. All the time. I develop on it, game on it, whatever. It works fine (I'd venture "great" but I don't want the wrath of /.ers).
1. Internet Explorer != Vista. IE sucks. Get Firefox. You'll be happier.
2. Latest Updates install quick. Plus, if you're spending a "day at work" then someone is pushing those updates at night for you. You don't see it.
3. Ctrl-C + Ctrl-V is fine for me. Maybe not for you, but you haven't given system specs or anything.
Floods only give her more places to go. ;)
Yeah! Well...let's see how your sailboat does during a drought! That's right Mr. Smarty-Pants. Whatcha gonna do now!!!
Close. I'd like to see an all out brawl between the supporters of Dojo, Jquery, Prototype, and any others I've neglected to remember.
Obviously Dojo would win, given the fact that it has produced hundreds of exceptional fighters in its time.
and their manager was a chinless milquetoast who let them get away with it.
That is just an excellent use of an insult right there. I applaud you.
I have to agree about the wasted screen space. Now that they have that bar on the left (with the links to all your pages items), it makes the home page itself quite a bit smaller. And, I don't want to have to click on each one of those items to see them in their full glory. I liked the home page to have quick bits of information and I could deicde what I wanted to read.
Hopefully they will listen and let users revert back.
That's awesome that that's worked out for you. That wasn't the case for my used car. That's why I go new.
Sure, it might be more hassle, but it's certainly cheaper, and you never have to worry about theft when your car's a piece of crap.
Yes, but when you do as much driving as I do, you can't afford to have a piece of crap fall apart on you. The "my car broke down" excuse does not a happy client make.
Plus, I like my dates to *want* to get into my car.
Do you actually believe this is typical?
Well, to that extreme - no. However, I have had a number of friends fall into similar traps. Granted, a new car could have just as many problems (and I've seen that happen too). But, a new car typically comes with a warranty.
As for doing better research, you are right (overall). The initial cost of the car wasn't a bad price. But the environment I was driving it in hurt it a lot (ton of snow/ice/etc).
As for learning about cars myself...I really don't have the time, quite honestly. Between the many other things I do, cars is not something high on my priority list. Basically, I thought I had a good mechanic, and I didn't. It's the unfortunate side-effect of moving too much.
The part that I was more focused on is the fact that people call cars an investment. Unless you're buying a fancy car to show at car shows and win money with (or resell when it gains value) - you aren't getting an investment.
You're not getting modded up because this is Slashdot. Nobody understands what this word "women" is. Is it like a case mod?
There's a simple rule to buying cars. Never buy a new one. You'll invariably be conned out of thousands over silly cosmetic details. Buy used, and put your pocket before your pride. You might need what's in there later on.
Really? Never? Hmmm...let's see...
The first car I bought was a used car. It was $8,000 at purchase price. Not too bad given milage/condition/etc (and I had it inspected by my own mechanic). However, over the next two and half years, I spent ANOTHER $8,000 getting the stupid thing fixed up, etc, etc. There were weird problems that kept cropping up. I kept holding out thinking, "This will be the last thing I need to fix." Of course, that wasn't the case. The breaks giving out (while I was driving) was the last straw.
Instead, I bought a Toyota for $13,500, brand new, and I haven't had a single problem (except for a flat tire) since then. That was almost 4 years ago. I have a warranty, I know all the problems with my car (no shady history), and I keep a good record of all the mechanical work I do on my car (get regular oil changes, etc). I will *never* buy a used car ever again.
Additionally, someone will probably respond and say, "Your car depreciates in value so fast...it's a bad investment." Um. What? When is a car an investment? Last time I checked, anything that DEPRECIATES in value at all is not a real good investment. My car exists to get me to the places I need to go, and I need to feel safe and comfortable while doing so. That's it. I'm not trying to make money off my car. I will drive it into the ground (or until it starts costing me a lot).
Alright. I'm off my soapbox now.
Emotional responses to the outwards appearance of a vehicle is why it should be harder to get a drivers license.
Wait. What?
Hate to break it to you, Mr. Narpak. People are kind of emotional. Some are less emotional than others, but people are emotional. The stupidest things can set them off.
In general, it seems that people with money tend to have more arrogance, and that extends throughout their social life, including driving.
Or maybe that's just your own personal perception. (My guess is you don't consider yourself "rich.")
Most people, whether they like to admit it or not, are relatively arrogant. I've had "rich" people (AKA people with nice cars) cut me off just as much as I've had "that guy in the old, beat-up station wagon" cut me off.