Pay people more . . . and work them less. This isn't because they don't want kids. Multiple studies and surveys have shown that. They can't afford to have kids ...
Are you sure you're looking at data for Japan? You seem to be missing the mark on this. The problem is more fundamental than not having kids, a large percentage of them aren't even having sex.
Illegal immigrants and their children eat up $135 billion in public funds every year, according to a report that examines the fiscal impact of unauthorized immigration in the U.S.
The study, released Wednesday by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), is one of the most comprehensive analyses of the costs of illegal immigration to date. It concludes that illegal immigration is a “staggering and crippling” drain on the public treasury.
Governments at the federal, state and local levels spent a total of $134.86 billion on illegal aliens in 2016, according to FAIR estimates.
At the same time, tax contributions by illegal immigrants did not come close to offsetting expenditures. Governments at all levels collected just $18.97 billion in taxes from illegal aliens, meaning that illegal immigration was responsible for a net fiscal drain of $115.89 billion last year
Whether he is a "xenophobe" (unlikely) is an open question. On the other had you are certainly uninformed.
You've never really bothered to look into this, or even ready much of the Slashdot stories on it, have you? Your ignorance is almost complete if that is what you believe.
The bankruptcy of a bitcoin exchange has been blamed on North Korean hackers, prompting concerns for the cryptocurrency’s future. Around $72 million worth of bitcoins were stolen from the South Korean exchange Youbit in April, before a second more recent cyber heist forced the exchange to shut down on Tuesday. Cryptocurrency exchanges from neighboring South Korea—which account for 15 to 25 percent of world bitcoin trading—appear to be the main target of the hackers, with the country’s largest exchange platform, Bithumb, hacked in July. Other Seoul-based bitcoin exchanges, including Yapizon and Coinis, have also been the target of cyber thieves suspected of being from North Korea this year.
In a perfect world, the open source community will drag a fine tooth comb through the code and we could be sure there was nothing malicious, but I don't believe in that world yet.
Over the years that contest has produced some stunning entries, including some that had as many as three different unrelated major functions contained in the same body of code. There is more than one way to hide secondary functionality of a program, some of which you would have to be quite clever to detect. The fact that Snowden is involved would serve to cause many people to drop their guard even if they had the skill and mindset to detect such obfuscated functionality.
Your "interesting" version of history omits a few details, such as Iraq invading and annexing Kuwait, invading Saudi Arabia and occupying the city Khafji, firing Scuds at Saudi Arabia and Israel, firing on US planes pretty much every day for years after the cease fire, repeated non-compliance with UN Security Council resolutions, hiding its VX nerve gas production, and on, and on, and on,... so yes, it was "we" that "did it" to Iraq.
Now, are you denying any bad actions by both North Korea and Iran? Really? You can't even credit North Korea with the official statements of its government threatening nuclear war against the United States? You can't credit them with their threats against Japan? That is JAPAN, the country with what is relatively a very small Self Defense Force that rarely and barely ventures outside the country?
Does even the mere possibility that your views might be a bit.... "off".... just not a good match for the facts of events . ..even occur to you?
This shouldn't even be close. Do you think the Guardian is trying to "do it" to North Korea too?
When someone says that they have sufficient evidence to give all reasonable cause to believe something, and then don't even bother to say what that evidence actually is, I think there's a sufficient basis to believe that they don't really know what they are talking about, and are only trying to make themselves sound much smarter than they actually are for figuring it out.
Another possibility is that they are right about their claims but aren't so obtuse as to reveal how they obtained the information so that they can keep using the techniques without the bad guys learning how they did it and blocking them. It's almost like their ability to keep getting intelligence is more important to them than the opinions of random people making posts on internet forums. But, you never know . . .
Not all countries would be affected evenly by future immigration, according to the Pew report. In the high migration scenario, Germany and Sweden would have the biggest increases because both countries took in the most asylum-seekers during the height of the refugee crisis two years ago. While Muslims made up 6 per cent of Germany’s population last year, their proportion would go up to 20 per cent by 2050. Sweden’s Muslims, who were at 8 per cent in 2016, would account for 31 per cent of the population in that same scenario.
Except this is exactly the issue we are worried about. How is it a much different era? Did companies stop being greedy? Did they stop consolidating to control massive swaths of customers? How is this era any different?
It is different because no internet company is in the position of AT&T and the Bell System, not even close.
. . . As a result of this vertical monopoly, by 1940 the Bell System effectively owned most telephone service in the United States, from local and long-distance service to the telephones themselves. This allowed Bell to prohibit its customers from connecting phones not made or sold by Bell to the system without paying fees. For example, if a customer desired a type of phone not leased by the local Bell monopoly, he or she had to purchase the phone at cost, give it to the phone company, then pay a 're-wiring' charge and a monthly lease fee in order to use it. . . .
In 1949, the United States Department of Justice alleged in an antitrust lawsuit that AT&T and the Bell System operating companies were using their near-monopoly in telecommunications to attempt to establish unfair advantage in related technologies. The outcome was a 1956 consent decree limiting AT&T to 85% of the United States' national telephone network and certain government contracts, and from continuing to hold interests in Canada and the Caribbean.
The internet and the legacy phone system may make use of related technologies, but the business, competitive environment, uses, and innovation are very different.
If you are only worried about "greedy companies" and aren't concerned about the stifling effects of government regulation then you don't worry enough about enough things.
Could you list the terrible things occurring in 2015 that both forced the hand of government to enact "net neutrality" and why it precludes returning to the regulatory environment of 2015?
. . . the major problem with the FCC’s move: It forced ISPs into an 80-year-old framework designed for the telephone monopolies of a much different era. Those regulations were more concerned about things like controlling market power than, say, promoting innovation. And while the advocates for net neutrality stressed the benefits for competition among content providers, the critics asked what would happen to competition among ISPs, since heavy-handed regulation often acts as a barrier to entry for new startups, which can’t afford to negotiate the regulatory apparatus. Those of us old enough to remember the telephone service looked like in the 1970s, before the FCC unwound a little -- which is to say, pretty much like the service our parents had when they were children, down to the astronomical prices for long distance calls, and the chunky plastic rotary telephones -- can see why critics were concerned about giving the FCC that kind of power to block innovation.
The Japanese, many Arab states, and North Korea have had various times held to forms of honor cultures that sometime lead to bad outcomes.
Moreover, North Korea is really China's problem, and China would much rather not have a nuclear war adjacent to its border. The Chinese government knows perfectly well what happens if North Korea launches a nuke
The sovereign nation of North Korea has repeatedly stated it is at war with the United States, that the armistice is off, and stated its intent to attack the United States with nuclear weapons. It has both nuclear weapons and it seems the long range ICBMs to deliver them, if not now, then soon. That might suggest the United States has at least some "minor" direct interest.
The right thing to do is not to stir up trouble.
Trouble already exists, and the war never ended. Waiting for much longer will result in it moving to another level.
And, as far as those hundreds of thousands of North Koreans, the number of civilian deaths in the Seoul area on the first day of the war could easily exceed that. Some problems have no good solution.
The situation of Seoul is difficult to calculate fully given the many variable, but it is probably better than commonly held. One thing is clear, however: some solutions are better than others. Waiting too long will probably make things worse, probably much worse.
North Korea is already deeply involved in many criminal enterprises, including drugs, counterfeiting currency (especially US), and the arms trade, to name a few. How do you think it would work out if they perfect their nuclear weapons and then begin selling them? There are nations that would be happy to buy nuclear weapons if they were for sale, and there are terrorist groups with access to deep pockets.
If you are in a war you are probably better off trying to win it in some fashion. Obama wasn't interested in that, but Trump is.
People gather around accidents, do you think they want to be in an accident? People gather to watch buildings burn, do you think they want their house to burn?
The point of the quoted text is to document the long history of North Korea's nuclear ambitions. It didn't start with Trump, it didn't start in the last year. It didn't start in the last 20 years. Many people try to suggest that North Korea is reacting to Iraq and Libya, and that simply isn't so.
The world is better off if the Korean peninsula is denuclearized.
It's not "par" when you've made the situation measurably worse.
You don't somehow think that all of the missiles that North Korea has been firing were somehow summoned by magic since the start of the Trump administration, do you? They were obviously being worked on during the Obama administration. What we are seeing is the flowering of Obama's work. (Or do you blame Her?)
So what you're saying is that at best, he's par for the course. "Par" is not what we were told to expect.
Trump hasn't even been in office for a year yet and he already has far more rigorous sanctions in place than Obama achieved, has China cooperating, and missile defense is getting a big boost in funding. He seems to be making progress that Obama couldn't. Lets see what happens between now and the end of the eighth year of the Trump administration.
Slashdot Mirror
Pay people more . . . and work them less. This isn't because they don't want kids. Multiple studies and surveys have shown that. They can't afford to have kids . ..
Are you sure you're looking at data for Japan? You seem to be missing the mark on this. The problem is more fundamental than not having kids, a large percentage of them aren't even having sex.
Why are almost half of Japan's millennials still virgins?
The problem isn't just money, it is social, and probably mainly social.
Cookie cutter socialist solutions probably aren't the answer here.
Citation provided.
The Total Fiscal Cost Of Illegal Immigration Is A Staggering $135 Billion, Report Says
Illegal immigrants and their children eat up $135 billion in public funds every year, according to a report that examines the fiscal impact of unauthorized immigration in the U.S.
The study, released Wednesday by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), is one of the most comprehensive analyses of the costs of illegal immigration to date. It concludes that illegal immigration is a “staggering and crippling” drain on the public treasury.
Governments at the federal, state and local levels spent a total of $134.86 billion on illegal aliens in 2016, according to FAIR estimates.
At the same time, tax contributions by illegal immigrants did not come close to offsetting expenditures. Governments at all levels collected just $18.97 billion in taxes from illegal aliens, meaning that illegal immigration was responsible for a net fiscal drain of $115.89 billion last year
Whether he is a "xenophobe" (unlikely) is an open question. On the other had you are certainly uninformed.
You've never really bothered to look into this, or even ready much of the Slashdot stories on it, have you? Your ignorance is almost complete if that is what you believe.
Bubble + North Korea hacking and theft + loss of confidence probably all play a roll
North Korea Hacking War on Bitcoin Exchanges Is Part of “Biggest Global Sting”
The bankruptcy of a bitcoin exchange has been blamed on North Korean hackers, prompting concerns for the cryptocurrency’s future. Around $72 million worth of bitcoins were stolen from the South Korean exchange Youbit in April, before a second more recent cyber heist forced the exchange to shut down on Tuesday. Cryptocurrency exchanges from neighboring South Korea—which account for 15 to 25 percent of world bitcoin trading—appear to be the main target of the hackers, with the country’s largest exchange platform, Bithumb, hacked in July. Other Seoul-based bitcoin exchanges, including Yapizon and Coinis, have also been the target of cyber thieves suspected of being from North Korea this year.
Bitcoin exchange collapses after second cyber attack in a year
Bitcoin fails its test as a haven in times of global turmoil
North Korea bitcoin WARNING: Kim regime hacking cryptocurrency to fund nuclear weapons
Strange as it may seem to you that isn't a guarantee that it is:
- Free of bugs
- Has no subversive behavior
- Has no hidden or obscured features
Even if you want to trust the contributors of that code, has either their development environment or the distribution means been compromised?
Has anyone publicly stated that they have audited and tested the code? I might trust the OpenBSD project contributors.
(I dont believe so, given all he sacrificed. And his demeanor did not suggest that -- watch Laura Poitras' film.),
CNN headline: Snowden to newspaper: I took contractor job to gather evidence
Laura Poitras was a collaborator with Snowden. Why would you think she would portray him in a bad light?
In a perfect world, the open source community will drag a fine tooth comb through the code and we could be sure there was nothing malicious, but I don't believe in that world yet.
I think you are wise not to.
Over the years that contest has produced some stunning entries, including some that had as many as three different unrelated major functions contained in the same body of code. There is more than one way to hide secondary functionality of a program, some of which you would have to be quite clever to detect. The fact that Snowden is involved would serve to cause many people to drop their guard even if they had the skill and mindset to detect such obfuscated functionality.
I think Elon Musk will have his hands full rescuing Elon Musk.
Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) should hold hearings on the matter. Then we can see if everyone agrees:
- Wired infrastructure providers
- Wireless infrastructure providers
- Content providers
- Services companies
- Hosting providers
- Security companies
- Regulatory agencies
- Schools & universities
- Government institutions
- Business users
- Individual users
- User groups
- Others
Hmmm .... just heard on the radio that "net neutrality" might hurt the porn industry. . . that could be worth some votes.
Your "interesting" version of history omits a few details, such as Iraq invading and annexing Kuwait, invading Saudi Arabia and occupying the city Khafji, firing Scuds at Saudi Arabia and Israel, firing on US planes pretty much every day for years after the cease fire, repeated non-compliance with UN Security Council resolutions, hiding its VX nerve gas production, and on, and on, and on, ... so yes, it was "we" that "did it" to Iraq.
Now, are you denying any bad actions by both North Korea and Iran? Really? You can't even credit North Korea with the official statements of its government threatening nuclear war against the United States? You can't credit them with their threats against Japan? That is JAPAN, the country with what is relatively a very small Self Defense Force that rarely and barely ventures outside the country?
Does even the mere possibility that your views might be a bit .... "off" .... just not a good match for the facts of events . . .even occur to you?
This shouldn't even be close. Do you think the Guardian is trying to "do it" to North Korea too?
Revealed: the gas chamber horror of North Korea's gulag
Maybe you've misread North Korea. This is not he socialist future you've been looking for . . .
Trump misreads North Korea’s sacred dynasty at his peril
When someone says that they have sufficient evidence to give all reasonable cause to believe something, and then don't even bother to say what that evidence actually is, I think there's a sufficient basis to believe that they don't really know what they are talking about, and are only trying to make themselves sound much smarter than they actually are for figuring it out.
Another possibility is that they are right about their claims but aren't so obtuse as to reveal how they obtained the information so that they can keep using the techniques without the bad guys learning how they did it and blocking them. It's almost like their ability to keep getting intelligence is more important to them than the opinions of random people making posts on internet forums. But, you never know . . .
...when it was a-ok to just bash someone's head in because he has the wrong imaginary friend.
"Antifa" ?
The point being that "Antifa" advocates beating "Nazis" but basically defines nearly everyone as a "Nazi" because Punch Nazis!!!!!
The label "Antifa" used by the current violent Left should be understood ironically.
In summary you are not able to successfully identify the relevant issues, potential implications, and what drawbacks might be attached to them. . . .
I suppose we can start with the basics. This is bad. The government was bad. The police were bad. The perpetrators were very, very bad.
The things linked to here are bad too. The government was bad. The police were bad. The perpetrators were very, very bad.
This is a pattern you will be seeing more of. Hopefully you survive any instance of it you are exposed to. (You might need someone's help.)
Is it turtles^H^H^H^H^H^H^H alien probes all the way down?
NO. Fuck it, it's not. It's a secular nation.
Don't confuse the state with the people. Besides, Sweden is likely to become markedly less secular in the future.
Europe's Muslim population projected to increase by 50m by 2050 in 'high migration' scenario
Not all countries would be affected evenly by future immigration, according to the Pew report. In the high migration scenario, Germany and Sweden would have the biggest increases because both countries took in the most asylum-seekers during the height of the refugee crisis two years ago. While Muslims made up 6 per cent of Germany’s population last year, their proportion would go up to 20 per cent by 2050. Sweden’s Muslims, who were at 8 per cent in 2016, would account for 31 per cent of the population in that same scenario.
Muslim population in some EU countries could triple, says report
Yes indeed, some parts of Europe could become quite religious in the coming years.
------------
...when it was a-ok to just bash someone's head in because he has the wrong imaginary friend.
"Antifa" ?
Black Unemployment Rate Lowest in 17 Years
IOW the move was not meant as an outright ban, but rather, a technique to help not getting fired by eliminating certain words and phrases.
LOL ... you actually think it is that easy to fire a US Federal Government employee?!? No, No, No.
Except this is exactly the issue we are worried about. How is it a much different era? Did companies stop being greedy? Did they stop consolidating to control massive swaths of customers? How is this era any different?
It is different because no internet company is in the position of AT&T and the Bell System, not even close.
Bell System - Nationwide monopoly
. . . As a result of this vertical monopoly, by 1940 the Bell System effectively owned most telephone service in the United States, from local and long-distance service to the telephones themselves. This allowed Bell to prohibit its customers from connecting phones not made or sold by Bell to the system without paying fees. For example, if a customer desired a type of phone not leased by the local Bell monopoly, he or she had to purchase the phone at cost, give it to the phone company, then pay a 're-wiring' charge and a monthly lease fee in order to use it. . . .
In 1949, the United States Department of Justice alleged in an antitrust lawsuit that AT&T and the Bell System operating companies were using their near-monopoly in telecommunications to attempt to establish unfair advantage in related technologies. The outcome was a 1956 consent decree limiting AT&T to 85% of the United States' national telephone network and certain government contracts, and from continuing to hold interests in Canada and the Caribbean.
The internet and the legacy phone system may make use of related technologies, but the business, competitive environment, uses, and innovation are very different.
If you are only worried about "greedy companies" and aren't concerned about the stifling effects of government regulation then you don't worry enough about enough things.
Could you list the terrible things occurring in 2015 that both forced the hand of government to enact "net neutrality" and why it precludes returning to the regulatory environment of 2015?
So, internet regulation is now back to what it was from circa 1980 - 2015? The horror .... the horror ....
The Internet Had Already Lost Its Neutrality
. . . the major problem with the FCC’s move: It forced ISPs into an 80-year-old framework designed for the telephone monopolies of a much different era. Those regulations were more concerned about things like controlling market power than, say, promoting innovation. And while the advocates for net neutrality stressed the benefits for competition among content providers, the critics asked what would happen to competition among ISPs, since heavy-handed regulation often acts as a barrier to entry for new startups, which can’t afford to negotiate the regulatory apparatus. Those of us old enough to remember the telephone service looked like in the 1970s, before the FCC unwound a little -- which is to say, pretty much like the service our parents had when they were children, down to the astronomical prices for long distance calls, and the chunky plastic rotary telephones -- can see why critics were concerned about giving the FCC that kind of power to block innovation.
Federal meddling can't improve the Internet.
Most people have never been able to do that. I mean, just look at how popular religion is.
And atheism, for that matter ....
Atheism is indeed the most daring of all dogmas...for it is the assertion of a universal negative. - G. K. Chesterton
How likely is it that Kim would start a war knowing that he'd be obliterated? There's a difference between being a psychopath and a suicide bomber.
Parallel between Japan 1941 and N. Korea 2017?
The Japanese, many Arab states, and North Korea have had various times held to forms of honor cultures that sometime lead to bad outcomes.
Moreover, North Korea is really China's problem, and China would much rather not have a nuclear war adjacent to its border. The Chinese government knows perfectly well what happens if North Korea launches a nuke
The sovereign nation of North Korea has repeatedly stated it is at war with the United States, that the armistice is off, and stated its intent to attack the United States with nuclear weapons. It has both nuclear weapons and it seems the long range ICBMs to deliver them, if not now, then soon. That might suggest the United States has at least some "minor" direct interest.
The right thing to do is not to stir up trouble.
Trouble already exists, and the war never ended. Waiting for much longer will result in it moving to another level.
And, as far as those hundreds of thousands of North Koreans, the number of civilian deaths in the Seoul area on the first day of the war could easily exceed that. Some problems have no good solution.
The situation of Seoul is difficult to calculate fully given the many variable, but it is probably better than commonly held. One thing is clear, however: some solutions are better than others. Waiting too long will probably make things worse, probably much worse.
North Korea is already deeply involved in many criminal enterprises, including drugs, counterfeiting currency (especially US), and the arms trade, to name a few. How do you think it would work out if they perfect their nuclear weapons and then begin selling them? There are nations that would be happy to buy nuclear weapons if they were for sale, and there are terrorist groups with access to deep pockets.
If you are in a war you are probably better off trying to win it in some fashion. Obama wasn't interested in that, but Trump is.
People gather around accidents, do you think they want to be in an accident? People gather to watch buildings burn, do you think they want their house to burn?
The answer to the above is "no," by the way.
The point of the quoted text is to document the long history of North Korea's nuclear ambitions. It didn't start with Trump, it didn't start in the last year. It didn't start in the last 20 years. Many people try to suggest that North Korea is reacting to Iraq and Libya, and that simply isn't so.
The world is better off if the Korean peninsula is denuclearized.
It's not "par" when you've made the situation measurably worse.
You don't somehow think that all of the missiles that North Korea has been firing were somehow summoned by magic since the start of the Trump administration, do you? They were obviously being worked on during the Obama administration. What we are seeing is the flowering of Obama's work. (Or do you blame Her?)
So what you're saying is that at best, he's par for the course. "Par" is not what we were told to expect.
Trump hasn't even been in office for a year yet and he already has far more rigorous sanctions in place than Obama achieved, has China cooperating, and missile defense is getting a big boost in funding. He seems to be making progress that Obama couldn't. Lets see what happens between now and the end of the eighth year of the Trump administration.