fuck I hate spambot feedback like that the worst is when its like 20 in a row from the same user, like the guy clearly "sold" a bunch of stuff to himself to bump his feedback. there should be an independent feedback site, like epinions or something.
wow, that really is the best page in the universe. though I do realize that the distribution method of podcasting was novel, its still just a fucking audio file posted on the internet. once people have downloaded it, its just another mp3. I really dont care that it was distributed through an rss feed rather than the user actively downloading it themselves. actually, just thinking about the "thingness" of podcasting is pissing my off, so I'm gonna go back and get to some old-fashioned jacking
"No one, and I mean no one, is going to shell out cash to buy lyrics. A manufacturer might as well sue customers for saying good things about their product in an online forum."
but they will visit the free, official site of the MPA (am I the only one who's never heard of this group?) and generate ad revenue for them, instead of some schmo listening to the songs and typing up what they think the lyrics are. that is, of course assuming that the MPA would cowboy up and fill the void after they shut everybody else down. and who's to say they'd do something so rational?
hey, at least this wasnt phrased "well, until oil prices climb even further there's no point in buying a hybrid because you won't save any money" like EVERY other "analysis" of the cost of hybrid ownership.
I honestly do not understand why people dont realize that when the overall cost of ownership is about equal, you might as well protect the environment and get a hybrid.
I mean, I want an M5 pretty bad, but the likelyhood of my being able to afford it anytime soon is slim to none, so I'll probably be buying a prius once I've got the down payment.
... yes, that certainly would fuck things up. however, if I'm remembering right, and this is of course not guaranteed in any way, those 15 seconds are actually before the original lion's roars. I'm pretty sure that there's new lion roars, the wonderful public service announcement that you're about to watch a cool movie, and then the original feature, as it originally played, beginning with the original lion's roars. the lion is different, a little more scraggly, and roared with a different cadence.
not to get too technical, but you press play on the third roar of the lion, there's a several second delay between 2nd and 3rd roars, so this is key.
those who have not done the combo viewing should definitely do so at their earliest conveniece. there are some rather amazing synchronicities, both in terms of rhythym and content.
obviously this experience could be enhanced with the addition of the proper preparation on your part.
"is there a guy behind the bush? I dunno!!! RED TEAM GO!!!! RED TEAM GO!!!" -jon stewart
while I agree with your sentiment, I would allow for the fact that the record labels are now no longer simply there to distribute music. they play a very pivotal (not necessarily a positive, but central) role in the creative process by making it standard to have spent millions of dollars producing a noteworthy album. Even thought that does mean that we end up with jessica simpson and endless reams of pop-punk, it would be incorrect to deny their place in the process. While they continue to spend millions of dollars to produce each big hit, artists not playing their game cannot hope to compete on a large scale, becuase they lack means of distribution.
The recording industry uses its monopoly on distribution to determine what we listen to and they are trying very hard to use it to determine how we listen to it. Any threats to that monopoly will naturally be threatening. hence the attempts to legislate their business model into perpetuity. and hence me saying they can go fuck themselves.
for business to defend market-based solutions to lifes problems by touting the adaptability of the market, how will naturally simply react to situations in the most effecient manner possible because of the wonderful mediating properties of currnecy, and then turn around and display such a remarkable lack of adaptability as to legislate the past into the future rather than innovating new ways to make money is just rather sickening. If big business had once, ever, in the history of modern capitalism, actually walked the talk about "letting the market decide," well, I'd be one surprised individual.
"If you don't like DRM, suggest another way for them to sell music. (And no bullshit answers about giving it away and making their money off concerts and t-shirt sales. Suggest a solution which doesn't involve simply giving up all that sales revenue.) If you can't come up with anything better than what's out there now, why would you be surprised that they can't either, and are desperately experimenting with so many bad ideas?"
Ok They do this amazing, ground-breaking thing, where they sell their music, be it on CD's or online, for a reasonable price. I would consider a reasonable price to be a little less than what IMS charges, and possibly a little less than that for older music, like music where the artist/composer is dead, for example... Then, they fire their lawyers, and stop the financial drain on their profit margin from prosecuting people for having downloaded a few songs. then, we make it a misdemeanor to have illicitly downloaded music, punishable like a traffic ticket. the RIAA keeps its watchdog services up and running, and forewards ip addresses of downloaders to the appropriate state, county, or municipal government, who issues a ticket. there is no criminality at issue, a simple traffic-style ticket, people just pay it and stop downloading, or dont and get caught and pay again. the ticket revenue goes to pay for the watchdog services, and the administrative overhead of issuing tickets. if there's any left over, then it gets donated to the NEA.
now, you will no doubt notice that there is no talk of restitution to the bereaved record labels for the vile thieves who are robbing them blind. Well, if they arent paying their lawyers MILLIONS of dollars a year, then they've got a pretty fucking sweet racket going. eliminate the need for their services (see the ticketing scheme mentioned above) and you eliminate that massive red mark on their ledger sheets, and by golly, you just might see a profit once and a while, oh, wait, they're already seeing massive profits anyways... well, on second thought, scratch my well reasoned and fair plan, and they can, in the words of our esteemed VP go fuck themselves.
ugh. if your only experience of dune is that craptastic movie, you might need to have your geek card revoked. jesus. at least watch the sci-fi miniseries. it didnt totally suck ass.
urgh. I'd prefer some vigilante justice. Just take hope and his chinese associates and shoot them to the moon, sans lunar landing module, just chained to the front of a titan III.
but of course, the U.S. doesnt do that sort of thing, so we'd have to have the CIA go borrow an old SS-19 from a former soviet republic.
I almost choked on my own tongue when I read that line.
right, the wsj reporter has this friend with illicit tv downloads.
This is really just fucking comedy gold. The wsj just reported something as if it was perfectly normal to have illegal downloads on your computers, or at least on your friends' computers. Just like this friend of mine had this rash one time...
i applaud the wsj for having the balls to address the question we've all (admit it) been thinking, "well, video iPod, all well and good, but will it play the vastness of my already established video collection?"
and the answer is...
yes, with some work, a small portion of your multi-terabyte porn collection can now be taken with you and viewed on the bus, in a cafe, or walking down the street.
huzzah
and I really do have to say it, as i've not seen it already said
*due sense of shame*... I for one welcome our portable-porn overlords...
fucking a I for one couldnt tell you within 50% how fucking tall american football goalposts are... and I'm ok with that. I mean, do we have standardized units of measurment for some fucking reason? or are they just ornamental?
"sorry, we're right smack-dab in the middle of one colosal pissing contest with apple right now.
Unless you want to go out and further support us by buying our inferior digital music player, you should just piss off and do what you were going to do anyways: burn a copy of the cd, then use that copy with itunes to put it on your stupid ipod.
sure, you'll have inferior audio quality, but fuck you for going with our competitor. you're just lucky we're not suing you for it."
I saw it too. I simply hope that they dont overdo the whole first person thing. it could get a little too kitchy. that said, I'm totally going to see it. and I'm going to enjoy the hell out of the trailer each time i go back to see serenity again.
well, no, the claim would go, 'MediaSentry broke into her computer, which was illegal, and therefore any evidence garnered as a result of said illegal act should be inadmissable.' But i'm under the impression that the poisoned fruit doctrine only applies to govt. agents such as police and other investigators, not private citizens. but ianal, of course
this is actually a case of several different mass transit options being pursued at the same time by the city and regional governments.
there is the monorail, light rail, and a limited-area streetcar all under development.
the monorail was being championed by a bunch of fanatics who would not listen to any nay-saying, because as far as they were concerned the monorail was the shit.
The monorail is a leftover from the Worlds Fair. It runs between the EMP and downtown. its a useless piece of concrete and steel that completely fucks up 5th avenue. The monorail expansion project was complete bs, and I for one am glad that those in power are finally realizing it.
hopefully we can roll over those taxes already collected for it into the light rail system and get a few more stops added.
um, have you actually been to atlanta? MARTA is actually pretty decent by american standards. I've never had to rent a car in atlanta, unless I needed to spend time solely out in one particular suburb.
BAH reinventing a system of apollo-style rockets built from shuttle-type parts is hardly building something that they *know* works. Its using proven individual technologies, yes, but if they could just build things that the knew worked and have that be sufficient, rocket science wouldnt be rocket science. we got to the moon the first time by stepping back, evaluating the available technologies, picking those that would suit needs best, and innovating those that were not yet available. The space elevator is one of the latter technologies. Like the race to the moon, the race to a space elevator will have technological benefits in many other areas. Think how the research into the construction of the current favorite, the nano-tube ribbon, will affect anything currently constructed with cables. advanced bridging technology springs instantly to mind, and I am certainly not an advanced fiber engineer.
besides, you know that america has to be the first country to so permanently penetrate the vast void of space with something so lasting and phallic as an elevator. I mean, how cool is that?
ownership of property, is of course on that list. However, I'd not place it first among constitutionally protected freedoms. not because is is lesser than the others, but rather because it has a way of guaranteeing itself, whereas civil liberties seem to need constant protection. again, we might disagree on this point.
Um... if government should be trusted with as little money as possible because its made up of self-interested individuals, then what do we say about the populace at large? I realize this is not what you mean to say, but it is... well, what you said.
You might want to watch yourself, equating "governance through big government for the collective good" with marxism. Aside from the fact that Marx wanted the concept of "government" to disappear, this is a historically inaccurate statement, as many, many other thinkers in history have advocated such. FIrst and foremost, the person to whom Marx was directly responding with the majority of his writing, Hegel.
The statement that Capitalism allows people to succeed as much as they are willing to work is, on its face, bullshit. To say that there are no systematic mechanisms at play in our capitalist market system that prevent the underpriveleged from succeeding financially is pretty damn ignorant. It is a myth of the successful that financial rewards are only visited upon those who have worked hard. It is, however, the degree to which our society values the particular type of work one does, not the degree to which one works hard at it, that determines how successful one is. This is not a problem, obviously doctors should be more highly rewarded than janitors. But we should be careful that everyone with the capability to become a doctor has the option to do so. which brings us back to...
The necessity of decent and universally available education, so that those who can do a thing are able to do so. If you think that eliminating public education is the way to achieve this, well, I think you're wrong.
"That sounds to me like a good argument in favor of a 100% private school system. Parents can choose what ideology their children are educated within, and no public money is spent on furthering or excluding any particular ideology."
I dont think that govt-funded charter schools is an appropriate middle ground. However, I think that the problem that a 100% private school system is that a rather sizable minority of families in this country could never afford the per-child costs of a private education. The tax savings for lower income families would be so negligable as to be nonexistent. Then we've even further stigmatized the children of lower-income households by making their place at school contingent upon charity contributions. At the same time, there would still need to be a govt bureacuracy of some kind simply to ensure that all children were receiving schooling of some kind, whether at one school or another. I think that a public system that provides as ideologically neutral education as possible is the best possible system given the situation of our society. The desire of parents to delegate the teaching of "their ideology" is no reason think otherwise.
"That's because individuals earn that money, and government takes it."
Not all income is earned income, if by "earn" you mean garnered through honest toil. Insofar as our government rules with the consent of the governed, it takes only those monies which you give. some might have different ideas concerning the source of governmental authority, and i respect that.
"It's not unreasonable for people to get angry over how that money is spent, especially when they feel they could put that money to better use themselves."
You arent listening. Of course its not unreasonable to get angry over how that money is spent. It is unreasonable to continue to consider it "your" money. The "I could spend it better myself" excuse is a blatant fallacy. Group action of the sort exemplified by govt spending programs fall victim to the Prisoner's Dilemma exceedingly fast. Govt spending programs cover those areas which self-interested individuals WILL have the tendency to overlook, or at least, not pay enough attention to. Ignorance of this relationship is endemic in this country.
"Case in point: my state legislators recently voted themselves pay raises ranging from 16 to 34 percent. That, combined with a ridiculous COLA index and lavish benefits, makes Pennsylvania's state legislature the most expensive in the nation. This bill was passed at 2:00 AM with absolutely zero public discussion. Do I (and THOUSANDS around Harrisbug) not have just cause to be angry?"
This is exactly what I'm talking about. This is a "mine" vs "Ours" distinction. All of you have the right to be upset, because you're collectively getting screwed. you cannot point to individual dollars and say that that one is mine or yours. The state legislators took "our" money (the ideal "our"... I'm not from PA) and used it in a way that "we" didnt like.
"So here we inevitably get to the heart of the matter:"
indeed
"you believe people who want fewer taxes are simply greedy."
No. please dont put words in my mouth like that. Greed has, actually, little to do with it. I believe that people who bitch about how "their" tax money is spent are SELFISH, not because their bitching, everybody has the right to bitch, but because they conceive of the res publica as being their sole concern. That the way in which govt spending affects them personally is somehow more important than they way it affects all of us together.
"You seem to subscribe to the notion that the will of the collective should supercede the needs of the individual."
You seem to want to ascribe a good deal of imperatives to me. i think that, in certain ways, and only in certain ways, the needs of the collective do supercede the needs of the individual. Taxes are one of them. however, the collective has tried to lessen the impact of this act on those whose mo
Slashdot Mirror
fuck I hate spambot feedback like that
the worst is when its like 20 in a row from the same user, like the guy clearly "sold" a bunch of stuff to himself to bump his feedback.
there should be an independent feedback site, like epinions or something.
oblig. family guy.
HIGH-FIVE!!! *slap*
ALLL RIIIIIGHT!!!!
*thumbs-up from lavar burton*
wow, that really is the best page in the universe.
though I do realize that the distribution method of podcasting was novel, its still just a fucking audio file posted on the internet. once people have downloaded it, its just another mp3. I really dont care that it was distributed through an rss feed rather than the user actively downloading it themselves.
actually, just thinking about the "thingness" of podcasting is pissing my off, so I'm gonna go back and get to some old-fashioned jacking
"No one, and I mean no one, is going to shell out cash to buy lyrics. A manufacturer might as well sue customers for saying good things about their product in an online forum."
but they will visit the free, official site of the MPA (am I the only one who's never heard of this group?) and generate ad revenue for them, instead of some schmo listening to the songs and typing up what they think the lyrics are.
that is, of course assuming that the MPA would cowboy up and fill the void after they shut everybody else down. and who's to say they'd do something so rational?
except that we already have heard from the RIAA robber-barons that they want to be charging more for new releases.
if they really understood, well, anything, let alone economics, they would not be giving their customers the middle finger on a daily basis.
what I want to know is, what the hell happened to Jobs calling them greedy and standing firm on the flat pricing scheme?
hey, at least this wasnt phrased "well, until oil prices climb even further there's no point in buying a hybrid because you won't save any money" like EVERY other "analysis" of the cost of hybrid ownership.
I honestly do not understand why people dont realize that when the overall cost of ownership is about equal, you might as well protect the environment and get a hybrid.
I mean, I want an M5 pretty bad, but the likelyhood of my being able to afford it anytime soon is slim to none, so I'll probably be buying a prius once I've got the down payment.
... yes, that certainly would fuck things up.
however, if I'm remembering right, and this is of course not guaranteed in any way, those 15 seconds are actually before the original lion's roars. I'm pretty sure that there's new lion roars, the wonderful public service announcement that you're about to watch a cool movie, and then the original feature, as it originally played, beginning with the original lion's roars. the lion is different, a little more scraggly, and roared with a different cadence.
not to get too technical, but you press play on the third roar of the lion, there's a several second delay between 2nd and 3rd roars, so this is key.
those who have not done the combo viewing should definitely do so at their earliest conveniece. there are some rather amazing synchronicities, both in terms of rhythym and content.
obviously this experience could be enhanced with the addition of the proper preparation on your part.
"is there a guy behind the bush? I dunno!!! RED TEAM GO!!!! RED TEAM GO!!!"
-jon stewart
while I agree with your sentiment, I would allow for the fact that the record labels are now no longer simply there to distribute music. they play a very pivotal (not necessarily a positive, but central) role in the creative process by making it standard to have spent millions of dollars producing a noteworthy album. Even thought that does mean that we end up with jessica simpson and endless reams of pop-punk, it would be incorrect to deny their place in the process. While they continue to spend millions of dollars to produce each big hit, artists not playing their game cannot hope to compete on a large scale, becuase they lack means of distribution.
The recording industry uses its monopoly on distribution to determine what we listen to and they are trying very hard to use it to determine how we listen to it. Any threats to that monopoly will naturally be threatening. hence the attempts to legislate their business model into perpetuity.
and hence me saying they can go fuck themselves.
for business to defend market-based solutions to lifes problems by touting the adaptability of the market, how will naturally simply react to situations in the most effecient manner possible because of the wonderful mediating properties of currnecy, and then turn around and display such a remarkable lack of adaptability as to legislate the past into the future rather than innovating new ways to make money is just rather sickening. If big business had once, ever, in the history of modern capitalism, actually walked the talk about "letting the market decide," well, I'd be one surprised individual.
"If you don't like DRM, suggest another way for them to sell music. (And no bullshit answers about giving it away and making their money off concerts and t-shirt sales. Suggest a solution which doesn't involve simply giving up all that sales revenue.) If you can't come up with anything better than what's out there now, why would you be surprised that they can't either, and are desperately experimenting with so many bad ideas?"
Ok
They do this amazing, ground-breaking thing, where they sell their music, be it on CD's or online, for a reasonable price. I would consider a reasonable price to be a little less than what IMS charges, and possibly a little less than that for older music, like music where the artist/composer is dead, for example...
Then, they fire their lawyers, and stop the financial drain on their profit margin from prosecuting people for having downloaded a few songs.
then, we make it a misdemeanor to have illicitly downloaded music, punishable like a traffic ticket. the RIAA keeps its watchdog services up and running, and forewards ip addresses of downloaders to the appropriate state, county, or municipal government, who issues a ticket. there is no criminality at issue, a simple traffic-style ticket, people just pay it and stop downloading, or dont and get caught and pay again. the ticket revenue goes to pay for the watchdog services, and the administrative overhead of issuing tickets. if there's any left over, then it gets donated to the NEA.
now, you will no doubt notice that there is no talk of restitution to the bereaved record labels for the vile thieves who are robbing them blind. Well, if they arent paying their lawyers MILLIONS of dollars a year, then they've got a pretty fucking sweet racket going. eliminate the need for their services (see the ticketing scheme mentioned above) and you eliminate that massive red mark on their ledger sheets, and by golly, you just might see a profit once and a while,
oh, wait, they're already seeing massive profits anyways...
well, on second thought, scratch my well reasoned and fair plan, and they can, in the words of our esteemed VP go fuck themselves.
ugh. if your only experience of dune is that craptastic movie, you might need to have your geek card revoked. jesus.
at least watch the sci-fi miniseries. it didnt totally suck ass.
urgh. I'd prefer some vigilante justice. Just take hope and his chinese associates and shoot them to the moon, sans lunar landing module, just chained to the front of a titan III. but of course, the U.S. doesnt do that sort of thing, so we'd have to have the CIA go borrow an old SS-19 from a former soviet republic.
do you...hate freedom or something?
you sound like you're with the terrorists, to me.
If you dont love america, you can just geeehhht out.
I almost choked on my own tongue when I read that line. right, the wsj reporter has this friend with illicit tv downloads. This is really just fucking comedy gold. The wsj just reported something as if it was perfectly normal to have illegal downloads on your computers, or at least on your friends' computers. Just like this friend of mine had this rash one time... i applaud the wsj for having the balls to address the question we've all (admit it) been thinking, "well, video iPod, all well and good, but will it play the vastness of my already established video collection?" and the answer is... yes, with some work, a small portion of your multi-terabyte porn collection can now be taken with you and viewed on the bus, in a cafe, or walking down the street. huzzah and I really do have to say it, as i've not seen it already said *due sense of shame* ... I for one welcome our portable-porn overlords...
fucking a
I for one couldnt tell you within 50% how fucking tall american football goalposts are... and I'm ok with that. I mean, do we have standardized units of measurment for some fucking reason? or are they just ornamental?
Think that they might as well have said:
"sorry, we're right smack-dab in the middle of one colosal pissing contest with apple right now.
Unless you want to go out and further support us by buying our inferior digital music player, you should just piss off and do what you were going to do anyways: burn a copy of the cd, then use that copy with itunes to put it on your stupid ipod.
sure, you'll have inferior audio quality, but fuck you for going with our competitor. you're just lucky we're not suing you for it."
I saw it too.
I simply hope that they dont overdo the whole first person thing. it could get a little too kitchy.
that said, I'm totally going to see it.
and I'm going to enjoy the hell out of the trailer each time i go back to see serenity again.
well, no, the claim would go, 'MediaSentry broke into her computer, which was illegal, and therefore any evidence garnered as a result of said illegal act should be inadmissable.' But i'm under the impression that the poisoned fruit doctrine only applies to govt. agents such as police and other investigators, not private citizens. but ianal, of course
this is actually a case of several different mass transit options being pursued at the same time by the city and regional governments. there is the monorail, light rail, and a limited-area streetcar all under development. the monorail was being championed by a bunch of fanatics who would not listen to any nay-saying, because as far as they were concerned the monorail was the shit. The monorail is a leftover from the Worlds Fair. It runs between the EMP and downtown. its a useless piece of concrete and steel that completely fucks up 5th avenue. The monorail expansion project was complete bs, and I for one am glad that those in power are finally realizing it. hopefully we can roll over those taxes already collected for it into the light rail system and get a few more stops added.
um, have you actually been to atlanta? MARTA is actually pretty decent by american standards. I've never had to rent a car in atlanta, unless I needed to spend time solely out in one particular suburb.
BAH
reinventing a system of apollo-style rockets built from shuttle-type parts is hardly building something that they *know* works. Its using proven individual technologies, yes, but if they could just build things that the knew worked and have that be sufficient, rocket science wouldnt be rocket science.
we got to the moon the first time by stepping back, evaluating the available technologies, picking those that would suit needs best, and innovating those that were not yet available. The space elevator is one of the latter technologies. Like the race to the moon, the race to a space elevator will have technological benefits in many other areas. Think how the research into the construction of the current favorite, the nano-tube ribbon, will affect anything currently constructed with cables. advanced bridging technology springs instantly to mind, and I am certainly not an advanced fiber engineer.
besides, you know that america has to be the first country to so permanently penetrate the vast void of space with something so lasting and phallic as an elevator. I mean, how cool is that?
and the power to destroy a planet is insignifigant agains the power of the force. its close enough that it had to be said
my favorite part about software EULA's is that once you can read it, you've already "freely accepted" it.
ownership of property, is of course on that list. However, I'd not place it first among constitutionally protected freedoms. not because is is lesser than the others, but rather because it has a way of guaranteeing itself, whereas civil liberties seem to need constant protection. again, we might disagree on this point. Um... if government should be trusted with as little money as possible because its made up of self-interested individuals, then what do we say about the populace at large? I realize this is not what you mean to say, but it is... well, what you said. You might want to watch yourself, equating "governance through big government for the collective good" with marxism. Aside from the fact that Marx wanted the concept of "government" to disappear, this is a historically inaccurate statement, as many, many other thinkers in history have advocated such. FIrst and foremost, the person to whom Marx was directly responding with the majority of his writing, Hegel. The statement that Capitalism allows people to succeed as much as they are willing to work is, on its face, bullshit. To say that there are no systematic mechanisms at play in our capitalist market system that prevent the underpriveleged from succeeding financially is pretty damn ignorant. It is a myth of the successful that financial rewards are only visited upon those who have worked hard. It is, however, the degree to which our society values the particular type of work one does, not the degree to which one works hard at it, that determines how successful one is. This is not a problem, obviously doctors should be more highly rewarded than janitors. But we should be careful that everyone with the capability to become a doctor has the option to do so. which brings us back to... The necessity of decent and universally available education, so that those who can do a thing are able to do so. If you think that eliminating public education is the way to achieve this, well, I think you're wrong.
"That sounds to me like a good argument in favor of a 100% private school system. Parents can choose what ideology their children are educated within, and no public money is spent on furthering or excluding any particular ideology."
I dont think that govt-funded charter schools is an appropriate middle ground. However, I think that the problem that a 100% private school system is that a rather sizable minority of families in this country could never afford the per-child costs of a private education. The tax savings for lower income families would be so negligable as to be nonexistent. Then we've even further stigmatized the children of lower-income households by making their place at school contingent upon charity contributions.
At the same time, there would still need to be a govt bureacuracy of some kind simply to ensure that all children were receiving schooling of some kind, whether at one school or another. I think that a public system that provides as ideologically neutral education as possible is the best possible system given the situation of our society. The desire of parents to delegate the teaching of "their ideology" is no reason think otherwise.
"That's because individuals earn that money, and government takes it."
Not all income is earned income, if by "earn" you mean garnered through honest toil. Insofar as our government rules with the consent of the governed, it takes only those monies which you give. some might have different ideas concerning the source of governmental authority, and i respect that.
"It's not unreasonable for people to get angry over how that money is spent, especially when they feel they could put that money to better use themselves."
You arent listening. Of course its not unreasonable to get angry over how that money is spent. It is unreasonable to continue to consider it "your" money. The "I could spend it better myself" excuse is a blatant fallacy. Group action of the sort exemplified by govt spending programs fall victim to the Prisoner's Dilemma exceedingly fast. Govt spending programs cover those areas which self-interested individuals WILL have the tendency to overlook, or at least, not pay enough attention to. Ignorance of this relationship is endemic in this country.
"Case in point: my state legislators recently voted themselves pay raises ranging from 16 to 34 percent. That, combined with a ridiculous COLA index and lavish benefits, makes Pennsylvania's state legislature the most expensive in the nation. This bill was passed at 2:00 AM with absolutely zero public discussion. Do I (and THOUSANDS around Harrisbug) not have just cause to be angry?"
This is exactly what I'm talking about. This is a "mine" vs "Ours" distinction. All of you have the right to be upset, because you're collectively getting screwed. you cannot point to individual dollars and say that that one is mine or yours. The state legislators took "our" money (the ideal "our"... I'm not from PA) and used it in a way that "we" didnt like.
"So here we inevitably get to the heart of the matter:"
indeed
"you believe people who want fewer taxes are simply greedy."
No. please dont put words in my mouth like that. Greed has, actually, little to do with it. I believe that people who bitch about how "their" tax money is spent are SELFISH, not because their bitching, everybody has the right to bitch, but because they conceive of the res publica as being their sole concern. That the way in which govt spending affects them personally is somehow more important than they way it affects all of us together.
"You seem to subscribe to the notion that the will of the collective should supercede the needs of the individual."
You seem to want to ascribe a good deal of imperatives to me. i think that, in certain ways, and only in certain ways, the needs of the collective do supercede the needs of the individual. Taxes are one of them. however, the collective has tried to lessen the impact of this act on those whose mo