I never said Brin & Page weren't going to give more.. I have no way of knowing that. What I do know is that their own site says they have donated 33 million.
The gates foundation hasn't just announced they're giving 1.5 billion annually.. they have already given 1.5 billion annually for the past several years. 33 million is about what the gates foundation gives away in a week.
Brin & Page have almost half as much money as gates (they're the 26 & 27th richest people in the world), yet they give 1/50th of what gates gives.
We may not expect half the world to come marching in, but we are responsible for defending half the world:
COUNTRIES WITH FORMAL U.S. DEFENSE COMMITMENTS Belgium, Argentia , Canada , Bahamas, Czech Republic , Bolivia, Denmark , Brazil, France , Chile, Germany , Colombia, Greece , Costa Rica, Hungary, Iceland , Dominican Republic, Italy , Ecuador, Luxembourg , El Salvador, Netherlands , Guatemala, Norway , Haiti, Poland , Honduras, Portugal , Mexico, Spain , Nicaragua, Turkey , Panama, United Kingdom , Paraguay, Peru, Trinidad & Tobago, Japan , Uraguay, Korea , Venezuela, Philippines, Thailand, Australia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Palau
The list above may not include all of the NATO countries, who can expect us to defend them as well.
COUNTRIES AND AREAS WITH US MILITARY BASES OR INSTALLATIONS Belgium , Australia, Germany , Japan, Greece , Korea, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Portugal (Azores), Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom, Canada, Diego Garcia, Greenland, Panama
COUNTRIES AND AREAS WITH LESSER OR TECHNICAL US MILITARY FACILITIES Antigua and Barbuda , Marshall Islands , Bahamas, New Zealand, Bahrain , Ascension Island, (United Kingdom)
Then there are additional countries that don't have a formal defense commitment, but do have close relations with the US military (some of these do have defense contracts, kuwait for instance.. so it's obviously out of date.. also I doubt Russia is expecting us to defend it in any way.. but many of these states do depend on us):
Austria, Israel, Kuwait, Finland, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Belarus, Oman, Georgia, United Arab Emirates, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Russia, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada, Montserrat, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent, Grenadines, Jamaica, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Taiwan
So, tell me: if the US is responsible for coming to the aid of these countries if they are attacked, is it unreasonable for us to have a large military? How many of these countries would agree with you? How many of these countries know we'll defend them, and spend less on their military because of it?
The only time Europe comes out guns blazing is when it has to do with one of their former colonies
Actually, they won't even do that.. witness most of Africa.. All except 2-3 countries in Africa were part of colonies in Europe. The Belgians created the Hutu/Tutsi (before Belgian came, they were the same people). Then when war broke out, and the genocide was all over the news, the Europeans just left (in fairness though, we left too.. but we didn't create the problem..).
and to clarify the point about peering agreements:
Peering agreements only exist between two providers who pass roughly equal amounts of traffic between eachother. It's just an agreement that say: I'm passing 1000TB of traffic to you, and your passing 1000TB to me, so we'll carry each others traffic for free.
If one of the companies loses market share, they will not renew the agreement. Take a look at what happened with Level1 and Cogent (IIRC)
every person who goes to work at a company invests their time and talent. In exchange they are given a salary. If that counts as investing then every employee and independent contracter in America deserves a piece of the companies they have worked at.
It does not count as investing, because there is very little risk in going to work for someone else. If the company had gone under, he could have sued for his paycheck; the owners would have been responsible for paying any employment taxes, even if they had to sell everything they have to pay it.
Unlike the poster, the investors had no guarantee of getting paid. They could have worked for years, saw the company go under, lost everything they had, and yet the post would have still been paid his salary.
These were active investors.. they invested not only their money, but their time and experience and talent in the company. And when their talent wasn't good enough, they hired someone to help them. That is all that happened, nothing more. It's unreasonable for him to expect to benefit from someone elses risk.
You expected way too much. You were hired as an employee. You didn't put any money into the company, and you were paid for the work you did.
The investors, who made more than you, would have lost all of their money if this went badly. If things went badly for the company, you would have still been paid your salary.
If you wanted the benfits of being an investor, you should have taken out a second mortgage on your home (for example) and invested the money in the company. Of course you didn't want to do that, because it was a startup, and you didn't know if you would get your money back.
Well, guess what? The investors in the company didn't know if they were going to get their money back either. The money they earned from the sale is their reward for taking the risk in starting the company.
So what you wanted was all of the benefits of being an investor, without any of the risk.. which was unreasonable to say the least.
Agree 100%.. I also don't shop at walmart (it's been several years since I stepped foot in one), and I won't buy from a company that uses slave labor.
Yes.. I'm prepared to pay more for US goods. Right now I'm buying pans from cooking.com.. I'm buying All-Clad.. They are expensive, but virtually everything else (except Calphalon) is made in China or Tailand. Go take a look at the prices.. I can get a 10" skillet for $15 bucks from China.. or I can get an All-Clad 10" skillet for $100.
China and third-world countries are my last option.. I'll only buy it if there is nothing else available. If there is something made in the US, I'm going to support the US company.
The Standard For Unqualified Made In USA Claims What is the standard for a product to be called Made in USA without qualification? For a product to be called Made in USA, or claimed to be of domestic origin without qualifications or limits on the claim, the product must be "all or virtually all" made in the U.S. The term "United States," as referred to in the Enforcement Policy Statement, includes the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. territories and possessions.
What does "all or virtually all" mean? "All or virtually all" means that all significant parts and processing that go into the product must be of U.S. origin. That is, the product should contain no - or negligible - foreign content.
They can also make a 'qualified' made in the USA claim.. like this:
"60% U.S. content." "Made in USA of U.S. and imported parts." "Couch assembled in USA from Italian Leather and Mexican Frame."
If they are assembling the product in the USA from foreign parts, they cannot claim "Made in USA".. they can make a qualified claim though.
wow.. you are really something. You say I misquoted Amnesty International. So I post exactly what they say on their own website from their own reports. Yet you still say Amnesty International is saying something else.
You clearly believe whatever you want... evidence has nothing to do with it. You could at least say so, instead of lying through your teeth and saying AI said something they didn't.
... an estimated 100,000 Kurdish civilians who "disappeared" in 1988 in the so-called "Operation Anfal";...
In October Amnesty International published a report, Iraq: "Disappearances" _ unresolved cases since the early 1980s, in which it appealed to the government to put an end to "disappearances" and to clarify the fate of hundreds of thousands of people who had "disappeared" since the early 1980s.
I'm going to believe HRW, AI, UN, and US State Dept (who all more-or-less agree on their estimates), than a troll on/. who can't even quote AI correctly.
Since the Saddam Hussein regime was overthrown in May, 270 mass graves have been reported. By mid-January, 2004, the number of confirmed sites climbed to fifty-three. Some graves hold a few dozen bodiestheir arms lashed together and the bullet holes in the backs of skulls testimo- ny to their execution. Other graves go on for hundreds of meters, densely packed with thousands of bodies. Weve already discovered just so far the remains of 400,000 people in mass graves, said British Prime Minister Tony Blair on November 20 in London. The United Nations, the U.S. State Department, Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch (HRW) all estimate that Saddam Husseins regime murdered hun dreds of thousands of innocent people. Human Rights Watch estimates that as many as 290,000 Iraqis have been disappeared by the Iraqi government over the past two decades, said the group in a statement in May. Many of these disappeared are those whose remains are now being unearthed in mass graves all over Iraq. If these numbers prove accurate, they represent a crime against humanity surpassed only by the Rwandan geno cide of 1994, Pol Pots Cambodian killing fields in the 1970s, and the Nazi Holocaust of World War II.
Let me repeat that in case you missed it:
"We've already discovered just so far the remains of 400,000 people in mass graves," said British Prime Minister Tony Blair on November 20 in London.
I agree it's a horrible idea.. but I doubt Google displaying a message will result in telco's abandoning it. I can see it now:
- User sees message on Google
- User calls ISP to ask about the message they saw on Google
- User is told that is because they are only paying for the "Silver" package, but they can upgrade to the Gold package for only an extra $20/mo. The Gold package features even "faster" access to your favorite sites, including Google, MSN, Yahoo, and Amazon!
There is no way I will ever do business with a credit union.
I still remember an article I was reading about a local CU that went bankrupt in Denver or Boulder, Colorado (which is where I am).
When you open an account at a CU, you are not just their customer; you are a "Member" of the CU. Basically, you are not just a customer, you are part owner.
When the CU went bankrupt, those "members" didn't receive all of their money back. The money the CU had left was used to pay creditors, and the rest was divided up by the "Members". No one received all of the money that was in their checking account
At least if I get an actual bank account, I get my money if the bank decides to close. That is a very valuable service. Let me know when a CU offers that.
Granted, you'd probably be able to afford fewer toys, but I am pretty sure you would not starve to death.
Ah.. well as long as I don't starve.. what else do I need? sounds like a paradise.
"look, the brown people want to rape our women and take our grain"
I'm not saying that.. I know most of them just want to come here to work. But a porous border also allows criminals and such to come into our country as well.
I'm not going to find links to back up everything I said.. you can do that yourself if you don't believe me.. but I do remember where some of the information came from so maybe that will help you out:
BBC: "27% of farm workers are illegal"
US Census: "only 20% of our population has an education higher than a high school education"
US Dept of Labor: "work for minimum wage, and who have the highest unemployment rate (as you gain more education, the unemployment rate goes down)."
Various (should be easy to find): "the federal government is allowed to run a deficit.. the states are not."
Various (should be easy to find): "The states have strained budgets as it is and have (drastically in some cases) cut services for citizens."
NYTimes: "They fill our federal (and sometimes states) jails (not for being here illegally, but for serious criminal offenses).. Lookup the percentage of illegals in federal prison for murder, rape, etc.. The numbers are far higher than you would expect for 11 million people."
NYTimes (but you can also find it in many other papers): "Mexico calls those who leave their country "National Heros". The 20 Billion they send back each year exceeds the budget for many Mexican states. Their border patrol holds meetings at the border to educate border crossers on how to get across the border, not get caught, and find a job in America."
Reading a good newspaper each morning can teach you a lot.. try it sometime.
haha.. which part of my sig do you think contradicts my post? Everything I said is true, and can be found in mainstream press (mostly nytimes or bbc).
Or do you think anyone who is for protecting our borders is an extremist nutjob?
There is no job that illegal aliens do that Americans aren't willing to do.. we have our poor too.
The industry with the highest number of illegals is farming.. where 27% of the work force is estimated to be illegal. Which means 73% of those doing that work are American citizens.
Americans are willing to do the work. Only 20% of our population has an education higher than a high school education. Those 80% of people work in manufacturing, service, retail, etc. These are the people who often work for minimum wage, and who have the highest unemployment rate (as you gain more education, the unemployment rate goes down). They will take whatever job they can get. (I should know.. my mother was poor too.. she worked on a farm picking oranges in Florida... she was an american citizen.. in fact, our family line dates back to the Mayflower.)
The problem isn't American citizens.. the problem is employers who want to exploit illegal immigrants. They want to pay them shit and exploit these people because they are vulnerable.
Illegal immigration is a problem. It drains state budgets.. Remember, the federal government is allowed to run a deficit.. the states are not. The states have strained budgets as it is and have (drastically in some cases) cut services for citizens. They (the local governments) cannot afford to pay for illegal immigrants.. they have a hard enough time paying for services for their own citizens.
They fill our federal (and sometimes states) jails (not for being here illegally, but for serious criminal offenses).. Lookup the percentage of illegals in federal prison for murder, rape, etc.. The numbers are far higher than you would expect for 11 million people.
The biggest opponents to stopping illegal immigrants are employers and Mexico... Mexico calls those who leave their country "National Heros". The 20 Billion they send back each year exceeds the budget for many Mexican states. Their border patrol holds meetings at the border to educate border crossers on how to get across the border, not get caught, and find a job in America.
Just wanted to add that it isn't the hospitals that choose to treat illegals... the federal government requires that illegal aliens be allowed emergency services and access to public schools at a minimum.
If I entered another country illegally, they wouldn't give me shit, much less emergency services and an education.
Slashdot Mirror
You missed my point.
I never said Brin & Page weren't going to give more.. I have no way of knowing that. What I do know is that their own site says they have donated 33 million.
The gates foundation hasn't just announced they're giving 1.5 billion annually.. they have already given 1.5 billion annually for the past several years. 33 million is about what the gates foundation gives away in a week.
Brin & Page have almost half as much money as gates (they're the 26 & 27th richest people in the world), yet they give 1/50th of what gates gives.
I'm happy to see Google donating some of their money, and I'm not trying to diminish their efforts, but...
Brin & Page are worth $22.5 Billion
Gates is worth $51 Billion
Google.org has donated $33 Million
Gates is donating $1.5 Billion Annually
We may not expect half the world to come marching in, but we are responsible for defending half the world:
COUNTRIES WITH FORMAL U.S. DEFENSE COMMITMENTS
Belgium, Argentia , Canada , Bahamas, Czech Republic , Bolivia, Denmark , Brazil, France , Chile, Germany , Colombia, Greece , Costa Rica, Hungary, Iceland , Dominican Republic, Italy , Ecuador, Luxembourg , El Salvador, Netherlands , Guatemala, Norway , Haiti, Poland , Honduras, Portugal , Mexico, Spain , Nicaragua, Turkey , Panama, United Kingdom , Paraguay, Peru, Trinidad & Tobago, Japan , Uraguay, Korea , Venezuela, Philippines, Thailand, Australia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Palau
The list above may not include all of the NATO countries, who can expect us to defend them as well.
COUNTRIES AND AREAS WITH US MILITARY BASES OR INSTALLATIONS
Belgium , Australia, Germany , Japan, Greece , Korea, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Portugal (Azores), Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom, Canada, Diego Garcia, Greenland, Panama
COUNTRIES AND AREAS WITH LESSER OR TECHNICAL US MILITARY FACILITIES
Antigua and Barbuda , Marshall Islands , Bahamas, New Zealand, Bahrain , Ascension Island, (United Kingdom)
Then there are additional countries that don't have a formal defense commitment, but do have close relations with the US military (some of these do have defense contracts, kuwait for instance.. so it's obviously out of date.. also I doubt Russia is expecting us to defend it in any way.. but many of these states do depend on us):
Austria, Israel, Kuwait, Finland, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Belarus, Oman, Georgia, United Arab Emirates, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Russia, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada, Montserrat, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent, Grenadines, Jamaica, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Taiwan
So, tell me: if the US is responsible for coming to the aid of these countries if they are attacked, is it unreasonable for us to have a large military? How many of these countries would agree with you? How many of these countries know we'll defend them, and spend less on their military because of it?
Actually, they won't even do that.. witness most of Africa.. All except 2-3 countries in Africa were part of colonies in Europe. The Belgians created the Hutu/Tutsi (before Belgian came, they were the same people). Then when war broke out, and the genocide was all over the news, the Europeans just left (in fairness though, we left too.. but we didn't create the problem..).
and to clarify the point about peering agreements:
Peering agreements only exist between two providers who pass roughly equal amounts of traffic between eachother. It's just an agreement that say: I'm passing 1000TB of traffic to you, and your passing 1000TB to me, so we'll carry each others traffic for free.
If one of the companies loses market share, they will not renew the agreement. Take a look at what happened with Level1 and Cogent (IIRC)
my other id is 200-something thousand.. not as low as yours, but I didn't sign up yesterday either.
Good points. I own a small business myself, and employ a few people. Investments in small businesses are, almost exclusively, invitation only.
Maybe he should have been allowed to purchase a few percent in the company.. but he wasn't, and he can't expect to benefit from a risk he never took.
every person who goes to work at a company invests their time and talent. In exchange they are given a salary. If that counts as investing then every employee and independent contracter in America deserves a piece of the companies they have worked at.
It does not count as investing, because there is very little risk in going to work for someone else. If the company had gone under, he could have sued for his paycheck; the owners would have been responsible for paying any employment taxes, even if they had to sell everything they have to pay it.
Unlike the poster, the investors had no guarantee of getting paid. They could have worked for years, saw the company go under, lost everything they had, and yet the post would have still been paid his salary.
These were active investors.. they invested not only their money, but their time and experience and talent in the company. And when their talent wasn't good enough, they hired someone to help them. That is all that happened, nothing more. It's unreasonable for him to expect to benefit from someone elses risk.
You expected way too much. You were hired as an employee. You didn't put any money into the company, and you were paid for the work you did.
The investors, who made more than you, would have lost all of their money if this went badly. If things went badly for the company, you would have still been paid your salary.
If you wanted the benfits of being an investor, you should have taken out a second mortgage on your home (for example) and invested the money in the company. Of course you didn't want to do that, because it was a startup, and you didn't know if you would get your money back.
Well, guess what? The investors in the company didn't know if they were going to get their money back either. The money they earned from the sale is their reward for taking the risk in starting the company.
So what you wanted was all of the benefits of being an investor, without any of the risk.. which was unreasonable to say the least.
Agree 100%.. I also don't shop at walmart (it's been several years since I stepped foot in one), and I won't buy from a company that uses slave labor.
Yes.. I'm prepared to pay more for US goods. Right now I'm buying pans from cooking.com.. I'm buying All-Clad.. They are expensive, but virtually everything else (except Calphalon) is made in China or Tailand. Go take a look at the prices.. I can get a 10" skillet for $15 bucks from China.. or I can get an All-Clad 10" skillet for $100.
China and third-world countries are my last option.. I'll only buy it if there is nothing else available. If there is something made in the US, I'm going to support the US company.
They can also make a 'qualified' made in the USA claim.. like this:
If they are assembling the product in the USA from foreign parts, they cannot claim "Made in USA".. they can make a qualified claim though.
wow.. you are really something. You say I misquoted Amnesty International. So I post exactly what they say on their own website from their own reports. Yet you still say Amnesty International is saying something else.
You clearly believe whatever you want... evidence has nothing to do with it. You could at least say so, instead of lying through your teeth and saying AI said something they didn't.
Actually, it's you who deliberately misquotes AI. From AI's own website: http://www.amnesty.org/ailib/aireport/ar98/mde14.
I'm going to believe HRW, AI, UN, and US State Dept (who all more-or-less agree on their estimates), than a troll on
17,000?! What a joke.
f
http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/pdf/iraq_mass_graves.pd
Since the Saddam Hussein regime was overthrown in May,
270 mass graves have been reported. By mid-January,
2004, the number of confirmed sites climbed to fifty-three.
Some graves hold a few dozen bodiestheir arms lashed
together and the bullet holes in the backs of skulls testimo-
ny to their execution. Other graves go on for hundreds of
meters, densely packed with thousands of bodies.
Weve already discovered just so far the remains of
400,000 people in mass graves, said British Prime
Minister Tony Blair on November 20 in London. The
United Nations, the U.S. State Department, Amnesty
International, and Human Rights Watch (HRW) all
estimate that Saddam Husseins regime murdered hun
dreds of thousands of innocent people. Human Rights
Watch estimates that as many as 290,000 Iraqis have
been disappeared by the Iraqi government over the
past two decades, said the group in a statement in May.
Many of these disappeared are those whose remains
are now being unearthed in mass graves all over Iraq.
If these numbers prove accurate, they represent a crime
against humanity surpassed only by the Rwandan geno
cide of 1994, Pol Pots Cambodian killing fields in the
1970s, and the Nazi Holocaust of World War II.
Let me repeat that in case you missed it:
"We've already discovered just so far the remains of
400,000 people in mass graves," said British Prime
Minister Tony Blair on November 20 in London.
I agree it's a horrible idea.. but I doubt Google displaying a message will result in telco's abandoning it. I can see it now:
- User sees message on Google
- User calls ISP to ask about the message they saw on Google
- User is told that is because they are only paying for the "Silver" package, but they can upgrade to the Gold package for only an extra $20/mo. The Gold package features even "faster" access to your favorite sites, including Google, MSN, Yahoo, and Amazon!
There is no way I will ever do business with a credit union.
I still remember an article I was reading about a local CU that went bankrupt in Denver or Boulder, Colorado (which is where I am).
When you open an account at a CU, you are not just their customer; you are a "Member" of the CU. Basically, you are not just a customer, you are part owner.
When the CU went bankrupt, those "members" didn't receive all of their money back. The money the CU had left was used to pay creditors, and the rest was divided up by the "Members". No one received all of the money that was in their checking account
At least if I get an actual bank account, I get my money if the bank decides to close. That is a very valuable service. Let me know when a CU offers that.
Granted, you'd probably be able to afford fewer toys, but I am pretty sure you would not starve to death. Ah.. well as long as I don't starve.. what else do I need? sounds like a paradise.
I'm not saying that.. I know most of them just want to come here to work. But a porous border also allows criminals and such to come into our country as well.
I'm not going to find links to back up everything I said.. you can do that yourself if you don't believe me.. but I do remember where some of the information came from so maybe that will help you out:
Reading a good newspaper each morning can teach you a lot.. try it sometime.
haha.. which part of my sig do you think contradicts my post? Everything I said is true, and can be found in mainstream press (mostly nytimes or bbc). Or do you think anyone who is for protecting our borders is an extremist nutjob?
There is no job that illegal aliens do that Americans aren't willing to do.. we have our poor too.
The industry with the highest number of illegals is farming.. where 27% of the work force is estimated to be illegal. Which means 73% of those doing that work are American citizens.
Americans are willing to do the work. Only 20% of our population has an education higher than a high school education. Those 80% of people work in manufacturing, service, retail, etc. These are the people who often work for minimum wage, and who have the highest unemployment rate (as you gain more education, the unemployment rate goes down). They will take whatever job they can get. (I should know.. my mother was poor too.. she worked on a farm picking oranges in Florida... she was an american citizen.. in fact, our family line dates back to the Mayflower.)
The problem isn't American citizens.. the problem is employers who want to exploit illegal immigrants. They want to pay them shit and exploit these people because they are vulnerable.
Illegal immigration is a problem. It drains state budgets.. Remember, the federal government is allowed to run a deficit.. the states are not. The states have strained budgets as it is and have (drastically in some cases) cut services for citizens. They (the local governments) cannot afford to pay for illegal immigrants.. they have a hard enough time paying for services for their own citizens.
They fill our federal (and sometimes states) jails (not for being here illegally, but for serious criminal offenses).. Lookup the percentage of illegals in federal prison for murder, rape, etc.. The numbers are far higher than you would expect for 11 million people.
The biggest opponents to stopping illegal immigrants are employers and Mexico... Mexico calls those who leave their country "National Heros". The 20 Billion they send back each year exceeds the budget for many Mexican states. Their border patrol holds meetings at the border to educate border crossers on how to get across the border, not get caught, and find a job in America.
They absolutely are a problem.
I whole heartedly agree with you 100%.
Just wanted to add that it isn't the hospitals that choose to treat illegals... the federal government requires that illegal aliens be allowed emergency services and access to public schools at a minimum.
If I entered another country illegally, they wouldn't give me shit, much less emergency services and an education.
I'm a business type person myself, and love documents like those. Can you upload it somewhere for me? Thanks, I appreciate it.
there should be a "-1 spoiled sob" mod option
the chart says:
Manufacturing, 15 countries or areas, 2003-2004
Percent change
So, italians had a 0.6 percent drop in output per hour compared to the previous year.
you can't call something a trade secret, and then release it to the public. Free Software is only "Free" because of Copyright law.