Sure the rich have the money to pay taxes, they also have the military, the government, the corporations, and anyone else they can bribe rather than pay taxes.
This means unless you and the middle class mob point your guns at them, they aren't going to pay taxes. The middle class is literally powerless so trying to say we are going to make billionaires pay taxes, we and what army are supposed to do this?
So you can't close loopholes when corporations write the laws.
What you can do however is gain the support of corporations to institute a tax to pay for infrastructure that helps reduce the costs to corporations. If less people are late for work it in theory reduces costs for corporations. If less people have to physically go to work because of telework it reduces costs for corporations. Driving just doesn't benefit the economy all that much and is a necessary evil.
The question is where do we get the tax revenue, and if we cannot get it from corporations because corporations are multinational, we must get it from people who can only live in one nation at a time.
Nobody is advocating taxing 100%. I don't know where you got that idea. Just like nobody is advocating we cut 100% of the government. The goal of a libertarian nationalist is to both shrink the cost of government while also increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of government.
This does not mean cutting programs. This means keeping all the programs which provide benefit to the people, and streamlining them to maximal efficiency per dollar. This means you keep social security, you can have universal healthcare, but there have to be some taxes instituted to pay for it. A Junk food or sugar tax would be a perfect example of a tax which could reduce the cost of universal healthcare while also bringing in money to help pay for it.
So you don't necessarily just need a higher tax rate, or to cut costs, but you need smarter or more intelligent taxation, and more streamlined government processes. Moving to high tech to help improve productivity in the government, and making the government employee more efficient and productive than the private sector could be a start. Government could benefit greatly from just upgrading their computers, automating tasks, or outsourcing the unimportant tasks such as answering the telephone.
But of course there are problems with efficiency, because politics play such a role in government. And of course you have people who don't ever want to raise taxes even when it reduces costs and improve efficiency in the long term. A gas tax, pollution tax, junk food tax, all increase efficiency and productivity in the long term. Do you want to cut the deficit or complain about taxes? You can't do both at the same time and expect to accomplish much.
So unless we are going to somehow use androids or robots to repair and build roads, we probably should consider taxing by the mile.
Basically there is a deficit, it has to be cut and the national debt has to be reduced. Social security has to be saved as well. This means only one option, we must raise taxes or die.
New car? Tax. Inheritance? Tax. Stock profit? Tax. Porn? Tax. Movie? Tax. Game? Tax. Cigar? Tax. Coffee? Tax. Junk Food? Tax. Sugar/HFCS? Tax. Transfat? Tax. Liquor? Tax. (Legalize Marijuana?) Tax. Pets (Pet food?) ? Tax. Internet (Depending on what you do...)? Tax. Gambling? Tax. Ipod? Tax. Big Screen TV? Tax. Sporting event? Tax. Concert? Tax.
This would apply to a wide range of people. Then it can be specialized, so that violent games or movies are taxed more for example. Tax all the luxuries that people buy but can live without or don't really need. Keep the social services that people need. Cut taxes on stuff people need like food.
Republicans want to have their cake and eat it too. They know, knew, and understand that you cannot fix a deficit or reduce the national debt without raising taxes. So all their talk about cutting and tax reduction is impossible on paper, basic math will tell you less revenue in means less to spend with. Less input = less output. The only question is who is going to pay the taxes when implemented.
It's going to take some taxes like this, and unfortunately driving is a luxury. Just so long as we don't get taxed for the bus, the train, the plane or group transportation. I mean this tax probably will suck and be annoying but its this or we lose social security, education, healthcare, and we get to watch grandma die.because you couldn't afford her medicine or treatment.
Creative taxation is the best move Obama could have made. As a libertarian I don't like taxes, but I do like having healthcare so let's be realistic, unless you are a libertarian millionaire or billionaire, you will rely on the government at some point in life whether it be financial aid, healthcare, or something else. And the Walton's and Koch bro's are not going to save grandma, they aren't going to help you pay for your education, and they wont give you money to survive so you don't become a criminal hooligan when unemployed or laid off. The government is the only check and balance against the corporation. The government in theory exists to defend human rights, and even if it doesn't do the job in practice, it is at least supposed to. The corporation doesn't care about human rights, isn't designed to be capable of caring, and doesn't care about the national interest or otherwise. Even if the national interest is GDP and other measures which equally benefit all Americans, corporations don't even care what happens to America because they have offices around the globe, so think about that corporatist liberatians. Think about the private prisons, the sweat shops, the outright sex slaves being trafficked, and tell me what corporations have done about it.
Evercookie is unstoppable, irrevocable, undeleteable, and it represents a new trend. When is Google and Microsoft going to do something about this? Or do they and others conspire to use this evil mega cookie to track us?
Despite all the problems, using an ATM machine beats standing in that long ass line trying to cash a check.
Why are banks open only from 10-3, the sort of hours they know everyone is at work? And why is it that at least one bank teller is on break or on lunch?
Why not upgrade graphics for hardcore gamers? If it fragments the market but results in higher sales and a loyal fanbase why care? Just make sure its done right. The harddrive being added didn't fragment consoles either. In the least they need to go back to cartridges, and they need to make the graphics upgradeable.
or the console will become obsolete as PC makers create smaller and smaller PCs which resemble consoles.
Basically it's only a matter of time before PC makers develop the gaming PCs. It could be Microsoft's next Xbox, or it could be Wii 2, or it could be Apple, Dell, or Toshiba.
Nintendo got away with it on the Gamecube, and then again on the WIi. They got away with it because Xbox was still very new, and the PC technology wasn't vastly outpacing console gaming. Now we are in another era, and it's time for the consoles to move the bar. If console hardware design isn't vastly superior to PC design, the console gaming will eventually become a thing of the past as Xbox will probably lead the way of combining the features of the PC into the features of a console.
The solution would be a modular design with upgradability in the core components. Simply put, if Wii 2 isn't at least a generation ahead of the PS3 and Xbox360, it will not be able to compete. The expectations of gamers now are photorealistic PC quality 3d graphics. The majority of console owners own PCs too, it's just a different world now.
I would buy a Wii 2, but Wii 2 has to be able to do things my PC can't do. The PS3 proves that pricepoint does matter in the short term but PS3 is also successful in the long term so it's not just price. It's mainly about the games. Nintendo wont be able to get by with another fancy controller, they are going to have to change the technology.
I think one way would be to go back to cartridges. SSD now has enough space on it to surpass DVDs in all areas. Another would be to have extremely powerful GPU, and a lot of ram. Finally they need to get the internet right. Built in WiFi would be helpful.
Don't their databases have files on people? People like us? Do you want Julian Assange reading your FBI file? Who the hell knows whats in it, we don't even know but if we find out do we want it to be through a leak or some other more private process? Corporations also have information about us, did the Sony customer information being compromised not prove this to you?
Also Assange just stole his idea from Cryptomes John Young who said the Internet is a spy machine. This isn't even his quote but he's receiving credit because he's Julian Assange. http://rt.com/news/cryptome-classified-secret-wikileaks/
This will only get worse unless everyone who has done any business with Sony changes their passwords to all other accounts.
Each account to each website must have a unique password. Password re-use is what hackers depend on to leverage their attacks. This can and will only get worse until users compartmentalize. One unique password per account always.
Openleaks is better than Wikileaks because it does not rely on any centralized authority, or have any single place from which to target. It's a general purpose technology (a lot like linux) which can be adapted to any news organization or any organization in general which needs to receive reports or leaks from anonymous sources.
Have been spewing conspiracy theories about the federal reserve, about Bush being a reptillian in disguise, etc, and about politicians and Presidents being directly related to the royal family.
The truth people believe the bullshit because foreign governments, corporations, and others deliberately pay experts to generate these memes for the purposes of psychological operations. It's psy-ops, thats what the birth certificate nonsense is.
Which government or faction would have to something to gain if people believe that?
You are right... not arresting the pedophile will guarantee that the pedophile will try to do it again. This is why the pedophile should be put under tight surveillance and should only be allowed to live in special communities where pedophiles aren't near kids. So while it's possible they could try to do it again, it's also unlikely they'd be able to do it and not get caught if they are under surveillance and physically restricted from living near or around children.
If they have children it might not work so they should lose their kids. If they don't have children, they can be told where to live. If they try to work near a school, or try to have contact with children while under surveillance the deal is revoked. So basically the deal should only work if they agree to avoid contact with children, and they should be watched to make sure they honor the deal. If they can't then they should serve their sentence. It's worth the risk by numbers, and if one more child is harmed it is collateral damage but it's also the only way to prevent many children from being harmed many times.
I have a difference of opinion on social retards. When regular people watch porn they aren't considered social retards so why see people who watch kiddie porn as social retards? I do think they need to seek some kind of help, or to be directed towards fake porn which does not involve real children (this way no children are harmed), but I don't think blaming pornography is the solution. I think the solution is to let people think whatever they want to think, as long as they never act on it.
Most normal people look at extreme porn of some sort, maybe not kiddie porn but extreme, and most normal people also have a conscience, and enough sense to separate fantasy from reality. Extreme porn is fantasy. It's stuff people will never do, and might not even want to do, but just like looking at other people do it for the sheer shock value of it. Like beastiality for example, or rape themed porn.
Somehow kiddie porn is treated as special, anyone who looks at that is automatically labeled a pedophile. I can understand that it's twisted to look at children get harmed and be turned on by it, and the only solution I have is to fake it, and monitor the viewers IP addresses. If the people viewing it have enough sense to know not to ever do it, then I don't see how viewing it would hurt children if the child porn is computer generated for example. In fact it should be studied to find out if this type of porn prevents or promotes harm to children. If it is confirmed to prevent harm to children then the logical thing to do would be to produce fake or virtual child porn.
What would be interesting would be to determine just how pedophilia is handled in other countries such as Japan. They have a fake kiddie porn industry, so we can see they have a lot of adult people who have strange pedophile style thoughts, but what is the correlation between these thoughts and actions to harm children? What is the child molestation rate in Japan compared to the USA? If it's much higher in Japan then we'd at least have some evidence.
At the same time in the USA we have a lot of rape oriented sexually themed porn. Does this promote rape? These things have to be studied by scientists. The emotional people need to let the scientists find out what works and what doesnt and make policies based on that. Policies based on feelings produce genocide and witch hunting, thats no different than what Hitler did.
I agree that they are doing things in the most incompetent way possible and it's because they "hate" pedophiles. Hatred of pedophiles leads to thought crimes, click jacking crimes, and other side issues which not only prevent successful investigations but also turn ordinary people against the FBI on civil or human rights issues. Most people don't want to see people getting locked away for clicking a link, or having a file they shouldn't have.
If we want to get the molesters, we have to make a deal with one of them. It's like with the mafia. Sometimes we had to make a deal with the hitman or the worst of the worst to get the whole group. It's the same with child molestation rings. We have to get beyond hatred of pedophiles and focus on actually protecting human children from harm, not virtual children.
If this means some guy will get 5 years instead of 50 in exchange for helping us take down the entire ring, so be it. It's less child molestation and less victimization going on if we spare one to take down 5 or more. If catching actual rapists is hard, maybe it's because of the extreme hatred for pedophiles is what drove them underground. Nobody likes rapists, but for some reason rape of a child is treated different from rape of an adult.
The same amount of resources should be given to all rape victims, and this should be determined by the ability to actually catch them. If they are a pedophile mafia, or rape mafia, it's going to take people wearing wires, it's going to take millions in resources, it's going to take X Ray Van type surveillance. The type of surveillance they use against terrorists should be used against human rights violators in my opinion.
It's difficult to detect child abuse, it always has been. But it's never impossible. When there is a high probability of catching a rapist, like that doctor who was raping patients, we should go after them and spare no expense. When there is a very low probability, we should still go after them but we need to stop driving them deep underground to do it, we need to take the opposite approach, the Facebook approach.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure the rich have the money to pay taxes, they also have the military, the government, the corporations, and anyone else they can bribe rather than pay taxes.
This means unless you and the middle class mob point your guns at them, they aren't going to pay taxes. The middle class is literally powerless so trying to say we are going to make billionaires pay taxes, we and what army are supposed to do this?
So you can't close loopholes when corporations write the laws.
What you can do however is gain the support of corporations to institute a tax to pay for infrastructure that helps reduce the costs to corporations. If less people are late for work it in theory reduces costs for corporations. If less people have to physically go to work because of telework it reduces costs for corporations. Driving just doesn't benefit the economy all that much and is a necessary evil.
The question is where do we get the tax revenue, and if we cannot get it from corporations because corporations are multinational, we must get it from people who can only live in one nation at a time.
Yes, and then what? Then you raise taxes.
Nobody is advocating taxing 100%. I don't know where you got that idea. Just like nobody is advocating we cut 100% of the government. The goal of a libertarian nationalist is to both shrink the cost of government while also increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of government.
This does not mean cutting programs. This means keeping all the programs which provide benefit to the people, and streamlining them to maximal efficiency per dollar. This means you keep social security, you can have universal healthcare, but there have to be some taxes instituted to pay for it. A Junk food or sugar tax would be a perfect example of a tax which could reduce the cost of universal healthcare while also bringing in money to help pay for it.
So you don't necessarily just need a higher tax rate, or to cut costs, but you need smarter or more intelligent taxation, and more streamlined government processes. Moving to high tech to help improve productivity in the government, and making the government employee more efficient and productive than the private sector could be a start. Government could benefit greatly from just upgrading their computers, automating tasks, or outsourcing the unimportant tasks such as answering the telephone.
But of course there are problems with efficiency, because politics play such a role in government. And of course you have people who don't ever want to raise taxes even when it reduces costs and improve efficiency in the long term. A gas tax, pollution tax, junk food tax, all increase efficiency and productivity in the long term. Do you want to cut the deficit or complain about taxes? You can't do both at the same time and expect to accomplish much.
So unless we are going to somehow use androids or robots to repair and build roads, we probably should consider taxing by the mile.
Basically there is a deficit, it has to be cut and the national debt has to be reduced. Social security has to be saved as well. This means only one option, we must raise taxes or die.
New car? Tax.
Inheritance? Tax.
Stock profit? Tax.
Porn? Tax.
Movie? Tax.
Game? Tax.
Cigar? Tax.
Coffee? Tax.
Junk Food? Tax.
Sugar/HFCS? Tax.
Transfat? Tax.
Liquor? Tax.
(Legalize Marijuana?) Tax.
Pets (Pet food?) ? Tax.
Internet (Depending on what you do...)? Tax.
Gambling? Tax.
Ipod? Tax.
Big Screen TV? Tax.
Sporting event? Tax.
Concert? Tax.
This would apply to a wide range of people. Then it can be specialized, so that violent games or movies are taxed more for example.
Tax all the luxuries that people buy but can live without or don't really need. Keep the social services that people need. Cut taxes on stuff people need like food.
Republicans want to have their cake and eat it too. They know, knew, and understand that you cannot fix a deficit or reduce the national debt without raising taxes. So all their talk about cutting and tax reduction is impossible on paper, basic math will tell you less revenue in means less to spend with. Less input = less output. The only question is who is going to pay the taxes when implemented.
It's going to take some taxes like this, and unfortunately driving is a luxury. Just so long as we don't get taxed for the bus, the train, the plane or group transportation. I mean this tax probably will suck and be annoying but its this or we lose social security, education, healthcare, and we get to watch grandma die.because you couldn't afford her medicine or treatment.
Creative taxation is the best move Obama could have made. As a libertarian I don't like taxes, but I do like having healthcare so let's be realistic, unless you are a libertarian millionaire or billionaire, you will rely on the government at some point in life whether it be financial aid, healthcare, or something else. And the Walton's and Koch bro's are not going to save grandma, they aren't going to help you pay for your education, and they wont give you money to survive so you don't become a criminal hooligan when unemployed or laid off. The government is the only check and balance against the corporation. The government in theory exists to defend human rights, and even if it doesn't do the job in practice, it is at least supposed to. The corporation doesn't care about human rights, isn't designed to be capable of caring, and doesn't care about the national interest or otherwise. Even if the national interest is GDP and other measures which equally benefit all Americans, corporations don't even care what happens to America because they have offices around the globe, so think about that corporatist liberatians. Think about the private prisons, the sweat shops, the outright sex slaves being trafficked, and tell me what corporations have done about it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evercookie
http://samy.pl/evercookie/
Evercookie is unstoppable, irrevocable, undeleteable, and it represents a new trend. When is Google and Microsoft going to do something about this? Or do they and others conspire to use this evil mega cookie to track us?
Everyone thought tablets didn't stand a chance and now there is the Ipad.
Despite all the problems, using an ATM machine beats standing in that long ass line trying to cash a check.
Why are banks open only from 10-3, the sort of hours they know everyone is at work? And why is it that at least one bank teller is on break or on lunch?
Wiimote already fragments, as does online play.
Why not upgrade graphics for hardcore gamers? If it fragments the market but results in higher sales and a loyal fanbase why care? Just make sure its done right. The harddrive being added didn't fragment consoles either. In the least they need to go back to cartridges, and they need to make the graphics upgradeable.
or the console will become obsolete as PC makers create smaller and smaller PCs which resemble consoles.
Basically it's only a matter of time before PC makers develop the gaming PCs. It could be Microsoft's next Xbox, or it could be Wii 2, or it could be Apple, Dell, or Toshiba.
Nintendo got away with it on the Gamecube, and then again on the WIi. They got away with it because Xbox was still very new, and the PC technology wasn't vastly outpacing console gaming. Now we are in another era, and it's time for the consoles to move the bar. If console hardware design isn't vastly superior to PC design, the console gaming will eventually become a thing of the past as Xbox will probably lead the way of combining the features of the PC into the features of a console.
The solution would be a modular design with upgradability in the core components. Simply put, if Wii 2 isn't at least a generation ahead of the PS3 and Xbox360, it will not be able to compete. The expectations of gamers now are photorealistic PC quality 3d graphics. The majority of console owners own PCs too, it's just a different world now.
I would buy a Wii 2, but Wii 2 has to be able to do things my PC can't do. The PS3 proves that pricepoint does matter in the short term but PS3 is also successful in the long term so it's not just price. It's mainly about the games. Nintendo wont be able to get by with another fancy controller, they are going to have to change the technology.
I think one way would be to go back to cartridges. SSD now has enough space on it to surpass DVDs in all areas. Another would be to have extremely powerful GPU, and a lot of ram. Finally they need to get the internet right. Built in WiFi would be helpful.
Find that list, and then unleash the terminators.
Why would you trust something which you aren't a part of and which doesn't represent your interests at all?
Don't their databases have files on people? People like us?
Do you want Julian Assange reading your FBI file? Who the hell knows whats in it, we don't even know but if we find out do we want it to be through a leak or some other more private process? Corporations also have information about us, did the Sony customer information being compromised not prove this to you?
Also Assange just stole his idea from Cryptomes John Young who said the Internet is a spy machine. This isn't even his quote but he's receiving credit because he's Julian Assange.
http://rt.com/news/cryptome-classified-secret-wikileaks/
This will only get worse unless everyone who has done any business with Sony changes their passwords to all other accounts.
Each account to each website must have a unique password. Password re-use is what hackers depend on to leverage their attacks.
This can and will only get worse until users compartmentalize. One unique password per account always.
When he is running Wikileaks and does not believe in secrets?
Openleaks is better than Wikileaks because it does not rely on any centralized authority, or have any single place from which to target. It's a general purpose technology (a lot like linux) which can be adapted to any news organization or any organization in general which needs to receive reports or leaks from anonymous sources.
I don't see why this would just apply to news. Any establishment cannot be trusted.
Have been spewing conspiracy theories about the federal reserve, about Bush being a reptillian in disguise, etc, and about politicians and Presidents being directly related to the royal family.
The truth people believe the bullshit because foreign governments, corporations, and others deliberately pay experts to generate these memes for the purposes of psychological operations. It's psy-ops, thats what the birth certificate nonsense is.
Which government or faction would have to something to gain if people believe that?
To protect the Windows computers on the network. But also to protect the Linux computers from Linux specific malware and virus attacks.
bury him in pig shit.
You are right... not arresting the pedophile will guarantee that the pedophile will try to do it again. This is why the pedophile should be put under tight surveillance and should only be allowed to live in special communities where pedophiles aren't near kids. So while it's possible they could try to do it again, it's also unlikely they'd be able to do it and not get caught if they are under surveillance and physically restricted from living near or around children.
If they have children it might not work so they should lose their kids. If they don't have children, they can be told where to live. If they try to work near a school, or try to have contact with children while under surveillance the deal is revoked. So basically the deal should only work if they agree to avoid contact with children, and they should be watched to make sure they honor the deal. If they can't then they should serve their sentence. It's worth the risk by numbers, and if one more child is harmed it is collateral damage but it's also the only way to prevent many children from being harmed many times.
I have a difference of opinion on social retards. When regular people watch porn they aren't considered social retards so why see people who watch kiddie porn as social retards? I do think they need to seek some kind of help, or to be directed towards fake porn which does not involve real children (this way no children are harmed), but I don't think blaming pornography is the solution. I think the solution is to let people think whatever they want to think, as long as they never act on it.
Most normal people look at extreme porn of some sort, maybe not kiddie porn but extreme, and most normal people also have a conscience, and enough sense to separate fantasy from reality. Extreme porn is fantasy. It's stuff people will never do, and might not even want to do, but just like looking at other people do it for the sheer shock value of it. Like beastiality for example, or rape themed porn.
Somehow kiddie porn is treated as special, anyone who looks at that is automatically labeled a pedophile. I can understand that it's twisted to look at children get harmed and be turned on by it, and the only solution I have is to fake it, and monitor the viewers IP addresses. If the people viewing it have enough sense to know not to ever do it, then I don't see how viewing it would hurt children if the child porn is computer generated for example. In fact it should be studied to find out if this type of porn prevents or promotes harm to children. If it is confirmed to prevent harm to children then the logical thing to do would be to produce fake or virtual child porn.
What would be interesting would be to determine just how pedophilia is handled in other countries such as Japan. They have a fake kiddie porn industry, so we can see they have a lot of adult people who have strange pedophile style thoughts, but what is the correlation between these thoughts and actions to harm children? What is the child molestation rate in Japan compared to the USA? If it's much higher in Japan then we'd at least have some evidence.
At the same time in the USA we have a lot of rape oriented sexually themed porn. Does this promote rape? These things have to be studied by scientists. The emotional people need to let the scientists find out what works and what doesnt and make policies based on that. Policies based on feelings produce genocide and witch hunting, thats no different than what Hitler did.
I agree that they are doing things in the most incompetent way possible and it's because they "hate" pedophiles. Hatred of pedophiles leads to thought crimes, click jacking crimes, and other side issues which not only prevent successful investigations but also turn ordinary people against the FBI on civil or human rights issues. Most people don't want to see people getting locked away for clicking a link, or having a file they shouldn't have.
If we want to get the molesters, we have to make a deal with one of them. It's like with the mafia. Sometimes we had to make a deal with the hitman or the worst of the worst to get the whole group. It's the same with child molestation rings. We have to get beyond hatred of pedophiles and focus on actually protecting human children from harm, not virtual children.
If this means some guy will get 5 years instead of 50 in exchange for helping us take down the entire ring, so be it. It's less child molestation and less victimization going on if we spare one to take down 5 or more. If catching actual rapists is hard, maybe it's because of the extreme hatred for pedophiles is what drove them underground. Nobody likes rapists, but for some reason rape of a child is treated different from rape of an adult.
The same amount of resources should be given to all rape victims, and this should be determined by the ability to actually catch them. If they are a pedophile mafia, or rape mafia, it's going to take people wearing wires, it's going to take millions in resources, it's going to take X Ray Van type surveillance. The type of surveillance they use against terrorists should be used against human rights violators in my opinion.
It's difficult to detect child abuse, it always has been. But it's never impossible. When there is a high probability of catching a rapist, like that doctor who was raping patients, we should go after them and spare no expense. When there is a very low probability, we should still go after them but we need to stop driving them deep underground to do it, we need to take the opposite approach, the Facebook approach.