Well they're not taxing mine. If I'm forced to collect the 7% sales tax through some automated system, I will, but then I'll refund it directly back to the NY customer. And I will NOT be filing any kind of tax form with New York.
New York is welcome to send the police to Southern Pennsylvania to try to arrest me. Good luck with that. The PA Militia (read: rifle-toting rednecks) and PA National Guard does not take kindly to foreign invaders, so I'm think I'm relatively safe.
I disagree. You don't have a right to tell someone "You can't eat that" or "You can't smoke that", because that makes them a slave to the government (i.e. not free to live how they want). But you do have a right to deny free handouts to such people.
We have socialized healthcare - Medicare - which pays a huge chunk of our hospital bills. That's why some American politicians get the "bright" idea to tax hamburgers to discourage bad health risks & lower Medicare costs.
Me, I prefer Thomas Jefferson's view:
(updated to the modern age): "Whether my neighbor eats one hamburger, many hamburgers, or no hamburgers, matters not to me. His actions do not harm my body, my property, nor my rights, so I will allow my neighbor to eat or not eat as many burgers as he pleases." - That is the true meaning of individual liberty. Do whatever you damn well please, and respect others' rights to do the same, so long as they do not harm your body, property, or rights.
I never thought of it that way. Good insight. Sales tax discourages consumption, and instead encourages saving money.
It's almost like a sin tax - "How dare you buy a new $5000 computer? We'll slap you with a $1000 tax to discourage such wasteful spending. Go put that money in your kid's education."
They are not allowed to tax Amazon because amazon does not lie within New York's jurisdiction. Ditto if I were to sell an item to you directly - I'm in Pennsylvania and not bound by NY Laws and therefore not obligated to collect tax to pay the NY Legislature. The NY politicians can kiss my shiny-metal ass.
>>>By law, offices of companies over a certain size must accommodate people whose disability requires sound to do their jobs.
Apparently this law either (a) does not exist or (b) was never read by my employer General Dynamics. They make us do training modules online, but don't have any headphones or speakers to let us hear the modules. That makes passing the test rather difficult.
On the other hand, one could argue that "slow connections" is the price you pay for living in an beautiful part of the U.S. that has not been disturbed by man. You give up one thing (fast internet) for another (a fantastic view). You always have the option to give-up that view & move to Baltimore or Philadelphia and hook-up to 50 megabit/s cable or FiOS.
The monopolies are dying. In most places cable internet is competing against DSL which can be bought for about 1/4 the price. Satellite is another competitor against cable. And also FiOS, which is slowly but surely being spread to more neighborhoods.
This is the free market in action - what was once a monopoly is now losing control to the competition.
I really wish people would READ THE 1996 COMMUNICATIONS ACT. Most of the money was earmarked to upgrade phone lines from analog to digital, and increase speeds from ~19k to ~56k. The end.
Now if you think that sounds like a stupid way to spend money, blame the politicians in Congress.
Yeah this is getting ridiculous. We need to go back to the ROOT reason why child pornography is illegal: - to protect real children/teens from being raped by adults
Therefore we also ban images of child sex because we don't want to distribute the imagery of said rape. But is a child harmed when they pose nude (like Vanessa Hudgens self-portrait)? No. There's no rape. Is anyone harmed by a cartoon or CGI of children? No. Again, there's no rape.
>>>Imaginary people now have all the rights of real people!
Yeah this is getting ridiculous. We need to go back to the ROOT reason why child pornography is illegal: - to protect real children/teens from being raped by adults
Therefore we also ban images of child sex because we don't want to distribute the imagery of said rape. But is a child harmed when they pose nude (like Vanessa Hudgens self-portrait)? No. There's no rape. Is anyone harmed by a cartoon or CGI of children? No. Again, there's no rape.
monopoly (from Greek monos, alone or single + polein, to sell)
"lone seller"
That's what the word means. I know people like to pretend the USA is "1984" incarnate and redefine words and use doublespeak, but monopoly had a specific meaning: "lone seller" or "single seller". i.e. A monopoly is a company that controls 100% (or in practical terms: 99.99%) of the market.
If you want to say Microsoft is "almost a monopoly" with its 89% market share, that's fine, but to say it's a "monopoly" aka "lone seller" is a clear indication you don't understand the meaning of the word.
>>>monopoly (from Greek monos, alone or single + polein, to sell)
I find it ironic that you provide this definition, but don't understand it. Microsoft is not the "lone seller" according to the Greek origination of the word. They have 89% of the market which makes them "almost a monopoly" but not a monopoly.
First you didn't say IBM PC. You said "PC" which means personal computer and can mean any brand.
Second, the others OSes were negligible? Hardly. The Apple II OS dominated from the years 1978 to 1982. The Commodore OS was the #1 OS from 1983 to 1989. That is not "neglibible" and should not be so casually ignored.
The fact is that a monopoly means 100% dominance (or in practical terms: 99.9%), but Microsoft did not dominate in either the 80s or 90s. Even today MS only controls 89%..... not a monopoly. If you want to say "almost a monopoly" that's fine, but don't redefine words like the book 1984. The word "monopoly" means a specific thing and Microsoft does not have one.
Likewise even if Google-Yahoo merged, you still do NOT have a monopoly. There are lots of other search engines out there.
>>>MS Operating Systems are on around 89% of all the PC's in the world. Apple is on about 9%, Linux and other free OS's on the remaining 2%.
So, not a monopoly. Monopoly means 100% (or in practical terms: 99.9%) control. If MS only controls 89% then it's not a monopoly. Use words with their TRUE meanings, not distorted meanings.
Telephone and cable is an example of "monopoly by government", not a natural monopoly. In fact prior to government interference, people living in 1920s-era cities had a choice between multiple phone companies... there were 3 or 4 wires hanging outside your window and you could choose if you wanted Company A, B, C, or D. We had true competition.
It was only AFTER the politicians stepped-in that our choice was narrowed to just one. Thanks mr. government.
>>>IBM was of the opinion that Apple was 6-12 months from getting a lock on the microcomputer market.
The irony here is that had IBM PC not arrived, the market would have been dominated not by Apple, but by Commodore. They were selling 4-5 million computers a year from 1983 to 1986 and dominated the #1 spot. We might all be using Commodore-produced Amigas now instead of IBM clones.
Ipods also support lossless formats which have a 20-20,000 hertz dynamic range. When played back through an Ipod, they should almost as good as the original CD.
>>>they were of the opinion that Apple was 6-12 months from getting a lock on the microcomputer market.
The irony here is that had IBM PC not arrived, the market would have been dominated not by Apple, but by Commodore. They were selling 4-5 million computers a year from 1983 to 1986.
No, they advocated a safety net even for those who are still on the highwire (i.e. everyone gets free SS and Medicare payouts).
I only advocate a safety net for those who fall off (needs-based and as a last resort). There's a huge difference because my viewpoint means 99% of citizens would be supporting themselves w/o government interference.
Slashdot Mirror
NYC sucks down more dollars than any other city.
Businesses rarely buy the buildings in New York City - they are usually given gratis while the New York State taxpayers shoulder the burden.
Well they're not taxing mine. If I'm forced to collect the 7% sales tax through some automated system, I will, but then I'll refund it directly back to the NY customer. And I will NOT be filing any kind of tax form with New York.
New York is welcome to send the police to Southern Pennsylvania to try to arrest me. Good luck with that. The PA Militia (read: rifle-toting rednecks) and PA National Guard does not take kindly to foreign invaders, so I'm think I'm relatively safe.
I disagree. You don't have a right to tell someone "You can't eat that" or "You can't smoke that", because that makes them a slave to the government (i.e. not free to live how they want). But you do have a right to deny free handouts to such people.
We have socialized healthcare - Medicare - which pays a huge chunk of our hospital bills. That's why some American politicians get the "bright" idea to tax hamburgers to discourage bad health risks & lower Medicare costs.
Me, I prefer Thomas Jefferson's view:
(updated to the modern age): "Whether my neighbor eats one hamburger, many hamburgers, or no hamburgers, matters not to me. His actions do not harm my body, my property, nor my rights, so I will allow my neighbor to eat or not eat as many burgers as he pleases." - That is the true meaning of individual liberty. Do whatever you damn well please, and respect others' rights to do the same, so long as they do not harm your body, property, or rights.
How about we just apply 18% to all food (including your diet soda) to discourage overeating. Would you be okay with that?
Why or why not?
I never thought of it that way. Good insight. Sales tax discourages consumption, and instead encourages saving money.
It's almost like a sin tax - "How dare you buy a new $5000 computer? We'll slap you with a $1000 tax to discourage such wasteful spending. Go put that money in your kid's education."
>>>with NY State already taxing Amazon purchases
They are not allowed to tax Amazon because amazon does not lie within New York's jurisdiction. Ditto if I were to sell an item to you directly - I'm in Pennsylvania and not bound by NY Laws and therefore not obligated to collect tax to pay the NY Legislature. The NY politicians can kiss my shiny-metal ass.
Install the xubuntu-desktop package, only in breezy. If you are using Hoary now you will have to wait till Breezy is released and you upgrade.
Breezy? Hoary? I wish they'd speak in normal language.
>>>By law, offices of companies over a certain size must accommodate people whose disability requires sound to do their jobs.
Apparently this law either (a) does not exist or (b) was never read by my employer General Dynamics. They make us do training modules online, but don't have any headphones or speakers to let us hear the modules. That makes passing the test rather difficult.
On the other hand, one could argue that "slow connections" is the price you pay for living in an beautiful part of the U.S. that has not been disturbed by man. You give up one thing (fast internet) for another (a fantastic view). You always have the option to give-up that view & move to Baltimore or Philadelphia and hook-up to 50 megabit/s cable or FiOS.
The monopolies are dying. In most places cable internet is competing against DSL which can be bought for about 1/4 the price. Satellite is another competitor against cable. And also FiOS, which is slowly but surely being spread to more neighborhoods.
This is the free market in action - what was once a monopoly is now losing control to the competition.
I really wish people would READ THE 1996 COMMUNICATIONS ACT. Most of the money was earmarked to upgrade phone lines from analog to digital, and increase speeds from ~19k to ~56k. The end.
Now if you think that sounds like a stupid way to spend money, blame the politicians in Congress.
Yeah this is getting ridiculous. We need to go back to the ROOT reason why child pornography is illegal: - to protect real children/teens from being raped by adults
Therefore we also ban images of child sex because we don't want to distribute the imagery of said rape. But is a child harmed when they pose nude (like Vanessa Hudgens self-portrait)? No. There's no rape. Is anyone harmed by a cartoon or CGI of children? No. Again, there's no rape.
If there's no victim, there's no crime.
>>>Imaginary people now have all the rights of real people!
Yeah this is getting ridiculous. We need to go back to the ROOT reason why child pornography is illegal:
- to protect real children/teens from being raped by adults
Therefore we also ban images of child sex because we don't want to distribute the imagery of said rape. But is a child harmed when they pose nude (like Vanessa Hudgens self-portrait)? No. There's no rape. Is anyone harmed by a cartoon or CGI of children? No. Again, there's no rape.
If there's no victim, there's no crime.
Bottom Line:
I object to a computer that is going to leak fluid in 3-4 years time and die.
I expect my computers to last longer than that, because I can't afford to just shell out $4000 every few years.
monopoly (from Greek monos, alone or single + polein, to sell)
"lone seller"
That's what the word means. I know people like to pretend the USA is "1984" incarnate and redefine words and use doublespeak, but monopoly had a specific meaning: "lone seller" or "single seller". i.e. A monopoly is a company that controls 100% (or in practical terms: 99.99%) of the market.
If you want to say Microsoft is "almost a monopoly" with its 89% market share, that's fine, but to say it's a "monopoly" aka "lone seller" is a clear indication you don't understand the meaning of the word.
>>>monopoly (from Greek monos, alone or single + polein, to sell)
I find it ironic that you provide this definition, but don't understand it. Microsoft is not the "lone seller" according to the Greek origination of the word. They have 89% of the market which makes them "almost a monopoly" but not a monopoly.
First you didn't say IBM PC. You said "PC" which means personal computer and can mean any brand.
Second, the others OSes were negligible? Hardly. The Apple II OS dominated from the years 1978 to 1982. The Commodore OS was the #1 OS from 1983 to 1989. That is not "neglibible" and should not be so casually ignored.
The fact is that a monopoly means 100% dominance (or in practical terms: 99.9%), but Microsoft did not dominate in either the 80s or 90s. Even today MS only controls 89%..... not a monopoly. If you want to say "almost a monopoly" that's fine, but don't redefine words like the book 1984. The word "monopoly" means a specific thing and Microsoft does not have one.
Likewise even if Google-Yahoo merged, you still do NOT have a monopoly. There are lots of other search engines out there.
>>>MS Operating Systems are on around 89% of all the PC's in the world. Apple is on about 9%, Linux and other free OS's on the remaining 2%.
So, not a monopoly. Monopoly means 100% (or in practical terms: 99.9%) control. If MS only controls 89% then it's not a monopoly. Use words with their TRUE meanings, not distorted meanings.
Telephone and cable is an example of "monopoly by government", not a natural monopoly. In fact prior to government interference, people living in 1920s-era cities had a choice between multiple phone companies... there were 3 or 4 wires hanging outside your window and you could choose if you wanted Company A, B, C, or D. We had true competition.
It was only AFTER the politicians stepped-in that our choice was narrowed to just one. Thanks mr. government.
>>>IBM was of the opinion that Apple was 6-12 months from getting a lock on the microcomputer market.
The irony here is that had IBM PC not arrived, the market would have been dominated not by Apple, but by Commodore. They were selling 4-5 million computers a year from 1983 to 1986 and dominated the #1 spot. We might all be using Commodore-produced Amigas now instead of IBM clones.
Ipods also support lossless formats which have a 20-20,000 hertz dynamic range. When played back through an Ipod, they should almost as good as the original CD.
>>>they were of the opinion that Apple was 6-12 months from getting a lock on the microcomputer market.
The irony here is that had IBM PC not arrived, the market would have been dominated not by Apple, but by Commodore. They were selling 4-5 million computers a year from 1983 to 1986.
Even the Ipod is good enough to hear the difference between an AACplus sample (20-20,000 hertz range) versus an AAC sample (typical cutoff at 10,000).
No, they advocated a safety net even for those who are still on the highwire (i.e. everyone gets free SS and Medicare payouts).
I only advocate a safety net for those who fall off (needs-based and as a last resort). There's a huge difference because my viewpoint means 99% of citizens would be supporting themselves w/o government interference.