Yes, but it is immoral for government officials to encourage people to commit crimes, it is called entrapment and is illegal in the United States. Surely, the feds do this on a regular basis.
I see, so when the Iranians protested the election results and exposing the criminal gangster regime for its crimes a month ago, the US government criticized Ahmadinejad for infringing on people's freedom of expression. Now that the USMC wants to disrupt social networking site access for its employees (read "slaves"), the explanation is called "security concerns".
This is so typical of our gangster government. The only difference between the US and Iranian governments is that the Iranian government doesn't put an extra effort to cover up its illegitimacy.
Not to worry, every welfare system is doomed to eventually collapse. Look at the Soviet Union - the whole system was welfare, everybody was on welfare. It collapsed. Liberty and free markets are the only long-lasting and sustainable system where people depend on themselves or voluntary contributions of other people. It will take long time for humanity to unequivocably come to this conclusion but it is just a matter of time before they do. Truth will always prevail, and when we discuss economic systems the truth is that liberty, capitalism, and free markets are the best system to take care of the maximum number of people. I am strong believer in liberty and our time will come, it just takes a while.
Hardly out of nowhere.. letting them fail would be far more harmful to the economy.
Really? Whose "economy"? The bankers? Or the people's? Wall Street's? Or Main Street's? From where I look it seems like Main St is pretty f***ed up.
And how exactly would "letting them fail" be "harmful"?
Dude, you're watching too much Fox and CNBC. Start thinking for yourself. Claiming that an institution is too big to fail is one big step towards elitism and destruction of free markets.
The problem isn't the basic idea of having a 'czar', which is a good idea. The issue is that we have too many czars appointed, so it has become difficult to keep track of them all and coordinate their efforts. What we need is a single individual given the executive power to oversee all of these czars, and appoint them, discipline them, and fire them at will, so as to centralize control of the czars. That person will be the Czar Czar.
We have that - he's called the President of the United States. He is such a czar-czar that he can order who will be the CEO of GM & BofA, and what compensation they should receive, soon enough he'd be able to tell ya what toilet paper to use: baby face or sandpaper-tough-spot exterminator - make sure to submit your hemorrhoid report to the government weekly or else... Of course, all these measures are in place for the sake of keeping us safe, protecting children, reducing our "carbon footprint" and fighting terrorism and drugs. Ah, and poverty, fighting poverty.
That said, gold seems to be rather high right now, while stocks are quite low.
I think you forget about one very important factor. The governments of the world are manipulating gold. Gold should be a lot higher now than it is. I think gold should be ~ $2000/oz but the IMF and other central banks are selling gold to hold price low in hopes that somehow the current crisis will go away and then gold prices will crash and people will run back to stocks.
I think this is not happening. The current financial system based of fraud and funny money is on its death bed. So it's still not late at all to protect one's savings.
The government would more likely refuse to pay their debts / print out 12 trillion dollars than steal gold.
Huh? Why not steal gold? The government already did it in 1933. FDR stole american's gold and then turned around and set gold from $22/ounce to $35/ounce, which automatically devalued americans' gold by 40%. Read some history buddy!
I'm amazed that in this day and age there are still people who think gold has inherent value
You're either stupid or joking - which one is it? If gold had inherent value we'd be using it for something else than money, doh! Gold has all the qualities of money -it's easy to split, does not rust, corrode, it's easy to carry, does not smell, etc. etc. etc. By your logic we should see people running to the grocery store with buckets of petrolium (because, according to you - it has "inherent" value) to buy milk or whatever. Oh, and on the same note: what "inherent" value does exactly a $1 Federal Reserve note have? or a $100 Federal reserve note? except that it's pretty good at wiping your ass after you took a crap? I suggest you go and read some economics before you come with this diarrhea about not having "inherent" value. In particular, read about the "definition of money" and also read about "barter economy".
James Hill created the northern rail system which was extremely robust with the help of private investors and $0 government help. His competitors went to the government for handouts and built a shitty system down south. Since the size of subsidies depended on the miles of railway they'd build the railway zig-zagging across the land without paying attention to topography. This resulted in really shitty and fragile railway system in the south which was very unreliable.
James Hill made money by getting people to settle next to his railway and this way they'd use his trains to ship their produce.
So there you have it buddy: your government-subsidized railway system gone awry. I suggest you read the story of James Hill - he was a brilliant, hard-working entrepreneur.
Wait a minute! Aren't businesses supposed to come up with the visions, not bureaucrats in Washington? Obama's "vision" reminds me of the commie apparatchiks who had plans on what to build. The only reason their plans appeared to work was because they'd actually force the poor citizens to use the fruit of their "visions". However, in America we still have some freedom left and I can tell you that Obama's "vision" will be a big waste of money, the contracts will go to the best lobbyist and the people will hardly use it.
Apparently we don't have such transportation system for two probable reasons: either the government will not allow it (laws that make such enterprise difficult/impossible to benefit the car/airline industry written by lobbyists) or there is simply not enough demand for such transportation that would make it profitable to build and operate.
All the Washington bureaucrats be damned for your idiotic central-planning commie-era garbage. Obama, my advice to you is to just sit down and chill. Stop bailing out Gold-man Sacks, and the other banksters. And for god's sake, stop with the idiotic central-planning "visions"! The market knows better than all you morons!
dude, i'm not comparing sweden with the USA. stop being defensive. The USA doesn't have it good. income taxes are too high. They should be more like 2-3% and we should cut the empire. it's a waste of money, human lives, and poverty and it does not serve american interests.
America has been overtaken by criminals in government and congress: lobbyists, the military industrial complex, the banking industrial complex (federal reserve), the medical industrial complex, the list goes on and on. These criminals will destroy this country. Then everybody will say: "see, free markets do not work, capitalism does not work". We need socialism.
And socialism, fellas, is tyranny with a nice suit.
Then we are doomed!
One thing we certainly learn from history is that we don't learn from history.
Good luck to all the socialists on this board. You have deprived yourselves of the ability to recognize common sense and apply it to your lives.
buddy! stop saying the government pays for stuff. the government pays nothing - it produces nothing. all it does is fleece people (key word: by force) and then does what it wants with the money.
yeah, i know you'll say what i just said is not true, but how can I trust you when all your education you received from that same government - surely they wouldn't teach you how inefficient they are and how government bureaucracy wastes money left and right. on the contrary, they'll teach you how great government is. see, they call that propaganda. so right there you already lose credibility.
and how exactly does the swedish government fear its people? because the swedish people are armed and if government does not listen they will stand up and fight? lol. oh, i forgot that the freedom of owning a gun in sweden is forsaken for the safety that the govamint provides.
i mean, look, I don't need to go to sweden to know that anything that government does is pretty screwed up. it's sort of like "i don't need to kill a man to know that murder is bad", ok? it is just simple common sense that people will handle their own money a lot better than the government would for them. the government might care for people as genuinely as they can try, and still individuals will make better choices than their government.
and I never said the USA had something better than Sweden. USA certainly has some very good things, like the Consitution and the American tradition of free markets and liberty. These have been forsaken lately here in the USA but that again proves my point: when you have government managing the economy you get a disaster (look up Federal Reserve, lobbyists, Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution).
USA has bad healthcare not because of free markets but because of legislation signed by Nixon in the 70's that created these HMO monsters. This has nothing to do with free markets. If we had free markets in healthcare we wouldn't have a limited number of schools offering medical degrees (you need accreditation from a central government body to teach medicine), we wouldn't have government-mandated medical programs with strict guidelines. The market would determine what is needed and what not - not some bureaucrats in Washington who have no clue.
Not until we get back to the solid principles of free markets, that is, money backed by gold and silver, no Federal Reserve, no fractional reserve banking will we understand that free markets and freedom is at the center peace and prosperity.
Mister, please read http://mises.org/books/fed.pdf Murray Rothbard's THe case against the Fed and then come back and try to make a reasonable argument on this forum.
You're embarassing yourself by saying that free markets do not work. The United States has not had free markets since 1913 when the Federal Reserve was created. THe Federal reserve has the power to turn us into dirt-poor overnight with the push of a button. This is not free markets - this is managed markets by the government.
THe reason we are in this mess right now is due to easy credit by the Federal Reserve - they lowered the interest rate to unreasonably low levels and this triggered the home-buying mania that then jacked up prices due to high demand and easy money. This is the main reason for the housing bubble.
All I am saying here has nothing to do with stupid ideology - it has all to do with simple common sense and understanding of how the current economy works.
Do you know what would happen if we had free markets? AIG, Citi, Wachovia, and the other rascals would be out of business immediately. THere would be no government bailouts, nada, nilch! Income taxes would be really low (like 2-3%), there would be no Federal REserve and money would be backed by a commodity. THere would be no fractional reserve banking which would prevent bubbles, speculations and boom and bust cycles.
You probably have no idea what causes boom and bust cycles. YOu probably have no idea what inflation is. You probably have no idea that money to trade is like scales to ice cream stand. YOu probably have no idea that inflation is hidden tax on savers - the very same people who generate capital in order to invest in projects and grow economies. You probably have no idea what is the difference between capital and credit.
You probably have no idea about how many things are wrong with the US and world economies. You should read up on this stuff to help you understand.
And please do not tell us that the government can spend my money more efficiently than I would spend my money - this is just utter nonsense.
There you have it folks: your government acting as the racketeer that they are (again?? lol).
And what does the government provide, again, that will entitle them to their "fair share"? The webcams? The business model? The internet connectivity? The "office building"? The wires the stream goes through? The security (pathetic arrogant police)? WHAT EXACTLY?
Swedes are taxed to death already in order to get some pathetic healthcare and free education. Now, don't tell me their healthcare is good, please! But this is the result of a mindless brain-dead swedish public who cannot fend for themselves and need the nanny-state to lead them on every step. How pathetic is that!
However, this piece of news just proves how the state has been allowed to stick its arrogant snively nose everywhere, even people's pants. Swedish government, you are disgusting! BACK OFF!
If criminals knew that much about IT, they would have an IT career, not a criminal one.
You can make what? - $100K? working as IT? and you could make something like $10 million trafficking drugs. The money benefit here is obvious. But i'd be fearful for my head. And that wouldn't be the authorities I'd be afraid of. I'd be afraid of the other criminals I had to deal with - one thing movies get right is that the cops always show up after the shootout.
Eeeh. that would be the USA. we don't count little crappy islands as countries. we're big and strong and we can crush you like a roach!
lol, just kidding man;)
Gartner anal-yst Steve Prentice has no clue. he must be one of those armchair philosophers. I'd much rather use my mouse than reach for a stupid screen.
Hell, the Feds take those funds, then use them as blackmail, to try to make the states pass national laws (ex. Hwy funds withheld unless drinking age moved to 21). If the states would stop sending in the monies...they would weaken the Feds, and they could better use their monies on their own people.
Yep. That's called centralization of power. Centralization of power leads to dictatorship - it is coming to a neighborhood near you!
I will certainly explain a key point, even though I mentioned I wasn't going to get into this. The Declaration of Independence states we have the right to life, liberty and persuit of happiness. Working 1/3 of the year to pay some bureaucrat against your will is certainly a form of slavery, as mild as people may consider it. Not paying up constitutes grounds for harassment, property seizure, imprisonment. You can take that any way you want.
On a side note, all taxes must be voluntary, once you establish a requirement backed by force then you lose the moral ground. You then set the stage for loss of civil freedoms, privacy infringement, and eventually enslavement.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but it is immoral for government officials to encourage people to commit crimes, it is called entrapment and is illegal in the United States. Surely, the feds do this on a regular basis.
An "Honest" professional politician can't exist.
Uuh, actually it's possible. Ron Paul. Look him up. He told us it would be tough but Americans don't like bearer of bad news.
Eeeh, maybe because the title of this discussion is about Murdoch who owns Fox?
I see, so when the Iranians protested the election results and exposing the criminal gangster regime for its crimes a month ago, the US government criticized Ahmadinejad for infringing on people's freedom of expression. Now that the USMC wants to disrupt social networking site access for its employees (read "slaves"), the explanation is called "security concerns". This is so typical of our gangster government. The only difference between the US and Iranian governments is that the Iranian government doesn't put an extra effort to cover up its illegitimacy.
Not to worry, every welfare system is doomed to eventually collapse. Look at the Soviet Union - the whole system was welfare, everybody was on welfare. It collapsed.
Liberty and free markets are the only long-lasting and sustainable system where people depend on themselves or voluntary contributions of other people. It will take long time for humanity to unequivocably come to this conclusion but it is just a matter of time before they do. Truth will always prevail, and when we discuss economic systems the truth is that liberty, capitalism, and free markets are the best system to take care of the maximum number of people.
I am strong believer in liberty and our time will come, it just takes a while.
why not let the free market decide what will be the correct MPG? How did Obama determine that 42 is the magic number again?
Hardly out of nowhere.. letting them fail would be far more harmful to the economy.
Really? Whose "economy"? The bankers? Or the people's? Wall Street's? Or Main Street's? From where I look it seems like Main St is pretty f***ed up. And how exactly would "letting them fail" be "harmful"? Dude, you're watching too much Fox and CNBC. Start thinking for yourself. Claiming that an institution is too big to fail is one big step towards elitism and destruction of free markets.
The problem isn't the basic idea of having a 'czar', which is a good idea. The issue is that we have too many czars appointed, so it has become difficult to keep track of them all and coordinate their efforts. What we need is a single individual given the executive power to oversee all of these czars, and appoint them, discipline them, and fire them at will, so as to centralize control of the czars. That person will be the Czar Czar.
We have that - he's called the President of the United States. He is such a czar-czar that he can order who will be the CEO of GM & BofA, and what compensation they should receive, soon enough he'd be able to tell ya what toilet paper to use: baby face or sandpaper-tough-spot exterminator - make sure to submit your hemorrhoid report to the government weekly or else ... Of course, all these measures are in place for the sake of keeping us safe, protecting children, reducing our "carbon footprint" and fighting terrorism and drugs. Ah, and poverty, fighting poverty.
That said, gold seems to be rather high right now, while stocks are quite low.
I think you forget about one very important factor. The governments of the world are manipulating gold. Gold should be a lot higher now than it is. I think gold should be ~ $2000/oz but the IMF and other central banks are selling gold to hold price low in hopes that somehow the current crisis will go away and then gold prices will crash and people will run back to stocks. I think this is not happening. The current financial system based of fraud and funny money is on its death bed. So it's still not late at all to protect one's savings.
The government would more likely refuse to pay their debts / print out 12 trillion dollars than steal gold.
Huh? Why not steal gold? The government already did it in 1933. FDR stole american's gold and then turned around and set gold from $22/ounce to $35/ounce, which automatically devalued americans' gold by 40%. Read some history buddy!
I'm amazed that in this day and age there are still people who think gold has inherent value
You're either stupid or joking - which one is it?
If gold had inherent value we'd be using it for something else than money, doh! Gold has all the qualities of money -it's easy to split, does not rust, corrode, it's easy to carry, does not smell, etc. etc. etc.
By your logic we should see people running to the grocery store with buckets of petrolium (because, according to you - it has "inherent" value) to buy milk or whatever.
Oh, and on the same note: what "inherent" value does exactly a $1 Federal Reserve note have? or a $100 Federal reserve note? except that it's pretty good at wiping your ass after you took a crap?
I suggest you go and read some economics before you come with this diarrhea about not having "inherent" value. In particular, read about the "definition of money" and also read about "barter economy".
James Hill created the northern rail system which was extremely robust with the help of private investors and $0 government help. His competitors went to the government for handouts and built a shitty system down south. Since the size of subsidies depended on the miles of railway they'd build the railway zig-zagging across the land without paying attention to topography. This resulted in really shitty and fragile railway system in the south which was very unreliable. James Hill made money by getting people to settle next to his railway and this way they'd use his trains to ship their produce. So there you have it buddy: your government-subsidized railway system gone awry. I suggest you read the story of James Hill - he was a brilliant, hard-working entrepreneur.
Wait a minute! Aren't businesses supposed to come up with the visions, not bureaucrats in Washington? Obama's "vision" reminds me of the commie apparatchiks who had plans on what to build. The only reason their plans appeared to work was because they'd actually force the poor citizens to use the fruit of their "visions". However, in America we still have some freedom left and I can tell you that Obama's "vision" will be a big waste of money, the contracts will go to the best lobbyist and the people will hardly use it. Apparently we don't have such transportation system for two probable reasons: either the government will not allow it (laws that make such enterprise difficult/impossible to benefit the car/airline industry written by lobbyists) or there is simply not enough demand for such transportation that would make it profitable to build and operate. All the Washington bureaucrats be damned for your idiotic central-planning commie-era garbage. Obama, my advice to you is to just sit down and chill. Stop bailing out Gold-man Sacks, and the other banksters. And for god's sake, stop with the idiotic central-planning "visions"! The market knows better than all you morons!
dude, i'm not comparing sweden with the USA. stop being defensive. The USA doesn't have it good. income taxes are too high. They should be more like 2-3% and we should cut the empire. it's a waste of money, human lives, and poverty and it does not serve american interests. America has been overtaken by criminals in government and congress: lobbyists, the military industrial complex, the banking industrial complex (federal reserve), the medical industrial complex, the list goes on and on. These criminals will destroy this country. Then everybody will say: "see, free markets do not work, capitalism does not work". We need socialism. And socialism, fellas, is tyranny with a nice suit. Then we are doomed! One thing we certainly learn from history is that we don't learn from history. Good luck to all the socialists on this board. You have deprived yourselves of the ability to recognize common sense and apply it to your lives.
buddy! stop saying the government pays for stuff. the government pays nothing - it produces nothing. all it does is fleece people (key word: by force) and then does what it wants with the money. yeah, i know you'll say what i just said is not true, but how can I trust you when all your education you received from that same government - surely they wouldn't teach you how inefficient they are and how government bureaucracy wastes money left and right. on the contrary, they'll teach you how great government is. see, they call that propaganda. so right there you already lose credibility. and how exactly does the swedish government fear its people? because the swedish people are armed and if government does not listen they will stand up and fight? lol. oh, i forgot that the freedom of owning a gun in sweden is forsaken for the safety that the govamint provides. i mean, look, I don't need to go to sweden to know that anything that government does is pretty screwed up. it's sort of like "i don't need to kill a man to know that murder is bad", ok? it is just simple common sense that people will handle their own money a lot better than the government would for them. the government might care for people as genuinely as they can try, and still individuals will make better choices than their government. and I never said the USA had something better than Sweden. USA certainly has some very good things, like the Consitution and the American tradition of free markets and liberty. These have been forsaken lately here in the USA but that again proves my point: when you have government managing the economy you get a disaster (look up Federal Reserve, lobbyists, Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution). USA has bad healthcare not because of free markets but because of legislation signed by Nixon in the 70's that created these HMO monsters. This has nothing to do with free markets. If we had free markets in healthcare we wouldn't have a limited number of schools offering medical degrees (you need accreditation from a central government body to teach medicine), we wouldn't have government-mandated medical programs with strict guidelines. The market would determine what is needed and what not - not some bureaucrats in Washington who have no clue. Not until we get back to the solid principles of free markets, that is, money backed by gold and silver, no Federal Reserve, no fractional reserve banking will we understand that free markets and freedom is at the center peace and prosperity.
Mister, please read http://mises.org/books/fed.pdf Murray Rothbard's THe case against the Fed and then come back and try to make a reasonable argument on this forum. You're embarassing yourself by saying that free markets do not work. The United States has not had free markets since 1913 when the Federal Reserve was created. THe Federal reserve has the power to turn us into dirt-poor overnight with the push of a button. This is not free markets - this is managed markets by the government. THe reason we are in this mess right now is due to easy credit by the Federal Reserve - they lowered the interest rate to unreasonably low levels and this triggered the home-buying mania that then jacked up prices due to high demand and easy money. This is the main reason for the housing bubble. All I am saying here has nothing to do with stupid ideology - it has all to do with simple common sense and understanding of how the current economy works. Do you know what would happen if we had free markets? AIG, Citi, Wachovia, and the other rascals would be out of business immediately. THere would be no government bailouts, nada, nilch! Income taxes would be really low (like 2-3%), there would be no Federal REserve and money would be backed by a commodity. THere would be no fractional reserve banking which would prevent bubbles, speculations and boom and bust cycles. You probably have no idea what causes boom and bust cycles. YOu probably have no idea what inflation is. You probably have no idea that money to trade is like scales to ice cream stand. YOu probably have no idea that inflation is hidden tax on savers - the very same people who generate capital in order to invest in projects and grow economies. You probably have no idea what is the difference between capital and credit. You probably have no idea about how many things are wrong with the US and world economies. You should read up on this stuff to help you understand. And please do not tell us that the government can spend my money more efficiently than I would spend my money - this is just utter nonsense.
There you have it folks: your government acting as the racketeer that they are (again?? lol). And what does the government provide, again, that will entitle them to their "fair share"? The webcams? The business model? The internet connectivity? The "office building"? The wires the stream goes through? The security (pathetic arrogant police)? WHAT EXACTLY? Swedes are taxed to death already in order to get some pathetic healthcare and free education. Now, don't tell me their healthcare is good, please! But this is the result of a mindless brain-dead swedish public who cannot fend for themselves and need the nanny-state to lead them on every step. How pathetic is that! However, this piece of news just proves how the state has been allowed to stick its arrogant snively nose everywhere, even people's pants. Swedish government, you are disgusting! BACK OFF!
If criminals knew that much about IT, they would have an IT career, not a criminal one.
You can make what? - $100K? working as IT? and you could make something like $10 million trafficking drugs. The money benefit here is obvious. But i'd be fearful for my head. And that wouldn't be the authorities I'd be afraid of. I'd be afraid of the other criminals I had to deal with - one thing movies get right is that the cops always show up after the shootout.
Why should the "US government" do this? Do we not have private enterprise in this country?
Eeeh. that would be the USA. we don't count little crappy islands as countries. we're big and strong and we can crush you like a roach! lol, just kidding man ;)
Gartner anal-yst Steve Prentice has no clue. he must be one of those armchair philosophers. I'd much rather use my mouse than reach for a stupid screen.
Oh, boy. there it comes again: the same old "protect the children" trick. if they pass this law it'll be downhill for the Ausies from there. scary.
Hell, the Feds take those funds, then use them as blackmail, to try to make the states pass national laws (ex. Hwy funds withheld unless drinking age moved to 21). If the states would stop sending in the monies...they would weaken the Feds, and they could better use their monies on their own people.
Yep. That's called centralization of power. Centralization of power leads to dictatorship - it is coming to a neighborhood near you!
bah! their health care is a joke! you must be dying to get free health help over there.
I will certainly explain a key point, even though I mentioned I wasn't going to get into this. The Declaration of Independence states we have the right to life, liberty and persuit of happiness. Working 1/3 of the year to pay some bureaucrat against your will is certainly a form of slavery, as mild as people may consider it. Not paying up constitutes grounds for harassment, property seizure, imprisonment. You can take that any way you want. On a side note, all taxes must be voluntary, once you establish a requirement backed by force then you lose the moral ground. You then set the stage for loss of civil freedoms, privacy infringement, and eventually enslavement.