What do you mean? It hits low-income earners no harder than the taxes they already pay.
Of course I would not support lowering rich people's taxes from 50% to 20% and raising poor people's taxes from 10% to that level, but I think lowering taxes so that everybody pays the lowest common denominator is the only way to be fair.
Progressive taxation is an ugly, ugly thing, in my view.
Seriously, I understand the affection americans have for one party over another. But the time for this cheerleading is long gone. Just realize that they're both trying to kill you.
I agree with the parent. I'm almost coming to believe that artists getting paid is a bigger threat to creativity and art.
I mean, lets face it: if there was copyright in the late 18th century, Beethoven would've written 3 symphonies, 9 piano sonatas and lived off the royalties till he died of cirrosis some 10 years earlier than he did.
The "economic stabilization" nuts have turned to "climate stabilization" nuts.
Apparently there's already too much respected literature completely thrashing the first, so the latter seems a more suitable excuse for the obtaining of political power.:-)
Just another special privilege which the government will grant to special interests and the less-free-with-each-passing-moment market will be blamed for.
How can you treat an group made up entirely of individuals as having LESS rights than an individual?
This is collectivism 101 you are preaching. If a corporation can be denied rights which the individuals making it up possess, then minorities can be denied them, cities, countries, professions, etc.
For the same reason that we shouldn't consider the mass murder of Hiroshima and Nagasaki anything other than that.
A corporation is ultimately made of people. Just because it is a collection of them, not a single individual, shouldn't make them have any less rights than a person does.
Just like a bunch of Japanese civilians don't lose some of their rights because the B-29 dropped a bomb on a 'city', not an 'individual'.
This ridiculous notion that a company can only grow "this" big or "this" successful without being tagged a monopolist, can only be held by a person without the slightest notion of what the word monopoly means.
The Post Office has a monopoly. If you deliver mail you get arrested.
The central bank has a monopoly. If you issue paper money you are imprisoned for counterfeiting.
Now Google isn't a monopoly. People can flock to Cuil, Bing, Webcrawler, Yahoo!, Altavista or whatever they think suits them better. If some of these other companies ( which were all around when Google came from out of nowhere and became this incredible service provider ) start getting their game together and Google drops the ball, they can become the dominant player. Or, who knows, some Searchster might come out of nowhere and leave Google eating dust.
Slashdot Mirror
"Capitalism" has taken water?
Oh dear, bad, bad capitalism.
I think sugar is added locally too.
That would explain the corn syrup-ish horrible taste US made coke has when compared to some country in which there's no sugar import quota
They both have nukes. There will be no war there.
Yes, because there is no difference between 'doing what you want' and trying to keep the fruits of your labor from an out of control government.
What do you mean? It hits low-income earners no harder than the taxes they already pay.
Of course I would not support lowering rich people's taxes from 50% to 20% and raising poor people's taxes from 10% to that level, but I think lowering taxes so that everybody pays the lowest common denominator is the only way to be fair.
Progressive taxation is an ugly, ugly thing, in my view.
What is the public good?
Sure. If you don't enforce 100 year copyright terms, the US thinks you're a PIRATE.
Hats off to Canada for sticking to what is a borderline unreasonable 50 years.
Full disclosure: IMSLP fanboy.
Why would they need jobs?
They would produce for themselves.
Are evil, exploiting capitalists NEEDED? :-|
*thunderous applause*
Yeah, and how much shit and CO2 do those 10 thousand cows generate?
Depressing.
The OP might believe that 'we got all we need', but it turns out we don't know what we need until someone comes up with it.
Of course most startups are absolute trash, but so long as they do it with their money, we get all the benefit and none of the risk. :-)
*all but the 32 who voted no*
Which were all Republicans.
Seriously, I understand the affection americans have for one party over another. But the time for this cheerleading is long gone. Just realize that they're both trying to kill you.
Democracy kills an apathetic citizenry faster than any other form of government
Just my take on your post. :-)
I agree with the parent. I'm almost coming to believe that artists getting paid is a bigger threat to creativity and art.
I mean, lets face it: if there was copyright in the late 18th century, Beethoven would've written 3 symphonies, 9 piano sonatas and lived off the royalties till he died of cirrosis some 10 years earlier than he did.
You can go to Yale, or you can NOT go to Yale.
What makes you think that a global system would be cheaper?
Bigger bureaucracy == more expensive bureaucracy.
We want to scale BACK patents, not make them a friggin global nightmare!
These folks are scary. :-|
The "economic stabilization" nuts have turned to "climate stabilization" nuts.
Apparently there's already too much respected literature completely thrashing the first, so the latter seems a more suitable excuse for the obtaining of political power. :-)
First Slashdot post that I read and think "Shit, that's me."
Just another special privilege which the government will grant to special interests and the less-free-with-each-passing-moment market will be blamed for.
How can you treat an group made up entirely of individuals as having LESS rights than an individual?
This is collectivism 101 you are preaching. If a corporation can be denied rights which the individuals making it up possess, then minorities can be denied them, cities, countries, professions, etc.
For the same reason that we shouldn't consider the mass murder of Hiroshima and Nagasaki anything other than that.
A corporation is ultimately made of people. Just because it is a collection of them, not a single individual, shouldn't make them have any less rights than a person does.
Just like a bunch of Japanese civilians don't lose some of their rights because the B-29 dropped a bomb on a 'city', not an 'individual'.
They're boosting aggregate demand! Government must make up for the money the people aren't spending to speed US to recovery.
Yes, And of UPS too.
The Post Office has allowed them to compete with them on express mail and package delivery.
Don't take my word for it, though, start a company for delivering regular normal mail and see how long till the Feds bust you.
This ridiculous notion that a company can only grow "this" big or "this" successful without being tagged a monopolist, can only be held by a person without the slightest notion of what the word monopoly means.
The Post Office has a monopoly. If you deliver mail you get arrested.
The central bank has a monopoly. If you issue paper money you are imprisoned for counterfeiting.
Now Google isn't a monopoly. People can flock to Cuil, Bing, Webcrawler, Yahoo!, Altavista or whatever they think suits them better. If some of these other companies ( which were all around when Google came from out of nowhere and became this incredible service provider ) start getting their game together and Google drops the ball, they can become the dominant player. Or, who knows, some Searchster might come out of nowhere and leave Google eating dust.