Maybe we need a federal program to move those red folks in blue states to red state and those blue folks in red states to blue states and then cut out most of the federal government except that specifically indicated in the constitution. I'm going to hold out that everyone should get a one time subsidy of $150,000 per person for five years, payable in Fort Knox bullion for moving. Independents can move to southern Alaska if they want to collect travel aid, where the sky's are gray all year round and where there are presently very few people, except when they get off of tour ships.
"Just stop taxing us so much, and get the hell out of our lives."
Funny, how 6.7 billion other people on the planet have a way of intruding on everyone's lives these days doesn't it. Get used to it. Its only going to get even hotter, and more crowded and that will mean the need for higher taxes, unless you can find a way to support so many humans, without destroying the last vestiges of the ecosystems that support them and which are disappearing because we as a species can't find a useful way to face reality.
Basically, its the humanity that Ruppert Murdoch has used up and then realized he had to discard. Consequently, the T-Party is made up of odd elements from all over the viewing spectrum. Consequently, the only thing now largely holding it together are about 40-50 cliques within the organization that are vying to lead it in one inconsequential direction or another fighting for a dwindling funding base now that Murdoch no longer has a need for them, based on the latest variation of the new conspiracy theory of government, where its a conspiracy to raise taxes on wealthy guys like Ruppert Murdoch.
One of the unfortunate consequences of being human. It makes one wonder if this will lead to the creation of drones that ultimately programmed to evaluate and optimize the output of other drones that then form a decision tree and then send it to the optimization drone for implementation and then finally back to the enforcer drone, who will then decide whether or not to take the human out.
"The banks didn't get bailed out until near the end of Bush's term when he started making liberal economic policies."
What liberal economic policies? Giving more away to his "base" faster?
The banks didn't get bail out until Bush created the economic disaster to insure that they would need it. The amazing thing is that they got away with it. Republicans destroy the economy just to profit from it.
Yes, but state enforcement of social norms is by far the cheapest and most effective way to keep citizens in line. Long experiments like letting bankers regulate themselves has a way of turning out perversely. Likewise, the libertarian notion that we all can be individual Roman Empors is not particularly workable. Better that we democratically elect representatives with enough sense to recognize the essential character and importance of taxes and taxation, rather trying to put in place people, who know nothing about taxes other than that they don't like them and don't want to pay them and consequently the government and thus directly most of the people and the planet suffer as a result.
One knows one is loosing an argument on having to pay their taxes, when they start trying to equivocate being forced to pay their taxes with having to forcibly give up their kidney.
The government isn't in such a need for kidneys at the moment that they won't be happy to just house you in a cell for a few years and even pay for your meals, so that when your time is up, you can again decide if you don't want to pay your taxes again. I have read little in either court transcripts, the newspapers, or seen in the media few reports of people being forced to give up their kidneys to the IRS, but maybe rates are higher in your area.
I don't think the IRS is about to murder your wife, but they are perfectly within in the law to make sure that you pay your fair share. That is not the problem. The problem is all those guys who find it advantageous to claim they owe less than their fair share of taxes have now gotten away with so effectively that they try to elect guys like Mitt Romney, so they won't have to pay anything at all ever. They will just be able to steal it outright by giving the government away to themselves in the name of making it smaller. Paying the consequences will be left to the those who can't afford it. Ironically, a complete repudiation of the teachings of Jesus, but then again its politics and Romney is Mormon, so there you have it.
Tell that to Jimmy Carter. He was a nuclear engineer. While he had a lot of bad luck, had the country actually had listened to him, we would be in much better shape, especially on environmental and energy regulation and a reducing our dependence on imported fossil fuels. Our federal budget would have been in balance, our trade deficit would not exist, the dollar would probably be incredibly strong against other currencies, and our environment wouldn't be in the mess that it is in today.
If I could just get 30% of my promises fulfilled, I'd gladly give away the chance for republicans to attain that which never was as often as they like.
Yes, for the destruction of the Government of the United States, like so many others who think that by privatizing the government and "making it smaller" will somehow address the real issues confronting humanity, such our running out of natural resources around the world to exploit means that our economy has only ourselves to exploit to keep it operating. Just today republicans blocked military biofeuls so that our air force and navy would be more vulnerable in terms of having adequate independent fuel supplies so that we, the taxpayes, could pay more on a few very large oil contracts.
And all evidence suggests that the real Nazis didn't give them a lot of choice. In the early phases of the war, military technology was primarily on the German and Japanese side.
What is wrong with the basic notion of an American citizen being entitled to something from their government? Seems to me as I look around at my fellow citizens I see many who have worked hard to deserve a little recognition. Why should all the savings always go to the wealthy and the corporations?
This is a population that by an large a substantial portion lives in one form of desperation or another brought about primarily from being at the wrong end of the corporate food chain. If Democrats are trying to pull on heartstrings among the citizenry by attempting to provide them with some kind of health care system, it seems to me that is far healthier than watching republicans dismantle health care programs for millions, many of whom will literally die as their devices are unplugged and their services no longer paid, pushed off their parents plans, or their meals no longer delivered ultimately by our government. It seems to me citizens have a right to complain about the lack of a credible republican health care plan. If maybe Democrats could pull on a few neurons, to try to get them to fire in their republican friends instead, then they might not need to resort to heartstrings.
One would think that if republicans were really so concerned about keeping people healthy they would actually have a plan, although they do seem to have all sorts of ever more perverted plans they seek to impose on women as they try to find health care for issues not shared by men and a few plans that have been lying about when it seemed politically expedient for them to have one, but then forgotten when no longer politically expedient.
Seems to me democrats and people in general have good reason to be angry at republicans and asking others not to vote for republicans because their primary effort is to destroy our government, since they really don't believe in government, excuses to make it small and meaningless to the lives of millions, when once it gave hope to humanity, or just to feed their avarice for the lust for power and greater wealth to control others. Sadly, ideas that might have worked well for cave-men are not only no longer survival skills, but directly contribute to a very high probability of humanity's extinction within the next 400-500 years, if not sooner. The sad truth is that going to war against the environment will not be a wining proposition, even if you lie to get people into believing that the war is a good idea in the first place.
Slashdot Mirror
What happens now that the company is public?
Yes, Zuckerberg has controlling interest, but what about the inevitable clash between making money at the expense of users?
How will users feel to have their personalities and personal histories bolted to the corporate bottom line as they two incompatible goals collide?
Maybe we need a federal program to move those red folks in blue states to red state and those blue folks in red states to blue states and then cut out most of the federal government except that specifically indicated in the constitution. I'm going to hold out that everyone should get a one time subsidy of $150,000 per person for five years, payable in Fort Knox bullion for moving. Independents can move to southern Alaska if they want to collect travel aid, where the sky's are gray all year round and where there are presently very few people, except when they get off of tour ships.
"Just stop taxing us so much, and get the hell out of our lives."
Funny, how 6.7 billion other people on the planet have a way of intruding on everyone's lives these days doesn't it. Get used to it. Its only going to get even hotter, and more crowded and that will mean the need for higher taxes, unless you can find a way to support so many humans, without destroying the last vestiges of the ecosystems that support them and which are disappearing because we as a species can't find a useful way to face reality.
"an unwieldy, chaotic group"
Basically, its the humanity that Ruppert Murdoch has used up and then realized he had to discard. Consequently, the T-Party is made up of odd elements from all over the viewing spectrum. Consequently, the only thing now largely holding it together are about 40-50 cliques within the organization that are vying to lead it in one inconsequential direction or another fighting for a dwindling funding base now that Murdoch no longer has a need for them, based on the latest variation of the new conspiracy theory of government, where its a conspiracy to raise taxes on wealthy guys like Ruppert Murdoch.
One of the unfortunate consequences of being human. It makes one wonder if this will lead to the creation of drones that ultimately programmed to evaluate and optimize the output of other drones that then form a decision tree and then send it to the optimization drone for implementation and then finally back to the enforcer drone, who will then decide whether or not to take the human out.
"The banks didn't get bailed out until near the end of Bush's term when he started making liberal economic policies."
What liberal economic policies? Giving more away to his "base" faster?
The banks didn't get bail out until Bush created the economic disaster to insure that they would need it. The amazing thing is that they got away with it. Republicans destroy the economy just to profit from it.
Yes, but state enforcement of social norms is by far the cheapest and most effective way to keep citizens in line. Long experiments like letting bankers regulate themselves has a way of turning out perversely. Likewise, the libertarian notion that we all can be individual Roman Empors is not particularly workable. Better that we democratically elect representatives with enough sense to recognize the essential character and importance of taxes and taxation, rather trying to put in place people, who know nothing about taxes other than that they don't like them and don't want to pay them and consequently the government and thus directly most of the people and the planet suffer as a result.
One knows one is loosing an argument on having to pay their taxes, when they start trying to equivocate being forced to pay their taxes with having to forcibly give up their kidney.
The government isn't in such a need for kidneys at the moment that they won't be happy to just house you in a cell for a few years and even pay for your meals, so that when your time is up, you can again decide if you don't want to pay your taxes again. I have read little in either court transcripts, the newspapers, or seen in the media few reports of people being forced to give up their kidneys to the IRS, but maybe rates are higher in your area.
Wow. I pay about $400 per year to have my taxes done. You make $400 an hour? What do you do?
Sure there is and we are on course to shortly test it, human extinction.
If its a civic duty, is it any longer a "volunteering"?
I don't think the IRS is about to murder your wife, but they are perfectly within in the law to make sure that you pay your fair share. That is not the problem. The problem is all those guys who find it advantageous to claim they owe less than their fair share of taxes have now gotten away with so effectively that they try to elect guys like Mitt Romney, so they won't have to pay anything at all ever. They will just be able to steal it outright by giving the government away to themselves in the name of making it smaller. Paying the consequences will be left to the those who can't afford it. Ironically, a complete repudiation of the teachings of Jesus, but then again its politics and Romney is Mormon, so there you have it.
"Congratulations for proving why discussion with left-wingers is a waste of time."
That sounds suspiciously like a confession that you seldom win the discussion. Thank you for at least being honest.
There are just as many points of view within science as without it considering scientists, who are few in number are abundant in hypotheses.
The US had one mathematician as president and he was assassinated. (James A. Garfield)
Tell that to Jimmy Carter. He was a nuclear engineer. While he had a lot of bad luck, had the country actually had listened to him, we would be in much better shape, especially on environmental and energy regulation and a reducing our dependence on imported fossil fuels. Our federal budget would have been in balance, our trade deficit would not exist, the dollar would probably be incredibly strong against other currencies, and our environment wouldn't be in the mess that it is in today.
Theses are great religious leaders?
No, it likely means that someone is his family has been accidentally shot.
Pretend he is not in Washington the whole time he is there by acknowledging only those parts of of Washington he can usefully explain and support.
There is nothing communal about North Korea other than enslavement in common quarters.
If I could just get 30% of my promises fulfilled, I'd gladly give away the chance for republicans to attain that which never was as often as they like.
Yes, for the destruction of the Government of the United States, like so many others who think that by privatizing the government and "making it smaller" will somehow address the real issues confronting humanity, such our running out of natural resources around the world to exploit means that our economy has only ourselves to exploit to keep it operating. Just today republicans blocked military biofeuls so that our air force and navy would be more vulnerable in terms of having adequate independent fuel supplies so that we, the taxpayes, could pay more on a few very large oil contracts.
No more borrowing? So your plan is to eliminate the bond market. Yeah, I will be curious to see how that works out for you.
And all evidence suggests that the real Nazis didn't give them a lot of choice. In the early phases of the war, military technology was primarily on the German and Japanese side.
What is wrong with the basic notion of an American citizen being entitled to something from their government? Seems to me as I look around at my fellow citizens I see many who have worked hard to deserve a little recognition. Why should all the savings always go to the wealthy and the corporations?
This is a population that by an large a substantial portion lives in one form of desperation or another brought about primarily from being at the wrong end of the corporate food chain. If Democrats are trying to pull on heartstrings among the citizenry by attempting to provide them with some kind of health care system, it seems to me that is far healthier than watching republicans dismantle health care programs for millions, many of whom will literally die as their devices are unplugged and their services no longer paid, pushed off their parents plans, or their meals no longer delivered ultimately by our government. It seems to me citizens have a right to complain about the lack of a credible republican health care plan. If maybe Democrats could pull on a few neurons, to try to get them to fire in their republican friends instead, then they might not need to resort to heartstrings.
One would think that if republicans were really so concerned about keeping people healthy they would actually have a plan, although they do seem to have all sorts of ever more perverted plans they seek to impose on women as they try to find health care for issues not shared by men and a few plans that have been lying about when it seemed politically expedient for them to have one, but then forgotten when no longer politically expedient.
Seems to me democrats and people in general have good reason to be angry at republicans and asking others not to vote for republicans because their primary effort is to destroy our government, since they really don't believe in government, excuses to make it small and meaningless to the lives of millions, when once it gave hope to humanity, or just to feed their avarice for the lust for power and greater wealth to control others. Sadly, ideas that might have worked well for cave-men are not only no longer survival skills, but directly contribute to a very high probability of humanity's extinction within the next 400-500 years, if not sooner. The sad truth is that going to war against the environment will not be a wining proposition, even if you lie to get people into believing that the war is a good idea in the first place.