Old view have a big family is what is less helpful in population. But honestly, 1st world countries aren't the problem when it comes to over-population. It is 3rd world countries where they are starving to death and decide it'd be a fantastic idea to have 6 kids.
On a related note the best thing to do to fix this problem is to educate the women in africa, when educated birth rates plummet (which is a good thing).
Sadly the fact that you have to verify that doesn't reflect poorly on/.s ability to pick up sarcasm. But rather some of the ridiculous positions people hold on the internet (getting modded insightful). I assumed sarcasm, guess that means there is still some optimism left in me. Or I could have noticed that you at least make fun of glenn beck so you are at least left of him...
I think we will be looking at a proxy that detects blocks and has a variety of proxies in different countries to go through. Visiting an alqueda website? It detects the block then redirects through Iran. Visiting an Israel has a right to exist, then it redirects you through Israel.
These types of bans will hardly hurt us, only slow us down. NOW, if they make encryption illegal and check at the packet level we are fucked. But I think that won't happen with the political climate. However I do think if big engines like Google get sued enough we will see the internet shrink, even if they are accessible I imagine sites won't really surface if they aren't indexed. Perhaps if Google is forced to index things locally and users are restricted to their version then it would end up the same.
At the current rate all that will come from the firewalls are nice automated proxy tools. Or something like TOR will actually become popular.
The insane kill ratios disagree with you. Also, the targeting of apartments, power plants, hospitals and so on... The security measures though? I totally agree with, they were in full rights to shoot her stuff. Risk you take by taking a laptop to that kind of country.
Different experiments require different levels of accuracy. The rest of your post is just a troll... Seriously, who disses scientific pursuit in general?
I love you too man lol. Just because I don't like a big chunk of your political view doesn't mean I'm just going to blanket assume you are wrong. Even if I come off as a douche sometimes:P
"socialist ideas" I didn't say it had to completely control all aspects of the economy. Nor did I say that that would even be desireable. Capitalism and competition is a GREAT thing for the economy. I simply believe that it is a power for the government to wield for the benefit of the people. Rather than the government being ruled by capitalism directly.
Some examples would be. Health care, justice, capturing criminals, phone, internet, plumbing, education on primary and higher levels, defense, libraries, buses. I'm sure I could go on, but notice that the US is already implementing most of that list. It is nothing to be afraid of at all, it is a good thing in fact.
"Go to the boss, the highest you can barge in on, hand him in writing your objections and the passwords AND your resignation. Have them signed and don't look back. "
Because a failed state of communism is now equivalent to socialist ideas?.... I think people in finland would be surprised if you told them that they supposedly waited for 12hours to buy toilet paper.
Anyways, it is a lame fucking argument at best. And complete bullshit at worst.
Feel free to provide a link showing that US doctors are better than swiss ones. Otherwise, bullshit. At the moment we are paying less and getting equal or better treatment (mostly due to a focus on preventative medicine). If other countries spent as much as the US we'd be getting far far better treatments.
"Yeah, like the privilege to wait in line for twelve hours to buy toilet paper. "
WTF? I honestly can't begin to guess what you mean here.
"It has nothing to do with being a 'brazzilionaire'. My combined tax burden across state/federal/local/property/sales/etc is close to 50%. I make a whooping $30,000. I just want to keep some more of that money. What's wrong with that desire? "
Taxation in your wage bracket would be minimally effected, you are much more likely to benefit actually.
"It's a fear of losing freedom and having individuality subordinated by the state. "
We are talking about levels though, in the states I imagine you give up a lot of individuality already for society to function. Since like I said many things are already implemented. I guess my point was... 'firefighters -> duh'... 'health care -> omfg the communists are coming to get me' type jump confuses me.
"No, I don't think anybody deserves any service they aren't willing or able to pay for. I'll await my troll mod now for having the audacity to say that out loud. "
I don't think they'll martyr you. But I don't know that I believe you. Would you be ok with a world with no enforced commitments? They seem necessary for society to function. For example, you wouldn't have roads, electricity would cost at least triple, likely no plumbing. Certainly no street lights. I'm sure the list would go on for quite some time. If you are truly willing to accept that type of living then i can respect your opinion... unique as it may be. Otherwise you are just afraid of some self fabricated line.
"It seems like nothing of the sort to me. If bus service is so cheap then why can't those who rely upon it pay the full cost of receiving it? Why should I have to subsidize it?"
It would be cheaper, more bang for the dollar if it were subsidized or totally free. The people who need the bus the most are the people that can't afford it, richer people have cars. The question is, would it be a good thing for my society? And I think I've made a decent attempt at showing that. You should have to subsidize it because it is the right thing to do, and you can afford to do so. Really it comes down to kindergarten lessons of sharing. If you want a more emotional example imagine this.
A man barges into the church meeting you are at, bleeding. He asks for help, saying he needs health care or he will die and he can't afford it. Everyone would chip in and save the guy I'm sure. And I imagine if there were a rich guy there that decided to pass on the collection basket there would be talk. There you have it, enforced, socialist health care.
Socialist ideas work very well in practice... look at the top countries for happiness and quality of life... Pretty much all of them borrow heavily from socialist ideals. The root of socialism being society... The root of communism being community.. and the root of capitalism being money (capital).
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessing. The inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of blessing."
I know you were trying to be cute but my change actually didn't effect the meaning of what you were saying at all. At least be honest.
In socialism you have a guarantee of a certain level of blessing. In exchange you can't achieve dizzying heights of wealth, less chance of being a bazzillionaire.
In pure capitalism you have NO guarantee of blessings. But you have a chance of becoming a brazzilionaire.
Personally, I'm willing to give up my brazilians to have a guaranteed level of living. Also, some level of socialism is needed for society to even function. Rules about rights to education, safe roads, blahblah are all socialist. Because the group is giving up their hard earned cash to provide a guarantee to the masses. Certainly the rich could have their butlers put out fires but as a society we decided that everyone needed this.
The fear of socialism in the states confuses me, it isn't complicated and it is already partially implemented.
It all comes down to this. Do you think everyone deserves service-x? Are you willing to slightly lessen your shot at owning a home worth more than a million dollars to provide this?
An example I like to use is public transit. Something a bit risky since it isn't free in even the most socialist countries. What are buses used for? - 90% of the time it is to go somewhere to spend money, or make money (Believe it or not they aren't exhilarating rides). Both of these things are good for the local economy. The cost is relatively minimal. It would also be lowered by not charging people, no tickets, no machines in buses, less time at stops, less bureaucracy and so on. It also lowers the barrier to move from total poverty up to working class, something very good for the economy. If more people use the system it only becomes more efficient cost wise. It also provides an alternative transport to those considering getting a car which provides environmental bonuses, I don't give a shit if you don't believe in GCC, It reduces city pollution, on which we have solid information on the dangers and number of deaths. The cons are that it disproportionately charges people that don't use the service. But it provides for the people that need it most, the money is much more effectively spent. Setting the cost of a bus ride to a dollar or even 50c seems like a no brainer. Or in the least it shouldn't get the level of fear and hatred that it seems to get in the states. It is a simple idea nothing horrific at all.
Switzerland is 2nd and WELL below the US in total cost. The Cuba point is also well illustrated on those charts. It performs well above the curve, the US well below. Canada btw is spending a bit over half what the US is. Honestly, follow ANY modern country other than the US and you will be doing well.
Treating people like 'animals' sure helps them develop. Point out the vast benefits that have come from not trading with them?... More of the people starve or live in horrible situations, and have far less access to information. Sounds great.
"I'm thinking that most ordinary Cubans aren't (in a socioeconomic sense) too far above that point."
Yeah, it'd be nice if they had some rich country many times larger than them nearby to trade freely with. I imagine that within a few decades their standard of living will double or triple.
Ooo I had no idea, walked right into that one. Meh, I still think dismissing other people's viewpoints based on their country is pretty shitty. And closed minded.
Slashdot Mirror
Old view have a big family is what is less helpful in population. But honestly, 1st world countries aren't the problem when it comes to over-population. It is 3rd world countries where they are starving to death and decide it'd be a fantastic idea to have 6 kids.
On a related note the best thing to do to fix this problem is to educate the women in africa, when educated birth rates plummet (which is a good thing).
Sadly the fact that you have to verify that doesn't reflect poorly on /.s ability to pick up sarcasm. But rather some of the ridiculous positions people hold on the internet (getting modded insightful). I assumed sarcasm, guess that means there is still some optimism left in me. Or I could have noticed that you at least make fun of glenn beck so you are at least left of him...
I'll kindly point out all the punctuation you just used and be willing to call it even.
He's a super fat white religious republican from South Dakota. The only thing that could make this more stereotypical is if he were a minister.
I copyrighted punctuation to piss of the grammar Nazis. Unfortunately, the value has been dropping ever since the advent of the internet. :(
I think we will be looking at a proxy that detects blocks and has a variety of proxies in different countries to go through. Visiting an alqueda website? It detects the block then redirects through Iran. Visiting an Israel has a right to exist, then it redirects you through Israel.
These types of bans will hardly hurt us, only slow us down. NOW, if they make encryption illegal and check at the packet level we are fucked. But I think that won't happen with the political climate. However I do think if big engines like Google get sued enough we will see the internet shrink, even if they are accessible I imagine sites won't really surface if they aren't indexed. Perhaps if Google is forced to index things locally and users are restricted to their version then it would end up the same.
At the current rate all that will come from the firewalls are nice automated proxy tools. Or something like TOR will actually become popular.
The insane kill ratios disagree with you. Also, the targeting of apartments, power plants, hospitals and so on... The security measures though? I totally agree with, they were in full rights to shoot her stuff. Risk you take by taking a laptop to that kind of country.
We know they have no brains, so I guess that is a good explanation. It is no wonder we are all just waiting for them to die.
Different experiments require different levels of accuracy. The rest of your post is just a troll... Seriously, who disses scientific pursuit in general?
I love you too man lol. Just because I don't like a big chunk of your political view doesn't mean I'm just going to blanket assume you are wrong. Even if I come off as a douche sometimes :P
So secret that most people in it don't even know they are in it!
seriously...mostly it is people with viri.
Parent shouldn't be modded as troll. Palin is really really stupid guys. If you can't even admit that much, I worry for you.
"socialist ideas" I didn't say it had to completely control all aspects of the economy. Nor did I say that that would even be desireable. Capitalism and competition is a GREAT thing for the economy. I simply believe that it is a power for the government to wield for the benefit of the people. Rather than the government being ruled by capitalism directly.
Some examples would be. Health care, justice, capturing criminals, phone, internet, plumbing, education on primary and higher levels, defense, libraries, buses. I'm sure I could go on, but notice that the US is already implementing most of that list. It is nothing to be afraid of at all, it is a good thing in fact.
"Go to the boss, the highest you can barge in on, hand him in writing your objections and the passwords AND your resignation. Have them signed and don't look back. "
He was already in prison at that point...
I am surprised anyone that comes to /. uses adobe reader anymore. Bloated to an almost impressive level and filled with security holes.
Because a failed state of communism is now equivalent to socialist ideas? .... I think people in finland would be surprised if you told them that they supposedly waited for 12hours to buy toilet paper.
Anyways, it is a lame fucking argument at best. And complete bullshit at worst.
Feel free to provide a link showing that US doctors are better than swiss ones. Otherwise, bullshit. At the moment we are paying less and getting equal or better treatment (mostly due to a focus on preventative medicine). If other countries spent as much as the US we'd be getting far far better treatments.
"Yeah, like the privilege to wait in line for twelve hours to buy toilet paper. "
... 'health care -> omfg the communists are coming to get me' type jump confuses me.
... unique as it may be. Otherwise you are just afraid of some self fabricated line.
WTF? I honestly can't begin to guess what you mean here.
"It has nothing to do with being a 'brazzilionaire'. My combined tax burden across state/federal/local/property/sales/etc is close to 50%. I make a whooping $30,000. I just want to keep some more of that money. What's wrong with that desire? "
Taxation in your wage bracket would be minimally effected, you are much more likely to benefit actually.
"It's a fear of losing freedom and having individuality subordinated by the state. "
We are talking about levels though, in the states I imagine you give up a lot of individuality already for society to function. Since like I said many things are already implemented. I guess my point was... 'firefighters -> duh'
"No, I don't think anybody deserves any service they aren't willing or able to pay for. I'll await my troll mod now for having the audacity to say that out loud. "
I don't think they'll martyr you. But I don't know that I believe you. Would you be ok with a world with no enforced commitments? They seem necessary for society to function. For example, you wouldn't have roads, electricity would cost at least triple, likely no plumbing. Certainly no street lights. I'm sure the list would go on for quite some time. If you are truly willing to accept that type of living then i can respect your opinion
"It seems like nothing of the sort to me. If bus service is so cheap then why can't those who rely upon it pay the full cost of receiving it? Why should I have to subsidize it?"
It would be cheaper, more bang for the dollar if it were subsidized or totally free. The people who need the bus the most are the people that can't afford it, richer people have cars. The question is, would it be a good thing for my society? And I think I've made a decent attempt at showing that. You should have to subsidize it because it is the right thing to do, and you can afford to do so. Really it comes down to kindergarten lessons of sharing. If you want a more emotional example imagine this.
A man barges into the church meeting you are at, bleeding. He asks for help, saying he needs health care or he will die and he can't afford it. Everyone would chip in and save the guy I'm sure. And I imagine if there were a rich guy there that decided to pass on the collection basket there would be talk. There you have it, enforced, socialist health care.
Socialist ideas work very well in practice... look at the top countries for happiness and quality of life... Pretty much all of them borrow heavily from socialist ideals. The root of socialism being society ... The root of communism being community .. and the root of capitalism being money (capital).
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessing. The inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of blessing."
I know you were trying to be cute but my change actually didn't effect the meaning of what you were saying at all. At least be honest.
In socialism you have a guarantee of a certain level of blessing. In exchange you can't achieve dizzying heights of wealth, less chance of being a bazzillionaire.
In pure capitalism you have NO guarantee of blessings. But you have a chance of becoming a brazzilionaire.
Personally, I'm willing to give up my brazilians to have a guaranteed level of living. Also, some level of socialism is needed for society to even function. Rules about rights to education, safe roads, blahblah are all socialist. Because the group is giving up their hard earned cash to provide a guarantee to the masses. Certainly the rich could have their butlers put out fires but as a society we decided that everyone needed this.
The fear of socialism in the states confuses me, it isn't complicated and it is already partially implemented.
It all comes down to this. Do you think everyone deserves service-x? Are you willing to slightly lessen your shot at owning a home worth more than a million dollars to provide this?
An example I like to use is public transit. Something a bit risky since it isn't free in even the most socialist countries. What are buses used for? - 90% of the time it is to go somewhere to spend money, or make money (Believe it or not they aren't exhilarating rides). Both of these things are good for the local economy. The cost is relatively minimal. It would also be lowered by not charging people, no tickets, no machines in buses, less time at stops, less bureaucracy and so on. It also lowers the barrier to move from total poverty up to working class, something very good for the economy. If more people use the system it only becomes more efficient cost wise. It also provides an alternative transport to those considering getting a car which provides environmental bonuses, I don't give a shit if you don't believe in GCC, It reduces city pollution, on which we have solid information on the dangers and number of deaths. The cons are that it disproportionately charges people that don't use the service. But it provides for the people that need it most, the money is much more effectively spent. Setting the cost of a bus ride to a dollar or even 50c seems like a no brainer. Or in the least it shouldn't get the level of fear and hatred that it seems to get in the states. It is a simple idea nothing horrific at all.
http://ucatlas.ucsc.edu/spend.php
Switzerland is 2nd and WELL below the US in total cost. The Cuba point is also well illustrated on those charts. It performs well above the curve, the US well below. Canada btw is spending a bit over half what the US is. Honestly, follow ANY modern country other than the US and you will be doing well.
People outside of the US get punished for smoking pot and sharing music.... So his point sorta stands...
Treating people like 'animals' sure helps them develop. Point out the vast benefits that have come from not trading with them? ... More of the people starve or live in horrible situations, and have far less access to information. Sounds great.
"I'm thinking that most ordinary Cubans aren't (in a socioeconomic sense) too far above that point."
Yeah, it'd be nice if they had some rich country many times larger than them nearby to trade freely with. I imagine that within a few decades their standard of living will double or triple.
Ooo I had no idea, walked right into that one. Meh, I still think dismissing other people's viewpoints based on their country is pretty shitty. And closed minded.