Businesses necessarily must make up for less profit by sticking it to their customers (in the form of higher prices or less choice), their employees (less wages, fewer benefits, and fewer jobs), their shareholders (less earnings per share, less dividends).
Where does this big-business-friendly point of view come from?
Maybe its different: When you tax people = individuals = customers, they have less money to spend ob goods and stuff. So bussinesses will sell less and cheaper.
So, if you tax people, you are hurting the economy!
PS: In reality of course it is a circle. But I would rather tax businesses and have people decide if they can still afford the more expensive goods than the other way around.
The adverts are on the web pages serving up the song files, not in the songs themselves. I don't think *anybody* would deal with that. Just started fiddling with Audacity this weekend....me likey!
Ehm, it's music industry we are talking about. Its not as if they actually cared what people want.
cotton gin: Well not much cotton in europe, don't know if someone else might have been faster though
microprocessor: I'll give you that
My point is, that inventions usually become "ripe", meaning someone will find something sooner or later. The reason is that nothing is invented out of thin air, usually you can't definitely tell when something was invented exactly or by whom. Take the airplane: Which is the first? Something that glides 50m, that glides 200m, that glides and can be steered, that is powered but unsteered, powered and steered? Do any of these have to come down unharmed to be called successful? Is it enough if the pilot is still alive or does the machine have to be ready to take off again?
And what do you mean by "invented in the US"? On US soil? By US engineers? International team under US engineer? Foreigner that immigrated into the US (1 day ago, 1 year, 20 years, 2 generations?), someone completely different but NSA had his communication tapped?
What I want to express: Its difficult to attribute inventions to a country, its usually groups of individuals scattered over time and space.
'll try it a bit more formally: Let the domain be the set of all Americans. Let s(x) mean person x excels at science, let i(x) mean person x is ignorant.
Then your implication:
ThereExists_x p(x) ^ ThereExists_x i(x) -> ThereExists_x ( p(x) ^ i(x) )
Warning: function p(System.Animals.Person) is not defined in line 2
So I'm an expert for germans now?;) But that really is interesting. Apart from the english (and american) obsession to think of germans in terms of WW2 (War, Hitler, stiff, hard pronouncation) and bavarians (_those_are the guys that sometimes wear lederhosen and dance these silly dances), I think you are part right when it comes to german's sense of comedy. I say half-right, because most younger germans (30-40 years) really like the british (i.e. good) humour, especially monty python, douglas adams, terry pratchett and the like, and everybody I show a copy of some great contemporary series like Black Books, IT crowd, Coupling find them hilarious. But you seldom get them over her (I mean "get hold of them", not "understand them";). And thats the second part: Why not? We have Mr Bean and Monty Python in national TV, but none of the others. I think its the american/hollywood dominance. But I also think that most older germans don't get that kind of humour (and this time I mean "understand"). There are or better were some horrible comedians over here, but also one especially good one (Loriot) which in turn will never translate into english. Translation also do not work sometimes, I'm not sure that this is because english was the better language for jokes, but merely that puns can mostly not be translated from one language to another. And gotih is right, we don't like dirty jokes that much (well, in private situations yes, but we don't think its that funny to see an naked ass 10 times in a row). So in short: We don't have a good humouristic industry, but that doesn't mean wo don't enjoy good humour or can be funny at times;-) How did we get here again? Nuclear energy, right...
No, its not that we (I happen to be german) have special brains that work better when it comes to nuclear stuff (or war or beer for that matter). On the other side: Beer might help...:) I'm not sure about the working models that feepness mentioned either. Nuclear radiation is only allowed to gain energy and for medical reasons, no warfare whatsoever, so I guess there are lots of countries with more possibilities to explore nuclear energy. And a couple of years ago our government even decided to shut down all nuclear plants in about 10 years time.
I think the only reason was (and because of gobalisation no longer is), that in the days if Bohr and Planck and Einstein and so on it was common that scientists discussed matters in quite close circles. I'm sure all these people are connected, somebody beeing a student of someone else or working at the same university for some time and such. Its the same with artists, they create "schools" and so most artists for, say, qubism come from a quite close circle. Today with internet and planes and stuff its more common that someone from, say, Japan has a new theory, some US-scientists work further on it, some french guy has the first breakthrough and so on.
"Democracy" is NOT mutual exclusive to "Republic"! "Constitutional Republic" doesn't make too much sense. Please read wikipedia or any other source, I will just try to explain shortly: Republic comes from latin "res publica", meaning "Public thing". Its usually used when it comes to the head of state, like who represents that state. In a republic this is always someone from the "public", i.e. some more or less ordinary guy, that has been elected by the public. In contrast, a monarchy describes a state where the head of state is a monarch, meaning the right is inherited. But a monarch can be bound by a constitution, giving and taking power from the monarch. Such a thing would be called a "constitutional monarchy". More or less just another name for that is "parlamentary monarchy". Both mean that the real power (like making laws, setting boundaries) lies with the parlament (which also is responsible for the constitution). Both forms (republic and constitutional monarchy) are very similar. The only difference is, whether the representive power (that has to act within the boundaries) is elected or inherited. Great Britain and Sweden would be examples for constitutional monarchies, the US, France or Germany for a republic. "Democracy" on the other hand is old greek and means "the people decide/rule". In a democracy the power roots in the people (in opposite to facist, communist or real monarchist systems). Most states nowadays are democracies while there are differences in how direct a democracy some state is. So, both a republic and a constitutional(!) monarchy are in fact democracies! Democracy is != Anarchy!
Slashdot Mirror
In Sweden, the United States, Canada, or the North Pole.
Santa must have his ass kicked good for all that plagiarism done by his elves...
Here is one more:
(4) If you are not in the US, US law does not apply.
I wished that was true :/
Why is parent modded insightful and grandparent is funny?
Its a common missconception made by US-based businesses.
Firstly, I agree: "Darwinism" seems to be a purely US-thing.
We do actually speak of Newtonian mechanics, for what it's worth.
But nobody speaks of "newtonism" when referring to his theory of gravity.
"Newtonian mechanics" is the more special branch of mechanics like, for example, "relativity" and "quantum mechanics" are, too.
So does separation of church and state
You are probably also the only country having refrigerators?
Poor rest of the world...
Businesses necessarily must make up for less profit by sticking it to their customers (in the form of higher prices or less choice), their employees (less wages, fewer benefits, and fewer jobs), their shareholders (less earnings per share, less dividends).
Where does this big-business-friendly point of view come from?
Maybe its different: When you tax people = individuals = customers, they have less money to spend ob goods and stuff. So bussinesses will sell less and cheaper.
So, if you tax people, you are hurting the economy!
PS: In reality of course it is a circle. But I would rather tax businesses and have people decide if they can still afford the more expensive goods than the other way around.
I do. How about you?
It's "flauschig". The word for "fluffy" I mean... ;-)
And the operas he meant are chinese
Mirabilis ICQ has had this for ages!
It gets worse:
I heard even ordinary people like you and me have to pay for things to not get sued for stealing!
Am I the only one to read terrorists = free market, US-Gov = centralistic ?
Makes you wonder even more...
Ehm, it's music industry we are talking about. Its not as if they actually cared what people want.
Come on, its google. Of course its called Gpay!
Were they?
My point is, that inventions usually become "ripe", meaning someone will find something sooner or later. The reason is that nothing is invented out of thin air, usually you can't definitely tell when something was invented exactly or by whom.
Take the airplane: Which is the first? Something that glides 50m, that glides 200m, that glides and can be steered, that is powered but unsteered, powered and steered? Do any of these have to come down unharmed to be called successful? Is it enough if the pilot is still alive or does the machine have to be ready to take off again?
And what do you mean by "invented in the US"?
On US soil? By US engineers? International team under US engineer? Foreigner that immigrated into the US (1 day ago, 1 year, 20 years, 2 generations?), someone completely different but NSA had his communication tapped?
What I want to express: Its difficult to attribute inventions to a country, its usually groups of individuals scattered over time and space.
So I'm an expert for germans now? ;) ;). And thats the second part: Why not? ;-)
But that really is interesting. Apart from the english (and american) obsession to think of germans in terms of WW2 (War, Hitler, stiff, hard pronouncation) and bavarians (_those_are the guys that sometimes wear lederhosen and dance these silly dances), I think you are part right when it comes to german's sense of comedy.
I say half-right, because most younger germans (30-40 years) really like the british (i.e. good) humour, especially monty python, douglas adams, terry pratchett and the like, and everybody I show a copy of some great contemporary series like Black Books, IT crowd, Coupling find them hilarious. But you seldom get them over her (I mean "get hold of them", not "understand them"
We have Mr Bean and Monty Python in national TV, but none of the others. I think its the american/hollywood dominance.
But I also think that most older germans don't get that kind of humour (and this time I mean "understand").
There are or better were some horrible comedians over here, but also one especially good one (Loriot) which in turn will never translate into english.
Translation also do not work sometimes, I'm not sure that this is because english was the better language for jokes, but merely that puns can mostly not be translated from one language to another.
And gotih is right, we don't like dirty jokes that much (well, in private situations yes, but we don't think its that funny to see an naked ass 10 times in a row).
So in short: We don't have a good humouristic industry, but that doesn't mean wo don't enjoy good humour or can be funny at times
How did we get here again? Nuclear energy, right...
No, its not that we (I happen to be german) have special brains that work better when it comes to nuclear stuff (or war or beer for that matter). :)
On the other side: Beer might help...
I'm not sure about the working models that feepness mentioned either. Nuclear radiation is only allowed to gain energy and for medical reasons, no warfare whatsoever, so I guess there are lots of countries with more possibilities to explore nuclear energy.
And a couple of years ago our government even decided to shut down all nuclear plants in about 10 years time.
I think the only reason was (and because of gobalisation no longer is), that in the days if Bohr and Planck and Einstein and so on it was common that scientists discussed matters in quite close circles. I'm sure all these people are connected, somebody beeing a student of someone else or working at the same university for some time and such.
Its the same with artists, they create "schools" and so most artists for, say, qubism come from a quite close circle.
Today with internet and planes and stuff its more common that someone from, say, Japan has a new theory, some US-scientists work further on it, some french guy has the first breakthrough and so on.
"Democracy" is NOT mutual exclusive to "Republic"!
"Constitutional Republic" doesn't make too much sense.
Please read wikipedia or any other source, I will just try to explain shortly:
Republic comes from latin "res publica", meaning "Public thing". Its usually used when it comes to the head of state, like who represents that state. In a republic this is always someone from the "public", i.e. some more or less ordinary guy, that has been elected by the public.
In contrast, a monarchy describes a state where the head of state is a monarch, meaning the right is inherited.
But a monarch can be bound by a constitution, giving and taking power from the monarch. Such a thing would be called a "constitutional monarchy". More or less just another name for that is "parlamentary monarchy". Both mean that the real power (like making laws, setting boundaries) lies with the parlament (which also is responsible for the constitution).
Both forms (republic and constitutional monarchy) are very similar. The only difference is, whether the representive power (that has to act within the boundaries) is elected or inherited.
Great Britain and Sweden would be examples for constitutional monarchies, the US, France or Germany for a republic.
"Democracy" on the other hand is old greek and means "the people decide/rule". In a democracy the power roots in the people (in opposite to facist, communist or real monarchist systems).
Most states nowadays are democracies while there are differences in how direct a democracy some state is.
So, both a republic and a constitutional(!) monarchy are in fact democracies!
Democracy is != Anarchy!