I don't know what the military was like back then, but I can tell you right now that the Army's technicians are by and large crap. I went through 52 weeks of training for my job and now that I'm at a duty station, they don't let us do a damn thing. They hire a bunch of overpaid contractors that don't really know all that much and they're the only ones authorized to get really technical with the systems. I'm literally a glorified restart button. All I do is restart services, restart workstations, and restart servers. The guys I work with are great but the experience they pick up here is useless in a non-DoD civilian tech environment.
Don't blame it on the Airforce. They have one of the most laxed height/weight and PT score requirements of all the military branches. Actually, they do have the most laxed. You sure as hell don't need to be anorexic. I've seen plenty of obese airmen. If you couldn't fit into that, blame yourself.
This is what happens when overpaid patent lawyers sit around and have nothing to do. They're acting busy by going out and sending out C&D orders to random people.
Yea and flying spaghetti monster forbid you accidentally type something like chmod a+rx on your consolidated/usr/bin directory. That'll be a load of fun to fix
But with that mentality, many things aren't truly homegrown. Granted, reverse engineering a CPU is much more complex than reversing many other things, but lots of stuff we have today was based on copying others. Even the late great Steve Jobs at one time proudly professed "Good artists copy, great artists steal"
Well, I was being sarcastic in my last post so I was in fact insinuating that you were being pessimistic, which is exactly what your view is. I see your view but I don't agree with it. I'd rather take the optimistic point of view that something is going to get fixed.
I like your optimistic enthusiasm for someone who sees the failings of the government and wants to fix it by reaching out to the tech community and gathering input. Or perhaps we should just continue operating the way we have been.
but if you look at the benchmarks, the Intel i3 beats the AMD in almost every gaming benchmark too. So what does the AMD chip have to offer if its supposed ondie GPU can't even beat Intel's?
Laws need to be changed because they aren't whining right now. They're exploiting it with big fat freaking smiles on their faces. And raising taxes on them isn't the solution because it won't do anything to them. There are too many loopholes. What needs to be changed is closing the loopholes so they can't exploit them and having a tax rate that is competitive with the nations that they're fleeing to.
1. I'm not whoring for any companies. I, in fact, absolutely abhor what those companies are doing.
2. If you had any knowledge about tax laws and how companies are exploiting them instead of your supposed "reality", you'd understand that trying to raise tax rates to "force" companies to pay taxes is in fact counter productive.
They are already getting around that too. I don't remember how exactly they do it but its something along these lines... GE manufactures stuff in the states and makes profits in the states. Then they setup a shell company in the Netherlands and they hire that company to provide them with all the services like marketing, hr, etc. Those service fees end up being almost a large portion of the profits they made in the states so they end up having very little reported income in the states.
It won't because GE is already keeping all its profits offshore. That's how its avoiding all these taxes. We need to lower the corporate tax rate to bring those companies back home instead of going offshore to countries that have a lower tax rate than us.
The number you're thinking of was 3.2 billion and we didn't give it to them...
GE's 2010 financial statements reported a $3.25 billion U.S. "current tax benefit," which is where the Times, which declined comment, got its $3.2 billion "tax benefit" number. But a company's "current tax" number has nothing to do with what it actually pays in taxes for a given year. "Current tax benefit" and "current tax expense" are so-called financial reporting numbers, used to calculate the profits a company reports to shareholders.
Zero is too low but something like 5% should be plenty attractive. I don't know of any 1st world nations that offer that kind of a tax rate. Then we'd be getting more companies to want to come here and getting our own companies to pay too.
Everyone is allowed to but not everyone has the ability to. You think that single mother with 2 kids making $40k a year can afford to put in as much as that millionaire tycoon? Hell, those millionaires don't even need to work. They can just make all their money off the investments.
That's not how it works though. The multinationals just make shell corporations offshore but they still conduct business in the United States as normal.
Sorry, read the first two sentences and though this guy doesn't know what he's talking about and I ha denough. Didn't get it till the end of your first paragraph.
Stop with the sensationalizing nonsense. This is not class warfare. In fact, not enacting this tax would be class warfare. That's nice you quote what their income tax bracket is but why don't you also include that the tax rate on their investments is substantially below what we pay? That's right, they only pay 15% on their long term investments. Please go educate yourself before you go off spouting all this nonsense. Buffet's idea (and I'm assuming Obama's too) is to raise the capital gains tax to rates that match what the working class has to pay.
you're totally misconstruing the "movement". its not at all fuck rich people. its rich people should be equal to us. in previous statements, obama said he's only trying to raise taxes on rich people so that they pay the same amount as the working class people because rich people are able to generate income through avenues that have a lower tax rate.
You know what, maybe start looking if the huge companies pay taxes?
That will just push companies to go offshore too. Look at how much GE paid last year. Its arguably even easier for these big companies to go off shore anyways since most of them are already multinational
Sure, they make plenty of trades that are risky in the sense that there is a high probability for loss. However, they shouldn't be making those kinds of trades when the potential loss is in the billions. That's an absurd amount of money to be using in high risk trades.
Sure, maybe not providing all our evidence for 9/11 was unreasonable, but how about having an Interpol arrest warrant or being indicted for murders of numerous people at different times? We had plenty of evidence against him for other acts of terrorism and we've been seeking his extradition from Afghanistan for at least 3 years prior to the attacks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden#Criminal_charges
Ok, so now you're changing your argument because originally, you said
Far more civilians died by Bush's orders, than died by Osama's you know
That doesn't suggest anything about casualties of war from our operations, which is what you're suggesting in your last response. But even with you changing your argument, I'd still argue that the civilian casualties of war form our operations is much less than the casualties caused by suicide bombers or outright attacks against civilians, which is what Osama has done.
Actually, they offered to do just that in the 90s. Clinton wasn't interested at the time.
As for Pakistan, Al-Qaeda are only heavily relying on them now because of our invasion of Afghanistan. Which goes back to the point earlier, if we hadn't invaded Afghanistan, having Pakistan sever ties with Afghanistan wouldn't have done a damn thing. And your last paragraph just tells me why Pakistan relies on Al-Qaeda, not the other way around. So tell me again, how would your plan have worked to ask Osama to stop and have Pakistan sever ties with the Taliban?
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know what the military was like back then, but I can tell you right now that the Army's technicians are by and large crap. I went through 52 weeks of training for my job and now that I'm at a duty station, they don't let us do a damn thing. They hire a bunch of overpaid contractors that don't really know all that much and they're the only ones authorized to get really technical with the systems. I'm literally a glorified restart button. All I do is restart services, restart workstations, and restart servers. The guys I work with are great but the experience they pick up here is useless in a non-DoD civilian tech environment.
Don't blame it on the Airforce. They have one of the most laxed height/weight and PT score requirements of all the military branches. Actually, they do have the most laxed. You sure as hell don't need to be anorexic. I've seen plenty of obese airmen. If you couldn't fit into that, blame yourself.
This is what happens when overpaid patent lawyers sit around and have nothing to do. They're acting busy by going out and sending out C&D orders to random people.
Yea and flying spaghetti monster forbid you accidentally type something like chmod a+rx on your consolidated /usr/bin directory. That'll be a load of fun to fix
But with that mentality, many things aren't truly homegrown. Granted, reverse engineering a CPU is much more complex than reversing many other things, but lots of stuff we have today was based on copying others. Even the late great Steve Jobs at one time proudly professed "Good artists copy, great artists steal"
Well, I was being sarcastic in my last post so I was in fact insinuating that you were being pessimistic, which is exactly what your view is. I see your view but I don't agree with it. I'd rather take the optimistic point of view that something is going to get fixed.
I like your optimistic enthusiasm for someone who sees the failings of the government and wants to fix it by reaching out to the tech community and gathering input. Or perhaps we should just continue operating the way we have been.
I blame the couples for signing a contract with restrictions but doesn't provide the restrictions. That's asinine.
but if you look at the benchmarks, the Intel i3 beats the AMD in almost every gaming benchmark too. So what does the AMD chip have to offer if its supposed ondie GPU can't even beat Intel's?
Laws need to be changed because they aren't whining right now. They're exploiting it with big fat freaking smiles on their faces. And raising taxes on them isn't the solution because it won't do anything to them. There are too many loopholes. What needs to be changed is closing the loopholes so they can't exploit them and having a tax rate that is competitive with the nations that they're fleeing to.
1. I'm not whoring for any companies. I, in fact, absolutely abhor what those companies are doing.
2. If you had any knowledge about tax laws and how companies are exploiting them instead of your supposed "reality", you'd understand that trying to raise tax rates to "force" companies to pay taxes is in fact counter productive.
They are already getting around that too. I don't remember how exactly they do it but its something along these lines... GE manufactures stuff in the states and makes profits in the states. Then they setup a shell company in the Netherlands and they hire that company to provide them with all the services like marketing, hr, etc. Those service fees end up being almost a large portion of the profits they made in the states so they end up having very little reported income in the states.
It won't because GE is already keeping all its profits offshore. That's how its avoiding all these taxes. We need to lower the corporate tax rate to bring those companies back home instead of going offshore to countries that have a lower tax rate than us.
GE's 2010 financial statements reported a $3.25 billion U.S. "current tax benefit," which is where the Times, which declined comment, got its $3.2 billion "tax benefit" number. But a company's "current tax" number has nothing to do with what it actually pays in taxes for a given year. "Current tax benefit" and "current tax expense" are so-called financial reporting numbers, used to calculate the profits a company reports to shareholders.
http://features.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2011/04/04/the-truth-about-ges-tax-bill/
Zero is too low but something like 5% should be plenty attractive. I don't know of any 1st world nations that offer that kind of a tax rate. Then we'd be getting more companies to want to come here and getting our own companies to pay too.
Everyone is allowed to but not everyone has the ability to. You think that single mother with 2 kids making $40k a year can afford to put in as much as that millionaire tycoon? Hell, those millionaires don't even need to work. They can just make all their money off the investments.
That's not how it works though. The multinationals just make shell corporations offshore but they still conduct business in the United States as normal.
Sorry, read the first two sentences and though this guy doesn't know what he's talking about and I ha denough. Didn't get it till the end of your first paragraph.
Stop with the sensationalizing nonsense. This is not class warfare. In fact, not enacting this tax would be class warfare. That's nice you quote what their income tax bracket is but why don't you also include that the tax rate on their investments is substantially below what we pay? That's right, they only pay 15% on their long term investments. Please go educate yourself before you go off spouting all this nonsense. Buffet's idea (and I'm assuming Obama's too) is to raise the capital gains tax to rates that match what the working class has to pay.
you're totally misconstruing the "movement". its not at all fuck rich people. its rich people should be equal to us. in previous statements, obama said he's only trying to raise taxes on rich people so that they pay the same amount as the working class people because rich people are able to generate income through avenues that have a lower tax rate.
You know what, maybe start looking if the huge companies pay taxes?
That will just push companies to go offshore too. Look at how much GE paid last year. Its arguably even easier for these big companies to go off shore anyways since most of them are already multinational
And juries aren't there to debate the merits of the law, only to decide if the individual in question broke it.
Absolutely false. There's a reason why we have jury nullification.
Sure, they make plenty of trades that are risky in the sense that there is a high probability for loss. However, they shouldn't be making those kinds of trades when the potential loss is in the billions. That's an absurd amount of money to be using in high risk trades.
I don't see it as an unreasonable demand
Sure, maybe not providing all our evidence for 9/11 was unreasonable, but how about having an Interpol arrest warrant or being indicted for murders of numerous people at different times? We had plenty of evidence against him for other acts of terrorism and we've been seeking his extradition from Afghanistan for at least 3 years prior to the attacks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden#Criminal_charges
Far more civilians died by Bush's orders, than died by Osama's you know
That doesn't suggest anything about casualties of war from our operations, which is what you're suggesting in your last response. But even with you changing your argument, I'd still argue that the civilian casualties of war form our operations is much less than the casualties caused by suicide bombers or outright attacks against civilians, which is what Osama has done.
Actually, they offered to do just that in the 90s. Clinton wasn't interested at the time.
Actually, he was interested and they never offered... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden#Clinton_administration. Sudan, on the other hand, did offer. But that has nothing to do with what we're discussing.
As for Pakistan, Al-Qaeda are only heavily relying on them now because of our invasion of Afghanistan. Which goes back to the point earlier, if we hadn't invaded Afghanistan, having Pakistan sever ties with Afghanistan wouldn't have done a damn thing. And your last paragraph just tells me why Pakistan relies on Al-Qaeda, not the other way around. So tell me again, how would your plan have worked to ask Osama to stop and have Pakistan sever ties with the Taliban?