You shouldn't insult people you don't understand. People go to McDonalds because they have children, and both parents work. They don't have TIME to prepare nutritious food. They need something quick and easy.
A couple of years ago, when I was living alone working as a chemist, I worked long hours and had no-one to prepare food for me. In a year I gained 15 pounds. I've leveled that off. My hours are even longer now, but I have someone who cooks delicious, healthy food for me now;).
And before you ask, yes, my mother moved in with me.
Think about how many calories are in a bag of carrots versus a bag of doritos. Measured per calorie, vegetables are MUCH more expensive.
Of course, most of the food I eat is cooked from scratch, and we grow our own vegetables, so eating healthy is fairly cheap, but it takes a LOT of time, time that most 2-worker households don't have.
I wouldn't insist anything. I think that such election laws are bad, because they interfere with free speech, which is a top level right. I'm just pointing out that the actions taken by the German company are likely illegal, and giving a parallel in terms of US law.
By the time they get to that point, it will already be too late. Just because the first step in fascism isn't into an oven doesn't mean that we should just except it.
It's more like giving all the Republicans free air time on your network, while not allowing Democrats to even buy airtime. It's in blatant violation of God knows how many campaign laws. Well, I say that, but I have no idea what the law is like in Germany. I would think that they would be pretty strict with such things though.
You might want to check YOUR history. The recession that followed the closing of the SECOND central bank (in 1836) was a result of the end of the business cycle caused by that very same central bank. If GW had shut down the Fed last year, this recession still would have happened, it just wouldn't have been as long and severe as it is going to be.
The panic of 1907 was primarily caused by government interference in the markets, IE the Hepburn Act of 1906, which set a cap on railroad rates, causing shortages of freight cars, meaning that many farmers couldn't get their goods to market, thus disrupting the largely agriculture dependent economy. This was on top of an attempt to corner the market in copper (similar attempts still occur with central banks).
You also fail to mention that all of those Panics that occurred without a central bank never hit main street, or if they did, the effects lasted a year or two at most. With the Fed in charge of banking, they took the end of a stock market bubble and turned it into a decade long Depression that caused the starvation of millions in the breadbasket of the world. To this day, farmers are paid not to farm, and perverse incentives have now worked their way into the system such that fantastic risks are rewarded if they succeed, where they are bailed out if they fail.
Bubbles and corrections happen. When the government gets involved things only get worse, because they muddy the waters and introduce enormous amounts of waste. They also bring the effects of the panics to main street by bailing out these foolish companies with taxpayer money, or worse, destroy the value of the dollar by printing money.
In any event, you still need to look at your history, as EVERY FIAT CURRENCY in the history of the world has failed, ending in hyperinflation. The United States has managed to fend it off for almost 40 years by exporting our inflation to other countries, but that is very risky, as all those dollars are still lurking out there, waiting for a crisis of confidence to flood back into this country and buy up every durable good in sight, bidding up the price of everything, until one day we wake up penniless paupers with wheelbarrows full of dollars, and nothing to spend it on.
You certainly can assign different values to different lives. Insurance adjusters do it every day. You don't see secret service personnel guarding Miss Davis down the street do you? Of course not, her life isn't nearly as valuable as that of the President. That said, it is true that value is something that is assigned by people, however, once should take inputs into account when one is placing a value on something. Otherwise, an acorn would cost the same as a ten year old transplanted oak. Would you trade a hundred year old oak tree for an acorn? That is what you are doing, when you sacrifice the mother's life for the baby. It isn't a crude calculation, it's common sense. The "oh noes dead babies" response steals freedom from parents, and hurts society.
If you think children's lives are so valuable, you could live like a monk and donate all your money to starving children in Africa. You won't though, because you are making rational decisions based on self interest, which is the primary mechanism of action of any economy, of which life is a subset. Indeed, you probably do more good for far more children by going about your daily business than you would by your other actions, because your continued involvement in the economy is valuable, and that value spreads around the world and multiplies itself. The mother's continued existence will allow for many more children to be born in the future, and for them to have better lives (rather than having one child being raised by a single father).
The rail system was one of the targets of the massive Keynesian spending packages they pushed out in an ultimately futile attempt to return to the good times (the 80's). The bank bailouts were another instance, just a different symptom of the same disease (ie government stimulus). The stimulus failed spectacularly, and they wound up with a nice rail system, and a crushing amount of debt. Luckily for them, the Japanese people are savers, so they have managed to survive. Americans have no savings, so there is absolutely no counterbalance to government debt.
Basically, any attempt to build such a system by the government is destined to be nothing more than a spectacular waste of money, and will likely do nothing save to drive us deeper into debt.
Write us back in six months when half of your economies have collapsed and tell us how you're doing. In the meantime, how's Iceland these days? Ireland and Spain are said to be on the verge of collapse as well.
There are no free markets in a world where all currencies are issued at will by central banks. Any nation with a central bank is destined for hyperinflation and eventual collapse so long as they rely on that bank for their currency.
Mod parent up. A book with writing in it is far more valuable than a blank notebook. It's the same with people. If the child dies, you can make another one in less than a year, if the mother dies, it'll take twenty years to replace her.
Did you consider the fact that Japan put themselves into an enormous amount of debt to build that system, one that will take multiple generations to pay off, and that it caused the "lost decade" of economic stagnation that they still haven't recovered from?
After you think about that for a while, you should realize that our national debt is ALREADY that high. Going deeper into debt to build such a system that has limited utility will probably destroy the economy to such an extent that the United States will cease to be a viable political entity.
If you want to use the billy club of the state to enforce your monopoly, you should have to pay for it. If the initial copyright lasts a certain amount of time, you should be able to renew it each year for a slowly increasing amount of money (say the amount goes up 50% per year). Big corporations could keep their moneymakers protected for a long time, until it became unprofitable, and abandonware would go into the public domain, where it can be reused by those still interested in it.
As a commercial software developer, you should know that those who pirate software tend not to use it for commercial purposes. In much the same way as my mother wouldn't have paid to go see any of the Madea movies, but she downloaded some and watched them on her computer. The producers of that movie lost nothing in that transaction, because she never would have paid in the first place. However, since she liked them so much, she went to see the latest one in the theater.
In much the same way, if someone pirates software and likes it, that means that next time they are more likely to BUY it. Hell, when I was in high school, I pirated Photoshop, but now I own it at full retail, because I have a lot more money than I did back then, and I use it commercially. I also got my boss to buy it for everyone in the lab who needs to do image processing. In a very real sense, that act of piracy which was made possible by some of the old filesharing tools, actually made Adobe about ten thousand dollars over ten years. And they didn't lose out by providing me with a free copy, because I could never have afforded it in the first place, and even if I could have, I never would have risked that much money on a piece of software I didn't know how to use.
If the damage is tangible and measurable, why should the damages go to the government rather than the victim? If the police catch a group of thieves, do they keep the loot? The government does. By keeping the money that rightfully belongs to those who were harmed, they become the same as thieves.
Slashdot Mirror
You shouldn't insult people you don't understand. People go to McDonalds because they have children, and both parents work. They don't have TIME to prepare nutritious food. They need something quick and easy.
;).
A couple of years ago, when I was living alone working as a chemist, I worked long hours and had no-one to prepare food for me. In a year I gained 15 pounds. I've leveled that off. My hours are even longer now, but I have someone who cooks delicious, healthy food for me now
And before you ask, yes, my mother moved in with me.
Mod parent up. Global warming isn't science, it's politics.
Think about how many calories are in a bag of carrots versus a bag of doritos. Measured per calorie, vegetables are MUCH more expensive.
Of course, most of the food I eat is cooked from scratch, and we grow our own vegetables, so eating healthy is fairly cheap, but it takes a LOT of time, time that most 2-worker households don't have.
I think he's referring more to the "special sauce".
It's not a free market when government interferes (regulates) to the extent that it is almost impossible to start a new phone company.
I wouldn't insist anything. I think that such election laws are bad, because they interfere with free speech, which is a top level right. I'm just pointing out that the actions taken by the German company are likely illegal, and giving a parallel in terms of US law.
Buncha damn Frenchies.
God is dead! -- Nietzsche
Nietzsche is dead! -- God
Cheers,
When, EXACTLY, did God say that?
By the time they get to that point, it will already be too late. Just because the first step in fascism isn't into an oven doesn't mean that we should just except it.
And the Pirate Party is a major party in Germany.
Which party do the owners belong to now?
It's more like giving all the Republicans free air time on your network, while not allowing Democrats to even buy airtime. It's in blatant violation of God knows how many campaign laws. Well, I say that, but I have no idea what the law is like in Germany. I would think that they would be pretty strict with such things though.
You might want to check YOUR history. The recession that followed the closing of the SECOND central bank (in 1836) was a result of the end of the business cycle caused by that very same central bank. If GW had shut down the Fed last year, this recession still would have happened, it just wouldn't have been as long and severe as it is going to be.
The panic of 1907 was primarily caused by government interference in the markets, IE the Hepburn Act of 1906, which set a cap on railroad rates, causing shortages of freight cars, meaning that many farmers couldn't get their goods to market, thus disrupting the largely agriculture dependent economy. This was on top of an attempt to corner the market in copper (similar attempts still occur with central banks).
You also fail to mention that all of those Panics that occurred without a central bank never hit main street, or if they did, the effects lasted a year or two at most. With the Fed in charge of banking, they took the end of a stock market bubble and turned it into a decade long Depression that caused the starvation of millions in the breadbasket of the world. To this day, farmers are paid not to farm, and perverse incentives have now worked their way into the system such that fantastic risks are rewarded if they succeed, where they are bailed out if they fail.
Bubbles and corrections happen. When the government gets involved things only get worse, because they muddy the waters and introduce enormous amounts of waste. They also bring the effects of the panics to main street by bailing out these foolish companies with taxpayer money, or worse, destroy the value of the dollar by printing money. In any event, you still need to look at your history, as EVERY FIAT CURRENCY in the history of the world has failed, ending in hyperinflation. The United States has managed to fend it off for almost 40 years by exporting our inflation to other countries, but that is very risky, as all those dollars are still lurking out there, waiting for a crisis of confidence to flood back into this country and buy up every durable good in sight, bidding up the price of everything, until one day we wake up penniless paupers with wheelbarrows full of dollars, and nothing to spend it on.
You certainly can assign different values to different lives. Insurance adjusters do it every day. You don't see secret service personnel guarding Miss Davis down the street do you? Of course not, her life isn't nearly as valuable as that of the President. That said, it is true that value is something that is assigned by people, however, once should take inputs into account when one is placing a value on something. Otherwise, an acorn would cost the same as a ten year old transplanted oak. Would you trade a hundred year old oak tree for an acorn? That is what you are doing, when you sacrifice the mother's life for the baby. It isn't a crude calculation, it's common sense. The "oh noes dead babies" response steals freedom from parents, and hurts society.
If you think children's lives are so valuable, you could live like a monk and donate all your money to starving children in Africa. You won't though, because you are making rational decisions based on self interest, which is the primary mechanism of action of any economy, of which life is a subset. Indeed, you probably do more good for far more children by going about your daily business than you would by your other actions, because your continued involvement in the economy is valuable, and that value spreads around the world and multiplies itself. The mother's continued existence will allow for many more children to be born in the future, and for them to have better lives (rather than having one child being raised by a single father).
The rail system was one of the targets of the massive Keynesian spending packages they pushed out in an ultimately futile attempt to return to the good times (the 80's). The bank bailouts were another instance, just a different symptom of the same disease (ie government stimulus). The stimulus failed spectacularly, and they wound up with a nice rail system, and a crushing amount of debt. Luckily for them, the Japanese people are savers, so they have managed to survive. Americans have no savings, so there is absolutely no counterbalance to government debt.
Basically, any attempt to build such a system by the government is destined to be nothing more than a spectacular waste of money, and will likely do nothing save to drive us deeper into debt.
Write us back in six months when half of your economies have collapsed and tell us how you're doing. In the meantime, how's Iceland these days? Ireland and Spain are said to be on the verge of collapse as well.
There are no free markets in a world where all currencies are issued at will by central banks. Any nation with a central bank is destined for hyperinflation and eventual collapse so long as they rely on that bank for their currency.
We'd go through lots of babies. Of course, they would all be animal babies. We'd probably work the kinks out with chimps.
From chimps to people shouldn't be that big of a leap.
Mod parent up. A book with writing in it is far more valuable than a blank notebook. It's the same with people. If the child dies, you can make another one in less than a year, if the mother dies, it'll take twenty years to replace her.
Did you consider the fact that Japan put themselves into an enormous amount of debt to build that system, one that will take multiple generations to pay off, and that it caused the "lost decade" of economic stagnation that they still haven't recovered from?
After you think about that for a while, you should realize that our national debt is ALREADY that high. Going deeper into debt to build such a system that has limited utility will probably destroy the economy to such an extent that the United States will cease to be a viable political entity.
Well, I scanned in a dollar bill, and sent three million copies of it to the Swedish court. I think that should satisfy them.
If you want to use the billy club of the state to enforce your monopoly, you should have to pay for it. If the initial copyright lasts a certain amount of time, you should be able to renew it each year for a slowly increasing amount of money (say the amount goes up 50% per year). Big corporations could keep their moneymakers protected for a long time, until it became unprofitable, and abandonware would go into the public domain, where it can be reused by those still interested in it.
As a commercial software developer, you should know that those who pirate software tend not to use it for commercial purposes. In much the same way as my mother wouldn't have paid to go see any of the Madea movies, but she downloaded some and watched them on her computer. The producers of that movie lost nothing in that transaction, because she never would have paid in the first place. However, since she liked them so much, she went to see the latest one in the theater.
In much the same way, if someone pirates software and likes it, that means that next time they are more likely to BUY it. Hell, when I was in high school, I pirated Photoshop, but now I own it at full retail, because I have a lot more money than I did back then, and I use it commercially. I also got my boss to buy it for everyone in the lab who needs to do image processing. In a very real sense, that act of piracy which was made possible by some of the old filesharing tools, actually made Adobe about ten thousand dollars over ten years. And they didn't lose out by providing me with a free copy, because I could never have afforded it in the first place, and even if I could have, I never would have risked that much money on a piece of software I didn't know how to use.
Almost. It's really for the state putting the people corporations don't like in jail.
Eh. Same thing.
> (except in the sorts of backwards parts of the world where women aren't allowed to drive).
You mean like Lubbock?
If the damage is tangible and measurable, why should the damages go to the government rather than the victim? If the police catch a group of thieves, do they keep the loot? The government does. By keeping the money that rightfully belongs to those who were harmed, they become the same as thieves.
Of course, you'll have no right to complain when they institute the troll tax.