It's called "Logan's Run"

Hello again. This time I wont try to have my cake and eat it too, as I have not moderated in this article.

"So lobbying can have good outcomes."

Yes, and a broken ( old style ) clock is correct twice a day. The occasional "good" accident does not mean accidents are good.
( where "good" means has a good outcome ). So, if I were writing a constitution, things would be different.

"It is difficult to separate the feelings that someone bought a result you don't like from an objective analysis of whether what you wanted them to do was rejected after an analysis of the issues"

True, but from where I sit too many things look way too purchased.
Also, https://www.commondreams.org/v...

And it is not about "what I want". I would like for politicians to properly represent their constituents, like they are supposed to.
I really dont think they do that.

"In this case, a "tell me how much I owe" version of federal taxes -- I seem to recall that there was such a system in place many years ago (1970's?) where the taxpayer would send in a form saying "tell me what you want" and the IRS did. I don't hear much about that anymore, so I suspect that it died, and why it died may give a clue to why it wasn't a good idea to bring it back. I don't know."

Lobbying?

"( on buggy whip manufacture ): Why not? If you grant that there are sometimes good outcomes from lobbying, just how do you write this new law prohibiting buggy whip makers while still allowing the useful lobbying?"

Why single out buggy whip manufacturers? Why should there be so much energy expended disallowing stupid. Why not make it so we make the exceptions ( if any ) be the smart things? Strikes me as bass ackwards.

"What SHOULD be the rule is that decisions are made based on merit, and anyone who wants to lobby should have the right to make that speech."

Exactly right. Without extra privileges for those with money. And corporations excluded entirely without exception. ( their owners, managers, stockholders, employees all each individually have the aforementioned right, no additional is needed ),.

It's not about buying votes, it's about buying legislation.

I don't doubt that companies that lobby for things feel a very real sense of needing what they are lobbying for.
I also don't doubt that there are times when 3rd parties are served or even well served by the outcomes of such lobbying.

But these things ought not be decided based on who has money and who doesn't.

I am all for impacts being analyzed and plans being made to make sure people are not unduly disrupted, but decisions should be made on merit.

We should not allow buggy whip manufactures to be able to lobby to ensure their livelihood.

( and why is it that when it is people's livelihoods, the politics seems to be "go for it", but for corporation's livelihoods it is "oh, wait a moment, cant have that"? )
( rhetorical question, I know the answer. )

It seems to keep coming back to get money out of politics. For me. I know there are those that disagree. ( I think they are are wrong as "money out of politics" is likely to succeed ).

Thanks!

So, does TIVO work with OTA HD signals?

Quite. Now, who added the single line spoken of to the farm bill that opened the door for this?

It is weird how so many anti-freedom people like yourself are so quick to claim majority support for what Eich did. Sure, a slim majority were anti-gay marriage back when he tried to enshrine his religious dogma into law. But the overwhelming majority did not support "the cause" enough to spend money on it. By his own actions he revealed himself to be an extremist.

Furthermore, the whole idea that being part of a majority somehow excuses a person from judgment and consequences of their actions is itself morally bankrupt. The civil rights movement was a struggle against majority opinion too.

BTW, the freedom to restrict another person's freedom is freedom in name alone.

Maybe it's whatever they use to replace Lead in Unleaded gasoline...

In case no one noticed, MS view on security has changed a LOT since Windows 95 and IE 6.

A stopped clock is right twice a day.

In at least one universe, yes.

I plan on being a zombie. I plan on leading the zombies. We are talking zombie apocalypse, right?

Slashdotters tend to have vaguely higher intelligence, judging by their impeccable skill at moderating posts and speed of typing "frist post". Completely ignoring science as any good zombie would, I deduce that their brains must be tastier and more wholesomely satisfying to my soon-to-be-acquired tastes for human brains.

Nobody asked which side I'd be on after the apocalypse. I plan on being on the winning side. Now, go make me a sammich... with your ears as bread.

Scientists not 100% certain that climate change isn't natural.

It's all well and good until it collides with a manned SAR Helicopter, killing a few paramedics...

> I'm not sure what the exact charges are.

Racketeering.