Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Another strategy (Score 1) 110

And if you are one of the many poor slobs whose health insurance is "go to the ER and hope they write off the check because I am in poverty and have no hope of paying it back"?

Recall that several congress critters cited exactly that scenario when they were debating against single payer health reform ("We already have single-payer health care, just go to your local Emergency Room!")

Comment Re:Simply put: (Score 1) 455

Not directly but then you need to look at all the related expenses that flow from the DEA's activities. To wit:
* Incarceration costs for non-violent drug offenders
* Court costs for said drug offenders
* Increased police footprint for drug surveillance
* SWAT teams and other paramilitary-esque police teams used to serve warrants to non-violent drug offenders
* Wrongful death suites from when said SWAT teams raid the wrong house and shoot someone (or someone's pet) that had absolutely nothing to do with drugs
* Maintenance of "fusion centers" and other data sharing services between disparate law enforcement organizations

and so on...

Comment Re:One way to stop it perhaps. (Score 1) 478

(yes, I am replying to myself, bite me mods)

Alternatively, if you want a national sales tax, basically the VAT that the UK has, you are still shafting the poor as that tax will be applied to food and other essentials, driving up their costs. The rich could soak the costs with little problem but the poor would not. Basically it all comes down to the size of the pie, if I take a quarter of an 8 inch pie that does not leave a lot for everyone else. If I take a quarter of a 24 inch pie that still leaves plenty of pie for everyone else.

Of course, you could create exemptions from the VAT but that would destroy the simplicity of it and open the door for abuse all over again. (Would caviar be exempt from the tax? It's a food after all...a luxury food yes but still technically a food)

Comment Re:One way to stop it perhaps. (Score 1) 478

The issue with a flat or "fair" tax is that it still shafts the poor. Let's say the tax is 10% of gross income, apply that to a median family making $50,000 per year. That makes for a $5,000 tax, leaving $45,000 for the family to live on. All in all, that's not a whole lot to live on, enough to pay rent, utilities, bills, and maybe save a a little for college, vacations, or a rainy day fund. Now let's apply that tax to a family making $500,000 per year. Yes, they pay more, $50,000 to be precise, but that leaves $450,000 for the family to live on, more than enough to live very comfortably. Thus, the Fair Tax isn't really fair, it's actually regressive in that it disproportionately affects the poor compared to the rich.

Comment Re:Not controlled by Red Hat? (Score 1) 83

Rebuttal: RHEL derived Linuxes such as CentOS and Scientific Linux are actually able to maintain binary compatibility with RHEL They have access to the same source as the paying customers, they just don't get the updates quite as fast because of the delay between Read Hat publishing the patch and the third-party package maintainers compiling and uploading said patch to their respective repositories.

Fedora has always billed itself a test-bed for new, potentially unstable technologies. You don't want potentially broken packages? Don't use Fedora.

Slashdot Top Deals

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.

Working...