I've been a member for some time but let it lapse a few years ago because it got to the point that the benefits didn't justify the expense. Or rather, the benefits hadn't justified the expense for some time, I finally got fed up hoping that might change. I finally noticed I wasn't getting my money's worth and pulled the plug on it. Much of ACM seems designed to extract maximum income from its membership. That gravy train is over, as far as I'm concerned.

I generally had this policy, but now that I've got $1500 deductible and $4500 out of pocket maximum, and this year am having to have cataract surgery, I went ahead and paid the $450 prep office visit bill. If the insurance company didn't negotiate it quickly and correctly, it's their loss because it's clear I'm going to exceed the out-of-pocket this year by enough that THEY will end up paying for anything they fail to properly negotiate. And in fact I've got another minor issue I'm going to be sure to take care of this year, because once the max is reached, everything else is free for that year. So for the rest of this year anyway, I've got the Caddilac plan.

I don't want a phone with ANY kind of keyboard, slide-out or virtual or whatever. A ONE button phone would be just fine. In fact, I don't even care if it has a screen, either, as I won't be looking at it. A phone is a mobile voice device, not a laptop or desktop computer, video game machine or TV. If I want something like that I'll get a tablet or laptop, not a phone. Take your instant messaging text and jam it up your ass.

The US may have a high corporate tax rate on paper, but not in actual practice:

http://www.financialsense.com/...

Given the military budgets are VASTLY different between the US and all other countries, comparing taxes with other countries makes no sense at all. Or do you figure the militaries aren't paid for by taxes? Or maybe you figure business gains no benefit from military operations, and therefore shouldn't have to foot the bill for them? Better look again, at least in the US, business gains PLENTY from the military expenditures, since much of the money is going to businesses that provide what the military needs. The US military is the biggest customer for a lot of US businesses. And as another user commented, plenty of these businesses don't pay ANY taxes (GE as one example).

You also might want to consider that many of the countries with "lower" corporate tax rates than the US have higher personal income rates. In addition, they don't spend anywhere near as much on a military.

If you think the corporate tax rate is high, compare it with the rates from the 1950s through 1980s. Then cry me a river.

If industry isn't thriving, it's not due to taxes and regulation, as there's nowhere near as much of those than there were decades ago. Taxes are down, wages are down, deregulation has been running rampant, and the oversight organizations haven't been doing their job (FDA,FCC,SEC,etc.). If industry still can't survive, could it be because the CEO's have run off with the profits and used the money to buy the politicians? Or maybe it's because employees can't afford to buy enough products anymore?

So in other words, Dropbox confirmed Snowden's claims.

A better system is a mixture of the better aspects of both capitalism and socialism. Getting the mix right is a challenge, but arguing for impossibilities like "a purely free market" or "pure socialism" are extremist and unrealistic.

Except I'm not talking about a phone, I'm using an iPad tablet.

Yes, they "cheat" more because that's how they learned to cope with the state. Any state. And given the American state's ethics, or I should say, near complete lack thereof, I see no reason to hold communist state emigre's adaptation behaviors against them. The IRS on the other hand, most likely has a different view.

You were socialized by your environment to be better at lying that telling the truth. You learned to "cheat" and it's easier than not at this point. Living in the US I once knew a Russian emigre who essentially was living in the US completely under the radar. He was an excellent and successful programmer and mathematician, but the way he did business with everyone was as if he needed to work-around or subvert the system, not because he was "unethical" but simply because it was what he knew best how to do.

Well, don't look to capitalism. Even Adam Smith recognized it's largely driven by the "invisible hand" of greed. Not exactly ethical, moral or responsible. Or for that matter, respectful of the individual and not particularly intelligent (pragmatic though, I suppose).

And if you doubt my assertion, read this: http://science.slashdot.org/co...