Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:AGW (Score 1) 961

3% is not 1/3 of my finger. And if your reading skills were better than your math skills, you'd notice that it's 0.003675% of total atmosphere. So, that's about the same amount of my finger that probably wore off while typing this response. God why am I feeding the trolls?

Comment Re:Only as "free" as your ability to defend it (Score 2) 692

I think the GP was referring to those who gain a majority of their subsistence through some sort of government payout rather than those who are working to better their lot in life and might need occasional help. With the per median income of that area above $70k per year, I don't think that's the group that was being referred to. The term "productive" is rather broad, and I think you're probably using it in a different way than the GP. For example if we asked "How much wealth does a bus boy generate as compared to a CEO?" compared to "Who does more physical labor, the bus boy or the CEO?". Or am I misunderstanding your statement?

Comment Re:make full time 32 hours a week (Score 2) 200

Why only one day a week? If we gave some sort of incentive for companies to let their people work from home more often, then they save on office space and we save on transportation costs.

I used to be 100% remote for a large company, then they spend millions renovating 2 floors of office space and required everyone within 50 miles to be on site every day. Those who were more than 50 miles were let go shortly after. Now workers spend hours driving to work, only to be less productive because it's too damn noisy. The only answer I've ever gotten for this is "because they said so". I'm not sure who came up with the idea, how it got approved but I'm willing to put money on Power Point being used in it. Some of the worst decisions in business history have been made to look good with that damn program.

Do the math, I live an hour away. That's 10 hours a week, 52 weeks a year. That's 520 hours a year. 13 work weeks each year spend driving to and from a job that has been proven successful when done from home office. 20,000 miles at a cost of over 9,000 (at $0.45 per mile) each year.

Oh, and they already issue laptops and require employees to have high speed broadband for on call duty.

Comment Re:From heat? (Score 1) 103

I think it's neat tech alright, but I'm not sure converting the heat energy to light energy to electricity is going to be more efficient than converting heat energy to electricity. Since TFA doesn't seem to give us any efficiency stats, it's hard to tell.

Comment Re:Rewrite the Constitution or face default! (Score 1) 1042

What congress passed in April was a "FULL-YEAR CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS ACT" http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-112publ10/content-detail.html which is not a full budget, and yet, your point is not invalid because it does fund spending through the end of the year.

We may as well call it a budget for convenience, hell we can call it a purple giraffe if that's what you like. If we agree that I was wrong, and for all intents and purposes it was a budget, can you tell me when the last one was passed before that? My quick research shows that we were funded from 2007-2011 by continuing resolutions, is that correct?

Comment Re:Rewrite the Constitution or face default! (Score 1) 1042

Yes, all spending bills must start in the house so of course the budget must originate there, after the President sends his budget for consideration. Unfortunately, we haven't had a budget passed in something like 840 days now and have been operating under a continuing resolution until the end of FY2011 which was most recently presented and passed with minor spending cuts. As I understand it, the only reason the government wasn't shut down was the bill to make sure our military still got paid was not passed by the Senate. This is the same military the Senate is holding hostage now, along with the threat of default, Social Security and Medicare.

The reason our credit rating is in danger isn't necessarily the threat of default, but is that we have spent close to 9 trillion in the last 2.5 years and can't find cuts 1/3 that amount over 10 years because the senate and president refuse to even consider any bills that don't raise taxes on those who earn 250k or more a year.

I appreciate that we are a republic and not a democracy, plutocracy or monarchy. Presidents have limited power, and still get credit or blame for what happens during their administration, even if they didn't cause it. Fair or not, it's the way it is.

Your arguments on the Constitution are not without merit, and I don't believe that the President is authorized under the Constitution to make such an increase. It's been nice to have a well reasoned discussion with someone who has opposing views, without things turning ugly.

 

Comment Re:Rewrite the Constitution or face default! (Score 0) 1042

This is extortion. This is anti-American. Rep Mike Lee Admits Extortion.

In specific Tea Party Republicans are threatening to put the nation into default, holding the entire US economy and millions of lives hostage to pass their amendment to the Constitution. They want the nation to default because it will boost recruitment into their militias. They want a civil war and are apparently beyond compromise. .

So, you understand that there is enough tax revenue coming in to pay the interest on the debt, social security, medicaid/medicare, education, VA and active duty payrolls. Right? The only way those won't get paid is the government (executive branch) CHOOSES not pay them. There is no real risk to defaulting.

I'm not sure if you've ever had a discussion with a Tea Party member, most of them are fairly reasonable folks and want a return to a government who's spending and legislative powers are bound by the constitution. Sure, there are some nutters there, just like every other group in America.

Comment Re:How Microsoft of Them (Score 1) 250

If Google+ is to succeed, they need to stop with the invite-only nonsense. A social network is only as strong as its user-base, and Google+ remains questionable until it has enough people on it to make it worthwhile.

I disagree. By limiting the access to the service, it makes it a scarce resource and people who wouldn't be interested in it are now dying to get in because they have been told they can't. Besides, if even I can get an invite in, anyone who knows anyone can probably find a way in.

Slashdot Top Deals

Say "twenty-three-skiddoo" to logout.

Working...