Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Talking points? (Score 1) 436 436

Bernie v Paul v Trump would be interesting and eventful if Paul pulled enough in from either side of the electorate to keep from drowning one or the other parties. Rand could do the staunch Classic Libertarian (not Ayn Rand or anarcho-capitalist) thing and, maybe, get enough visibility.

The Libertarian Party has some issues... It has been co-opted by folks who are ashamed Republicans and they are a vocal minority. It is associated with Ayn Rand. The actual platform ideals do not fit on a bumper sticker or make good talking points for thirty-second blurbs. This is a problem.

I typed you out a novella, by the way, in another section. You may find it amusing. I did not proofread it, caveat emptor.

Comment Re:Talking points? (Score 1) 436 436

The types of charitable giving that I typically do are for those that can not do for themselves - like disaster relief, the FSF, or others that enable people to do things on their own, such as Heifer International and I sponsor a scholarship program at Kent's Hill. Things like that... I wonder what his donations look like in that area. Those sorts of things speak volumes.

Keep in mind that, for now, I can not think of any particular thing that Trump has said that I intrinsically disagree with - nothing totally false and unacceptable. The same is not true with Hillary, in my opinion. I can not, and will not, vote for her. For now, I am entirely undecided but it is still unlikely that he will get my vote - there is likely to be a candidate more in line with my particular desires. I am not altruistic - I will not be voting for the general good of society, I will be voting for the party most likely to benefit me because I am a greedy and egotistical asshole.

I suppose, I should also make it clear, that I am a leftist but not in a traditional sense. I support the idea of a strong social safety net and providing for those who can not or will not do so on their own. Why? It helps stop them from stealing my shit. I like my shit - that is why I bought it. I am a greedy bastard. I support the idea of roads, libraries, police forces, and firefighters. They enable people to be productive. Their productivity is something I can capitalize on. I want everybody to create wealth - so I can have it. The leftists just have not realized I am a mole...

If I can not vote for someone who is going to make me money then I am going to vote for someone who will at least let me keep it. I do not mind taxes - not at all. I wish they were better spent but, frankly, taxes are less than I would pay to have a private company provide all the services I want. Those taxes are actually an investment - they do stuff like help me keep my shit. I already mentioned how much I love my shit - that is why I bought it in the first place. I am an asshole but I am honest about it. Anyone who can realistically show that they have a plan that enables me to be more productive (and acquire more shit) has my vote. That may be Trump. It sure as hell is not Hillary. It probably is not Sanders - he has some blanks to fill in. It might be Rand Paul but i worry that he is just riding his father's coattails. It will most certainly not be Bush.

I will be voting for myself. I am running for state Senate in Maine. We have lumped the Independent and Greens together here so I am an Independent/Green candidate. The signatures are already submitted. I am funding my campaign entirely on my own. I will accept not one single donation - not even from citizens. I am beholden to nobody and my choices are my own but will do my level best to represent the needs and desires of my constituents. My job will be to fairly represent them as honestly and openly as possible. I want to help them accumulate more shit. That way, I can find a way to get some of it. Besides, it will stop them from stealing *my* shit if they have enough of their own and have means to be productive to earn their own.

I suppose, I am the rare breed that is truly independent. I am likely to win my seat. My district has a habit of voting out incumbents and electing third party candidates. The guy who is currently in office is *scratches that out*... The guy is disliked by a majority if people are being honest with me. I do have self-interest in mind, I will be advocating for a Geek Appreciation Week where IT workers get an extra paid week off. *nods* (No, not really.) My entire platform is, pretty much, here is a list of everything I have done wrong. On the back of that paper you will find what I have learned from each of those mistakes and how it has changed my outlook.

If you want to vote or me and do not live in Maine, I can take care of that. I will get you an absentee ballot. You want a ballot? I will get you one. No, no... Again, I kid... I can see some LSJ reporter digging through my posts and only quoting part of that. I should probably delete it but, well, we have internet in my district. I can publish a URL. I am not sure how well honesty and being truly independent will serve me but, frankly, it is worth the shot and I might be able to make a very small change as a very small voice in a very small area. I can hope and, if not me, I can hope the person that runs against me is going to try to do similar. (Right now I may be running unopposed.)

Comment Re:Let the market decide. (Score 1) 436 436

I dunno... I think the EV craze might exist without the subsidies BUT it would not be as quick or as prevalent. There were people who bought them before the subsidies existed as far as I know. I do not recall there being subsidies when Tesla first brought out the roadster way back when. Well, not at the federal level - I think one or two of the west coast states may have had subsidies?

I think the market could decide but that it would not be quick enough if we really want to change things in a timely fashion. There are people who can and will elect to pay more to be environmentally friendly. We do it because we think it is the appropriate thing to do. Some of us, like myself - I hope, are far from zealots. I do not have, for example, an EV. I eat dead animal flesh. I have a giant RV and am so eager to be content I use that RV to tow a car behind it so that I can more easily move around at a long-term stop. I have many firearms and love to hunt. So, no... I am not some sort of eco-nut - I don't think.

I suspect (or, hope, really) that there are more people like myself. I hope that there are more of me that are not eco-nuts as well. But, if it takes the kooks to get things rolling then, at least, perhaps they have done something useful.

I could get behind taxing emissions but I would worry about how it would impact the impoverished. While they might be exempted from a number of taxes they would almost certainly be affected due to externalities as costs for most everything will increase. Cap and trade is, I feel, a shell game - at best. It is more likely to be some abused industry that preys on people and lives off the government's teat by virtue of being a mandate. I mean, yeah, it sounds like a good idea but let's be honest for a minute and think about how it will likely manifest in the real world.

No, I do not have solutions for this. I have some ideas but they are not important as nobody ever listens to me. I do not expect that to change.

Comment Re:I don't get it,... five a day? (Score 1) 335 335

I am a hell of a cook, I just do not really like food. I eat once or twice (at most) a day. I have a neighbor that I pay to clean my house and she usually cooks a big meal which I eat over a few days. I sometimes cook my own food but, often, after I have cooked it there is something that makes me no longer really want to eat it. I was an opiate abuser for many years and that slows down the digestive system a great deal. When I quit my appetite was huge and I ate a lot but that did not last long. I just really do not like eating. I would most certainly not benefit from this drink, however. I would not consume it. If it were a pill? I might eat that. If it were a pill that got me high as all hell? I'd eat the fuck out of that - I'd shoot that shit.

I do have a sibling who has gastroperesis (I have no idea how to spell it, basically it means her stomach and intestines do not work - at all) and she lives because she gets her nutrients through a pick line in something called TPN and uses a strange computerized pump. I pay for some of her medical care and it is expensive - like $900/wk for the TPN alone. The tubing, computer, etc... That stuff is very costly. I do not know the exact figure but it probably works out to about $1500/wk with all of her TPN supplies. She is disabled so the government covers the majority of the stuff but the only company that was eligible to take care of her supplies was inept so it was simpler to get a different company, that does not accept government insurance, and does the job better. *sighs* Fortunately, I owned my own company and was able to sell it at a great price and retire. It is still a bit of a burden.

I could complain about all sorts of things in her area of life but it would do me no good. One prescription she was only allowed so much of (about half of what the doctor recommended) and, if she paid for any additional number of that med they would stop paying for what they were already covering. It is pricey... You do what you can, I suppose. Any insurance policy I could find that would actually cover even as much as is already covered is actually more expensive than what I am already paying. It reminds me that there really are cracks that people can fall through and, once they are there, there is little hope of getting anywhere. I imagine that there are many like her, she indicates that there are, but are unable to really do anything and have nobody to help.

But, enough digression...

Comment Re: They aren't revolutionizing shit. (Score 1) 335 335

Yup. For every dead animal they do not eat - I will eat two. I am old and I still can not get much heavier than 170 pounds no matter how much I eat. I am exactly 172 pounds on my scale and I have been that exact weight for as long as I have owned the scale. I do not seem to lose or gain any weight. Strange, really.

Comment Re:They aren't revolutionizing shit. (Score 1) 335 335

Wait... I am paying to feed you?!?

Actually, I am okay with that. If you were hungry I would expect you to steal for food. I'd rather people not do that. If anything, I think they should make it more readily available and work to take the social stigma out of benefits. I suspect more people would apply if it were not embarrassing. Well, I am assuming it is embarrassing, I do not really know. It should not be, however. When I am supreme rule of the galaxy, I will make sure to change that.

Comment Re:headline is misleading (Score 1) 436 436

I do follow that site. That is kind of my point. We can blame the voter for being naive and/or gullible but, when we really examine it, the fault of lying politicians is the politicians themselves. One key thing to remember is that a lot of them seem to think that they will be able to do many things as president but the job really does not have that much power in reality. Either way, the fault lies with the liar not the person lied to. Though they may share some culpability the blame still resides with the liar. Well, it does in my universe. My universe may not be exactly glued to reality. You're free to opine on such, of course.

Comment Re:Let the market decide. (Score 1) 436 436

I think my only point was that you said, "You don't." No, some of us do. See the EV craze for instance. That began with early adopters who did so not because it was cheaper but because they felt it was the responsible thing to do. I suspect the market could decide this, in time, but I do not think it will be allowed to decide it. I suppose the value of that is debatable but, yeah, there are a number of folks who will "do the right thing" simply because it is the right thing. There are others who will do it because it is trendy. Others will do it because they are contrary folks. Eventually enough will adopt it and the price will be more reasonable - maybe. I do it because I can and I try to minimize my impact so I can feel better about my abuses in other areas.

Comment Re:Thanks big government (Score 1) 436 436

I love my Russian fireplace. It has vents to the whole house and the fans inside the vents are on thermostats. A Russian fireplace is awesome. I have plenty of acreage and will never run out of wood. I harvest it myself and have a wood splitter so there is not a whole bunch of labor that I do not like - I love felling trees (it is an art and a science) and I have a tractor with a heavy duty 10 ton winch so I can tote tree length to a yard and buck it up there and trailer it out for processing to 24" lengths. If I ever get lazy(er) I can have wood cut, split, and delivered. The only modification I made to the fireplace design is it has a custom forged door that allows me to cut off or control the air intake.

Many people are inclined to skip the idea of wood and see it as bad for the environment. Done properly it is the perfect renewable resource. Clear cutting is silly. Timber stand improvement is excellent and wonderful for the ecology - animals live around areas where the land changes from fields to trees or from trees to water or whatnot. (There's a name for those types of environments but I forgot the name.) Anyhow, animals live in areas near those breaks - not deep in the forest typically. It is great for them, great for us, and great for the environment in general. Err... So long as it is properly managed. There is that caveat.

Comment Re:Let the market decide. (Score 1) 436 436

I would choose to pay more for clean energy because it impacts the environment less. I already do pay more for electricity than I need to - I have solar and wind. I replaced the panels before they could pay themselves off because the newer panels are more efficient than the ones I had installed seven years ago.

I pay more in giving than I need to - I need to pay taxes. I also pay quite a bit in donations to charitable causes. Much more than I need to.

I pay more for consumables than I need to. I prefer the higher quality. I prefer food that tastes better. I prefer clothing that looks good and is comfortable to wear.

Just because you're cheap does not mean that the rest of us are. If this is something the market can fairly sort then, by all means, let it do it. But do not go assuming that people will be cheap just because you find shopping at Wal*Mart to be acceptable and because you do not value the local retailers, products, or produce.

Comment Re:Talking points? (Score 1) 436 436

I will, most likely, not be voting for Trump. I am not a fan. I worry that his success will make him unable to objectively view the needs of those who have not been successful. I suspect it will be Trump vs. Clinton. I am old, I have seen the pendulum swing in both directions and it is due to change again any time now. I suspect that this means that the Republicans will win this election and that it will mean Trump is in the Whitehouse. (Opera did not like the word Whitehouse. It suggested whorehouse instead. Very apt.)

I am a huge fan of donating. I donate a lot of money to varied causes because I think that is my end of the social bargain. So far as I know, Trump is not really a huge player there - though he does some donating. I would like to know which charities he has donated to in the past and what percentage of his income that was. Tax records are nice but not all donations go on tax records and there is no reason to list those that are not going to reduce your tax liability. You can only donate so much to reduce liabilities, after that you are donating without the tax benefit - which is well and good for me as I do not donate to get tax relief, I donate because I feel it is the honorable thing to do.

Back to Hillary... The populace has not seen much good come out of the current administration. This has, in my observations, historically been an indicator that the opposing party was due to win. Hillary is unlikely to win the presidential election - there is too much dirt to throw at her. This would not necessarily be a problem but her dirt is too widespread, meaning that there is something to dislike about her for everyone. We, the nerd vote, are annoyed with her private email server and the implications that has - as one example. The Middle East fiasco is a reason for the anti-violence folks to not like her (though I do not see many of them voting for Trump). And, obviously, there are more issues but they spread across a broad spectrum and anyone can find a reason to dislike her and this gives plenty of ammunition to her opponents.

At the other side, we have a bunch of Republicans nominally running. Trump is likely to get the GOP nomination in the primaries. He has lots of dirt but very little political dirt. He has no public vote history to track. He has no experience in the arena. While he might do things well it is a shot in the dark. An interesting thing to watch will be the mental gymnastics that people will do to vote for him after claiming they would not vote for Obama because he was not an experienced politician.

I, myself, will likely be doing as I always do which is throwing my vote away on a third party candidate. The Republicans that fail in the primaries may well do what they have often done and co-opt the Libertarian name (they are not, they have no concept of liberty) and run as such in hopes of remaining relevant. It should be interesting but I am not seeing a single candidate that I think is really qualified for the job and has a reasonable chance at success. I do kind of like Sanders but he is unlikely to get the primaries. I expect anyone who claims they will not vote for Hillary will be called a sexist (exactly like I, a partially black man, was a racist for not voting for Obama) and I expect that tactic to be successful.

Anyhow... I have enough popcorn for everybody. I planned ahead. It should be about as amusing as a three ring circus with Down's Syndrome afflicted persons as the center ring act. Which is to say, it should be pretty damned amusing but it is really inappropriate to laugh.

Comment Re:Talking points? (Score 1) 436 436

Thank you for reminding me. I am an idiot. I was really concerned with some of the moderation that I have seen over the past couple of months and this thread (I have mentioned it already in this thread) was one that caught my attention and not in a good way. I had forgotten that people tend to really be unable to be objective when the election cycle is in play. Yes, I had forgotten how bad it truly was. Yes, that makes me an idiot. It does not, however, excuse those moderators who are engaged in such acts.

I suppose that it is time to either just ignore moderations for a while or to actually use my mod points to counteract this as much as I can. I do not typically moderate, it is just not who I am. However, this may be a good time for me to do so. I understand that we humans are not very good about being objective but I do have high standards for this site and, usually, /. kind of sort of meets those standards (for varied degrees of meets). It is pretty clear what the moderations are for and pretty clear that it is not objective. So, again, thanks for reminding me why I have been seeing this trend for a couple of months and why this thread stands out in particular.

Comment Re:Could be? (Score 1) 436 436

Did you miss the fact that they were clearly talking about Bill Clinton? I think you will find that *both* Clintons are now in play. We have a double-Clinton effect. ;) It is almost as bad as a Triple Bush.

As an aside, Bill Clinton is the only person that I have voted for that managed to win the presidential election. I am nearing 60. I consider my failure to vote for the winning candidate to be a good thing. I generally vote for third parties and always have. It is still holding my nose and voting but it is somewhat more comforting. Sort of like I imagine a rape victim might feel if the rapist left them a few thousand dollars as payment afterwards.

That is probably not my best analogy.

The gent who wakes up and finds himself a success hasn't been asleep.

Working...