Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Socalim is organized psychopathy (Score 1) 290

You're supposed to outgrow "fair" by age 8 or so, you know. The world's not supposed to be fair, it's supposed to be righteous, or failing that, just. Fair is pretty lame: imagine a court system in which guilt or innocence was judged by a perfectly fair coin flip. Totally impartial, unbiased, fair, and stupid.

CEOs, movie actors, and professional athletes all get paid a lot, and for the same reason, but there are so few of each we're not getting less because of it. Is it just? Hard to say: they have a large audience, and when they do well at their jobs they do make a lot of people happy. The idiots get paid well too, but that's life for you.

But if you keep obsessing on targets of envy or outrage, you'll always be unhappy, as there will always be guys like that. Get over it, if you want to be happy. Better to focus on a system that makes your life better, most people's life better, than to focus on taking away from people. The more you learn to feel joy in the success of others, and the more you do to help others be successful (even those who don't deserve it), the happier you'll be.

Comment Re:Socalim is organized psychopathy (Score 1) 290

P/E is how you deduce earnings from valuations (which are no more crazy than they were since the invention of the publically traded corporation in the 1600s).

Another metric would be executive compensation to median wage

That has everything to do with envy and jealousy, and little to do with how much people actually get paid. If the CEO get paid 300x what the median worker does, but his company has 100,000 employees? Again, math.

It's funny you mention bubbles. We seem to have a lot of them. That would be capital sucking royally at it's job.

And almost always they're broke afterwards. Bailouts are the exception, not the norm.

Perhaps once the more egregious abuses are hammered out and the question can be discussed rationally and publically

So right, you don't actually care if it's already fair, you just want to parrot talking points like a poorly-written chatbot. Fair enough, you're normal for /. these days.

Comment Re:A more important question is... (Score 1) 194

And just such an adult wrote

Critics who treat "adult" as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. And in childhood and adolescence they are, in moderation, healthy symptoms. Young things ought to want to grow. But to carry on into middle life or even into early manhood this concern about being adult is a mark of really arrested development. When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up.

Grow up kid, and put aside your fears.

Comment Re: If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... (Score 2) 194

Doesn't matter how you feel, that's pretty cut n dry in the eyes of the law

Fucking stupid laws that hurt society should be changed. Punishing stupid fan-hating companies that take advantage of such nonsense is a good start. Just because somethings technically legal, doesn't mean you're not a total dick for doing it.

Comment Re:Summary is flat out WRONG (Score 2) 290

Silva does not seem to understand that searches at the border are, by definition, reasonable and therefore exempt from the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement.

What kind of totalitarian fascist drivel are you spouting there, man? Reasonable? Are you insane? The US Constitution as Amended is perfectly clear that you need a specific reason that a specific person might be guilty of something, as reviewed by a judge, before you can search them. There's no "unless we're scared" exception in there. I checked. Twice.

* Border checks are usually an unconstitutional search.
* TSA searches are clearly unconstitutional
* Searches required before entering a courthouse: blatantly unconstitutional

The only argument for any of these obviously unconstitutional searches is "but we're scared!" Tough shit: no such exception.

But there I go again, pretending the UC Constitution is somehow relevant to the 21st century US. Silly me.

Comment Re:Socalim is organized psychopathy (Score 2) 290

Define "fair share" please. Seriously, pick a percentage. Most business require significant capital, and choosing investments wisely is vital to the economy (see bubbles for why), so capital should get more than 0%, right? So what's the labor/capital ratio for pre-salary profits that seems right to you - what part to labor as pay, what part to capital as net profits? 80% labor? More?

Once you've committed to a number, look up total US corporate earnings as a percentage of total US salaries, and see if we're actually that different from what you think is fair (publically traded companies are about half of the US economy, and the P/E of the S&P500 is a good stand-in for that). Of course, most small business owners also work their asses off, so you might want to give them some credit (that's the non-public-stock half of the economy).

Willing to do the homework, or just want to rant in ignorance?

Comment Nope; kill off all guest worker programs (Score 1) 337

Seriously, kill ALL guest worker programs. Foreign companies representing foreign gov, and nations, will ALLWAYS cheat on these. Instead, we need change green card programs in which we cut the number of ppl from each nation in half, and then apply that total count to bringing in ppl on needed skills as green card. By bringing them here, most will stay and keep the skills going. In addition, for anybody brought on needed skills, they need to be paid at least average for that position and location.

Comment Re:Hmm... (Score 1) 203

Yes, yes, I get it, "property is theft" and all that. It's an old song. Funny thing is, any productive use of land can be construed as damaging to someone else, if you try hard enough. If the goal is to prevent economic growth, there's always a way to succeed.

How about instead we form an agency to enable you to do anything reasonable with your land, by providing you a reasonable way to go about it? Its no wonder we've had economic stagnation for so long, with a generation or two raised to believe that "the only reason people own the land is because at some point in history someone stole it" and that "profit" is a bad word and so on. Sheesh.

Comment Re:Hmm... (Score -1, Troll) 203

"EPA is underfunded" you say? And you take the EPA's word for that? Of course you do: for a totalitarian statist, the right answer to every question is "more government".

A better alternative: the EPA just sucks at its mission. Get rid of it. Replace it with something better.

Two is not equal to three, even for large values of two.