Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Not going to be as rosy as the YES! campaign sa (Score 1) 321

by bigpat (#47927259) Attached to: Scotland's Independence Vote Could Shake Up Industry
A smooth transition isn't a "handout", it would be in the best interest of both sides. Regardless of the outcome they still have to live side by side on the same island and will be a major trading partner. Amicable divorces are much better than pointlessly bitter ones.

Comment: Re:This isn't scaremongering. (Score 1) 321

by bigpat (#47926309) Attached to: Scotland's Independence Vote Could Shake Up Industry
I think it is quite clearly scare mongering or worse, threatening. The UK government agreed to this vote and they should be making assurances that whichever the outcome that the UK government will do its best to facilitate a peaceful and mutually beneficial transition. Two independent states can share a currency... the EU proves that currency unions are possible. And if the EU were to exclude Scotland, then that would be the first time the EU will have contracted instead of expanding which would undermine confidence in the EU itself just as it was regaining it. Certainly there will be costs to establishing and negotiating a transition, but to assume a worst case scenario and that people will act in a destructive way against their mutual interests out of some sort of royal spite is not helpful.

Comment: Re:Not going to be as rosy as the YES! campaign sa (Score 2) 321

by bigpat (#47926209) Attached to: Scotland's Independence Vote Could Shake Up Industry
I think it would be fairly cynical of the English side to allow a vote on independence and then screw over Scotland as an 'I told you so'. The best thing for everyone would be to facilitate a peaceful and mutually beneficial transition. That means cooperating with the Bank of Scotland to keep the Pound if they want to and doing nothing to make EU membership difficult. This isn't some sort of armed rebellion. The UK agreed to this vote. If the remaining UK screws over Scotland out of regret for allowing independence, then it would hurt the UK just as much as it would Scotland.

Comment: Re:Most taxes are legalized theft (Score 1) 299

by roman_mir (#47926195) Attached to: New Global Plan Would Crack Down On Corporate Tax Avoidance

Your claim that I am a 'terrible human being' noted. So what does that make you given the fact that your claim is based on my comment, which states that no human should be forced to be a slave to another human by anybody, especially by the violent power of the state?

What does that make you, a 'better' human being, to want to use the violent power of the state to force people to give up portion of their live involuntarily for any supposed benefit of anybody at all or for any reason whatsoever for that matter?

At the very minimum it makes your position extremely inconsistent within itself, claiming that being what you are a 'better' comparing to what I am, while declaring that people need to be forced by violence (that is what state is - violence), subjugated to the will of the collective and not be allowed to decide how to control their own lives?

Then again, no socialist ideas are consistent within themselves. The so called 'green' socialists are of the opinion that people are destroying the planet. They want to use the violent power of the state to subjugate the individuals, to turn their productivity to the state, so that the state would decide what to do with it, supposedly for the benefit of the environment somehow (while the worst damage to the environment comes from the operation of the state, nuclear disasters, wars, pollution). They do not see the inconsistency of their ideas at all. They want the state to control the resources, but obviously for the state to do so, it needs to throw bones to the subjects, the bones being subsidies.

So tax those, who are productive, steal their productivity (lives, time on this planet, creativity) and allow the state to subsidise others? How is that consistent with the 'green' ideology, which is of the opinion that human activities cause ecological problems on this planet? They would be consistent if they in fact decided to completely remove subsidies, we get more of what we subsidise.

Providing subsidies causes an influx in births, those who live on subsidies do not have to care as much how to provide for the offspring, their birth rates are higher. It is an inconsistent position to provide for more subsidies from those, who already control their own birth rates to those, who will not if given subsidies.

But of-course socialist positions are never consistent.

As a side note, I have formed my opinions on this matter over 30 years ago, I only read Ayn Rand's novels out of curiosity maybe 2 or 3 years ago, I don't need anybody to form my opinions for me, which is, by the way, why I am an individual, not an ant in a colony.

Comment: Re:Parallax. (Score 1) 378

by Jeremy Erwin (#47924017) Attached to: Apple Edits iPhone 6's Protruding Camera Out of Official Photos

Yep. I recently acquired a inexpensive macro zoom lens. At 1:2-- yes, yes, it's not true macro-- I have to hold the camera very close-- a few centimetres-- to whatever I'm trying to focus on. At the faster f-stops, the depth of field is wafer thin-- a good photographer with a fast macro can make that lens "bulge" disappear. Most macro technique involves stopping down the aperture (and consequently needing to use some sort of flash) and focus stacking to get as much depth of field as possible-- neglecting to do so for artistic reasons is quite doable.

Comment: Re:Most taxes are legalized theft (Score 2) 299

by roman_mir (#47923605) Attached to: New Global Plan Would Crack Down On Corporate Tax Avoidance

I know what you do NOT do, you do NOT put a gun to OTHER people's had to steal their money from them to 'help' anybody whatsoever under any circumstances. No amount of misery can be justified to destroy individual freedom.

If a person is irresponsible and has children, too bad for those children, however that's what other family members are for. Beyond that there are private organisations that try to help children. Governments cause massive pain for children by destroying the economy that they and their parents live in.

Comment: Re: This is why my hair always stands on end (Score 1) 299

by bigpat (#47923447) Attached to: New Global Plan Would Crack Down On Corporate Tax Avoidance
The perfect example of this is the tax on dividends which should be exactly the same rate as other income, but it was argued that it was already being taxed as corporate profits so the rate was set lower. The perverse effect is that people that actually make a wage or salary would pay higher income tax rates compared to those who can shift their income to dividends.

Comment: Re: Most taxes are legalized theft (Score 2) 299

by bigpat (#47923351) Attached to: New Global Plan Would Crack Down On Corporate Tax Avoidance
It is hard to convince people they are better off knowing how much is really being taken from them. But the worst things about indirect or obfuscated taxation are that it is harder to have an informed electorate when taxation is hidden so indirect taxes undermine Liberty and democratic systems and it is harder for even the most well informed to accurately judge whether the tax burden is equitable, progressive or regressive. As far as I can tell the tax system is primarily responsible for the erosion of the middle-class in the US because it is a regressive burden on the middle-class more so than the very wealthy. But try convincing a wealthy person that the higher tax bracket they see and combined taxation is actually less of a tax burden on them than the middle-class. Most people just don't understand how insideous and distorting indirect taxation can be to all our perceptions.

Comment: Re:That's government spending for you.. (Score 4, Insightful) 168

SpaceX has promise, but Boeing has shown it can deliver.

...eventually, and only after the requisite pork has been spread across a multitude of states and subcontractors to keep the requisite congress-critters happy. :(

Not to knock Boeing's technical prowess, but damn - they do know how to play the game (which explains why they're getting a piece of the contract most likely...)

As a very apt comparison, go back to the days when the F-16 first came out: relatively cheap, by some upstart company (General Dynamics), a revolutionary design, the first 9-G capable fighter, and was an all-around workhorse that could do (within reason) damned near anything you demanded of it. It's still in production today (albeit as a division of Lockheed-Martin), with a design that stands to be around for decades to come. Compare and contrast this with, oh, the F-35/6/whatever that's been nothing but a massive money-sink to date.

Comment: Re:And by "monitor this situation" (Score 1) 69

by Penguinisto (#47922283) Attached to: The Case For a Federal Robotics Commission

Thinking the same thing. Ostensibly, a government agency would stay the hell out of the way save for basic health/safety concerns... but in the age of bureaucrats who want to puff up their service records, I can see such a commission going straight to hell in an awful hurry.

(OTOH, seeing how ineffectual the FCC is at doing its job viz. the Internet and Network Neutrality, who knows?)

Comment: Re:Most taxes are legalized theft (Score 0) 299

by roman_mir (#47921671) Attached to: New Global Plan Would Crack Down On Corporate Tax Avoidance

You people who believe you'd run a functioning society without taxes and the things it pays for are completely deluded.

- government has no place in anything that private individuals need and provide for themselves and others absent government.

Energy, clothing, food, shelter, education, transportation, roads, schools, investments, entertainment, mail, anything at all that people need, individuals need, individuals, people create and once they create it, if others like it, they can also buy these solutions from the individuals that created it. That is what businesses are: individuals solving individual problems that become solutions for the entire societies.

Your complete lack of understanding of these simple realities of life and your dogmatic belief in something 'grander' than you are, are blinding you and obviously somebody so blinded cannot see the forest for the trees. "Libertarian" is just a moniker. The point is individual freedom.

Free people create stuff based on their own creativity.

Slaves only work hard enough not to get beat up too much (just enough not to be taxed too much).

Looks to me you prefer a 'society' of scared, ignorant children rather than a society of grown up people actually thinking for themselves and building stuff they need and trading with other grown ups for stuff they built.

New systems generate new problems.