Oh wow, the "my corporate company brand is better than your corporate company brand" fight.
Can't we fine them and jail the executives for fraud on not delivering promised product instead? Might put a kick in the pants.
I'm tired of punishments consisting of not paying the corporate robbers any more money but getting to keep all they made so far.
Property ownership starts with self ownership. To earn money one has to spend his own time and effort, one has to use his own health and life, the time not spent enjoying but working. Property is thus extension of our own bodies and time given to us to spend on this planet.
To deny people ownership of the fruits of their labour is to deny people self ownership and it is disgusting. Noone should be born into slavery.
Your hands and your head and legs and the rest of it belongs to you. The collective does not own you and it cannot own what you produce. You can trade with others for what they produce or give it away, but that is your choice, your life. Your body your choice, yes?
Well, not according to you. You would steal from those who produce but how is it different from taking their body away? Taking 1 of every 2 chairs away from a chair maker is somehow different from taking away 50% of his life on the planet? It is not. That 50% of life is gone from him and nobody can fix that.
Your ideology is also insane in another regard. If somebody can produce chairs and another person cannot you want to take away from the one who can. What if there are people with no eyes? Let us then make it 'fare' for them and take everybody's eyes out. Some people are missing limbs, lets hack everybody's arms and legs off. There were people who died...... let us just murder everybody to make it fair for those who are dead but also for all of those who never lived at all.
Your ideas are horrendous if someone takes 1 minute to examine them, they lead to slavery and murder while providing superficial justification for the feeble minded.
Gmail optimizes for low bandwidth links.
I didn't know that! Is it something I need to configure?
Good News: No, you don't need to configure anything.
Bad News: Yeah, it's as bad as you remember. The biggest difference is this really condescending message at the top of your screen, saying, "Hi! You're a second-class citizen, so we're sending you to a second-class interface using second-class bytes! NOM NOM!!"
... Or something - I can't remember the exact text; I just remember promising myself I'd find the developer who wrote that and emasculate him with rusted baling wire.
A decent mail client with GMail over IMAP is probably best. Only downloads headers unless you actually load the message.
What if you don't like wearing suits?
Wear a MacDonalds outfit instead, if that's what makes you happy.
I can see we will need to fund another MRRD kid.
Seriously, we are not the white people. Even if you do have to insist that the Mative American Indians were all peace loving (which they weren't) or they all were wiped out by the white guy (Which they weren't, an awful lot of them integrated with society and became not savage. This is what happened with most the eastern tribes), you cannot seriously be letting a little kid think this shit happened yesterday and she was part of it so she should feel guilty about it. That's beyond cruel and borders child endangerment. When your kid grows up with mental problems, I hope you look back and think about the guilt you unnecessarily put into her only because you wanted to push an fallacious political opinion. It will be your fault for not correcting your wife and setting the record straight. The shit that happened between the Indians and the white people happened generations before any of us were around or even thought of.
Nobody is stealing your money - you're paying taxes.
- wrong, income taxes are legalised theft of life, creativity, time on this planet. It is slavery imposed by the violence of the collective on behalf of those, who perceive it to be to their advantage, whether it is so or not and against those, who are in a minority. This is how income taxes started in USA in the first place, top 2% of people were forced to be paid up to 7% of their income in taxes so that the vast majority wouldn't have to pay alcohol and some import taxes anymore (of-course the result is that everybody pays insane amounts of taxes, both on income side and on consumption).
The rest of us will recognize your right to retain the rest of your property if you recognize your responsibility to help care for the indigent
- wrong, nobody has any responsibilities towards anybody unless they are your children, then you have responsibility to them.
If you don't do your part, then why should I recognize that you have any right to own property at all?
- because it is in your best interest to recognise that if I cannot own property, then neither can you.
That's what society used to be: very few people owned any property, everybody belonged to the select few, who had the so called 'birth right' to it. You couldn't earn property, you could only be born into it or be given it by somebody who was born into it.
Meritocracy is a much more fair system to everybody, except for those, who lost that birth right of-course.
But, call it theft if you like. It really doesn't change the fact that you have no choice but to comply.
- wrong. I do not comply, I use the 5 flag strategy to ensure that something like you has a very limited access to my property.
I imagine that you'd be a little less lofty in your views if you had one of those irresponsible parents. Heck, some kids don't have any parents/family at all.
The fact is that all the property/etc you've worked so hard to obtain is only yours as the result of you having been born to parents who raised you well, and who gave you genes that allow you to support yourself.
- parents, fine. That is none of anybody's business.
What you are born with physically is of nobody's business.
Absent either of those, and especially absent the latter, you'd be as well-off as an ape that shares 98% of your genetics.
- I am yet to see an ape that is forced to pay income taxes.
As a result, I certainly have no moral issues with requiring anybody with the ability to take care of themselves to spend some of their effort taking care of others, using force if they do not wish to do so.
- irrelevant what you have or have no moral issues with. I already know what your 'morality' is. Socialist/Marxis morality is violence and theft, nothing else. I have no qualms and no doubts about your level of 'morality' and thus I do what I can to avoid such as yourself.
No, it's a religion, it just isn't the religion they think it is or want you to think it is.
I think you both are mistaken, it doesn't matter who you think the one true god is, the statement still holds true and can adequately describe problems within any of those secs.
I would hardly compare the two. In fact, they are not even close if you tried and did so honestly.
I get it, you hate religion and hate religion touching your science. Get over it. If the science is as much as you think it is, it will win if you put the two in a closet and told them to battle it out. So what are you actually afraid of?
Oh, and neither abstinence only and ID discussions in science classes are even close to banning subjects and mental processes altogether. The sky is not falling, stop pretending.
It's perfectly fine. I stand corrected. The sad thing is I skimmed the post 3 times and missed it.
Oh well, its still a point of reference and little more. Certainly not partisan like the anon was attempting to make out.
They don't want the kids to learn science or even mention things like evolution... Is their religion on such shaky grounds that it can't stand up to some critical thinking?
Actually, most religions claim there's an abundance of ways to fall for temptation and sin while the path to God is straight and narrow. You make it sound like making it a challenge and pointing out all the alternatives and benefits would be a good thing, while the religious consider it trying to lead the children astray and trying to put a wedge between them and God. Like say their interpretation of the Bible means sex belongs only in the marriage - bear with me on this one - then pointing out that "if you're going to have sex anyway, use a condom" is kinda upselling a sin. It leaves the impression they don't really think you'll stick with plan A anyway. So a lot of parent don't want their children to know there even is a choice. You think in terms of pros and cons, they think it's one good choice and a lot of bad alternatives they don't need to know about..
I think you need to distinguish between terrorism and reign of terror. Hit-and-run bombings like the IRA or ETA rarely succeed in people giving in to terror. Taking actual control of areas, waving the flags and killing off all that oppose you has a much better historical record, ask anyone from Pol Pot to Hitler and Lenin and Mao. In case you haven't noticed, they're using their brutal savagery primarily to quell resistance and internal dissent. The story they're selling is that they're too fucking crazy to pick a fight with and so far they seem more than willing to put that reputation to the test and post it on YouTube.
I mean, would you like to be in a resistance movement inside IS territory? Do they care that they can't find you? Heck no, they'll just round up a few civilians and shoot them in retaliation for your sabotage/assassination/sedition. Far more civilized occupants have used that tactic, all those millions of people they control are in practice hostages. You're fighting an enemy willing to overreact to any provocation, give them a push and you won't get a shove back they'll beat you to a bloody pulp. And given their history so far, I don't think they have a problem with human shields. You can not excise them without massive civilian casualties. Sadly I give them much better odds than you predict.
if NK ever managed to actually detonate a nuclear bomb even China wouldn't hestitate to march in and take over. I think they'd be glad of the excuse, really.
FYI, North Korea has made three underground nuclear detonations in 2006, 2009 and 2013. Very few doubt that they now got a few nukes in the kiloton range - basically 1940s tech - and the means to deliver them to Seoul - a mere 35 miles away from the NK border. China doesn't care. They got a loyal ally, they could crush him at any moment and it'd only create hostility between Koreans and Chinese. And the country is not worth the trouble. I guess if China ever went on the offensive they'd gobble up NK - and probably SK too - but only if they're on the warpath anyway.
Did it suck when he was there or only after he left? I don't recall anymore.