Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Hammerheads in Vermont (Score 1) 378

Raising the minimum wage form the current $7.25 an hour to $15 an hour is calculated to raise the cost of fast food for example by 4.3%

If some segment of the population suddenly has twice as much income, and maybe 5x as much disposable income, that's going to put upward price pressure on lots of goods and services.

For instance, the people who are living with 3 roommates each making minimum wage now decide to get a bigger place, or just have 1 other roommate (maybe a GF/BF). Suddenly demand for housing goes up. The people who used to compete for low rent places in crappy neighborhoods are now competing for medium rent places in decent neighborhoods. Now the manager, who lives in a decent neighborhood, faces a rent increase and wants a higher salary. Did your 4.3% include that?

I think people who think the minimum wage doesn't have a big impact are missing this key idea. It's all relative, and it's not just about direct costs. It's about, if I make 4x minimum wage right now, and suddenly I'm only making 2x minimum wage, that hurts me in many small ways that add up. Maybe these poor people start having more kids, and my kids' school gets crowded, and there's a bond referendum to build a bunch of new schools and hire teachers, and my property taxes go up. Maybe poor people stop taking the bus or walking to work and buy cars, and now there's more traffic, and the city/county/state need to add lanes to a bunch of roads, and there's a tax increase to pay for it. Now I'm being affected even if I don't eat fast food.

It's a selfish viewpoint, but really it's no more selfish than those who want a higher minimum wage.

Comment Re:legalism is a crap philosophy. (Score 1) 582

Of course I did, they were installed when the neighborhood was built, and priced into the homes.

Maybe they're more expensive to add, and definitely if yards are sloped and need regrading to add a sidewalk, but from a quick search they're not exorbitant.

I guess another factor is yard size... a neighborhood with 1 acre plots will be more expensive per homeowner than one with 0.2 acre plots.

But hey, if there's a decent chance that some overcautious nutjob is going to get the city to lower the speed limit to 15 and/or install speed cameras and/or install speed bumps, the neighborhood may rather put up with the cost of sidewalks.

Comment Re:Take back Slashdot (Score 1) 1309

I wonder if your perspective on "unfair" moderation is related to your word choice? Maybe you think you're being fair here, but calling disagreement with feminist perspectives "a He-Man Woman Haters Club" is stupid. Adding "even if not of the flaming nutjob variety" to "conservatives" makes you sound like a troll.

How do you think your post should be moderated? Insightful? Interesting? It's not either of those. It probably should be Troll because it's designed to upset people and make them post a defensive reply ("I'm not a woman hater! You're a man hater!").

I've got mod points but I almost never mod posts down, so I thought I'd just ask you... what do you think should happen to your posts when you talk like that?

Comment Re:legalism is a crap philosophy. (Score 1) 582

Are you sure? Unless you mean historical fences and walls that end very close to the street, people would only be giving up like 6 feet of yard to get sidewalks. And lots of people actually love sidewalks... having moved from an older neighborhood without them to a neighborhood with them, I think they're great.

Comment Re:Dear black and whiter (Score 4, Insightful) 582

You're not considering that the 4 lane avenue is wider and probably busier, and thus scarier to kids. A sleepy residential street on the other hand is the kind that a kid might cross without really thinking about because 9 times out of 10 (or more) a car isn't coming.

Therefore you can't assume the streets have to be treated the same just because of proximity.

Comment Re:Twitter shouldn't be shutting anyone down.. (Score 1) 832

Without disagreeing, I'd like to point out that if anyone can compel me to print their words on my platform, I no longer have the right to choose with whom I associate.

I see what you're saying and that's a great point, and perhaps I didn't make this clear, but I wasn't talking about the government enforcing a greater protection of free speech than it currently does. I'm only talking about whether a given individual can say they support free speech, and to what extent.

I would note that your freedom of association is already limited by the government if your platform is public. For instance, anti-discrimination laws are a pretty blatant violation of that right. I'm not 100% sure but I anti-discrimination might also cover speech, like if your platform says that people can't publish anything that is in the interest of black people (at the discretion of some officer of the company), is that legal? You might let black people publish stuff, and white people publish stuff, and make it a uniform ban (so black and white people both can't talk about things in the interest of black people), but is that legal? What if it turned out that the ban was affecting black people 90% of the time, so it was disproportionate based on race? I don't know.

Certainly even if it were legal, if your platform had a policy like that, nobody would agree that you're a strong supporter of free speech.

I think it's unfair to characterize a typical degree of support for the right to free speech as "not supporting it very much".

Perhaps I'm more optimistic of you, but I think most people support free speech outside of government interference. For instance, if you see a comment that you disagree with here on slashdot, do you mod it troll? Probably not. What do you think of people who do mod comments as troll if they just disagree with them? If you have a negative opinion of them, then you're demonstrating that you don't like their abuse of the moderation system to suppress speech. If you've ever shared those feelings, or commented "why was this modded troll?" then you've participated in exerting social pressure to protect free speech.

Again, if you go around modding comments troll just because you disagree with them, I don't think you can call yourself a strong supporter of free speech.

Comment Re:Twitter shouldn't be shutting anyone down.. (Score 4, Insightful) 832

Nope, you got it backwards. The concept of free speech has nothing to do with the government. The 1st amendment right to free speech is a constraint put on the government to uphold the principle in limited circumstances, it does not define or limit the principle itself.

One's support for free speech is generally a matter of degree. If your support ends at the 1st amendment, and you think that private "consequences" for free speech are fine and dandy, then you don't support it very much.

Slashdot Top Deals

All the simple programs have been written.