Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:10 years ago and earlier.... (Score 1) 202

by u38cg (#48249137) Attached to: Car Thieves and Insurers Vote On Keyless Car Security
It's about the excess of risk. Thirty years ago or more, when all cars were equally stealable, you could charge the same theft premium for all of them because they were all equally easy to steal and there is a relatively fixed amount of theft in total. When only *one* model is easy to steal, that model *will* be stolen, and hence insuring it means a premium equal to the cost of the vehicle.

Comment: Re:I've questioned that myself (Score 1) 275

by u38cg (#48229139) Attached to: Ballmer Says Amazon Isn't a "Real Business"
Well, not exactly. They've simply said explicitly they intend to go on investing their profits in the long term in pursuit of growth. They're free to do so and their investors are free to agree or disagree. Their competitors can do the same thing (and have access to the same sources of finance), but they simply wish to keep repaying profits to investors than invest, which is a legitimate choice.

Comment: Re:Automation and jobs (Score 0) 712

by u38cg (#48221501) Attached to: Automation Coming To Restaurants, But Not Because of Minimum Wage Hikes
Several reasons. Firstly, people don't simply move to the cheapest tax location, as being in America gives you access to things like...well, I don't know why people like being in America, but many of you plainly do. Secondly, because there's no real evidence that a basic income would cause people either to stop working or to choose not to work. Thirdly, characterising taxation as theft is sophistry. Clearly some uses of tax are more worthy than others; that doesn't make the principle unjust of itself. Fourthly, we already tax rich people and give it to the poor, in various forms. Fifthly, who said anything about stopping people leaving?

To thine own self be true. (If not that, at least make some money.)