But it's you who sees religion where there isn't any. Why else would you call it "Calvinist"?
You should consider doing some reading, especially the writings of Max Weber -- "The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism".
In American history, the work ethic that places value on hard work and frugality is often ascribed to the puritans. It is by no means unique to them -- if I had brought up Asian Tiger Moms or the Jewish work ethic, someone else would have jumped on that, ignoring the rest of my argument.
But historically and culturally, the puritans were known to place a higher value on being good, hardworking people than on the ceremonies of religion. In fact, their whole idea is that being a good and useful member of society is a far better display of being "good" than going to church or confessions. In that sense, they have effectively distanced themselves from the traditional ceremonies of religion, despite the origins of the term (which is also why the new GOP has a bastardized concoction of values that admire both Jesus and capitalism).
In any event, I certainly think there is value to that worldview (hard work and frugality), your religious affiliations (or the lack thereof) notwithstanding. Perhaps I should call it the Horatio Alger work ethic, as Neal Stephensen calls it.
All right, all right. I'll stop having a beef with you.
Eh. You do realize that I am an American, right?
Dude, get that chip off your shoulder. For one, I am areligious myself, and was raised Hindu, so your comment is just silly.
I admire the Calvinistic work ethic without the religious connotation, and I am sorry you have to see religion everywhere, even when there isn't any.
You can appreciate the work ethic without subscribing to the religious view. After all, some of the hardest working communities (e.g. Asians or Jews) appreciate the value of hard work and diligence, and have nothing to do with Calvinism in the religious sense.
Shouldn't that be illegal?
The Insight and Prius are *not* pure electric vehicles. As for Ford, neither are the Escape and Fusion.
The Chevy Spark is new, but not the same class as the Tesla (smaller city car), but it's a start.
When they start building 100% electric Corollas, Civics or other mass-market cars, then maybe prices will go down.
Tech: 2 C64s (first model), 3 1541 and 1 1541-II. Logitech optical cordless desktop (mouse needs a new battery door, holding with tape). both NES consoles.
Appliances: My mom's old Panasonic Dimension 4 microwave/convection oven, my 1970 something fridge (still kicking)
AV: 1974 Marantz 2240, 1980s Alpine AL80 tape deck, old Sony turntable, 1970s Harman Kardon speakers. 2000s RCA 52" HD RPTV, 27" Trinitron CRT.
As a previous poster wrote, most things made before mid-eighties were built to last, not so for the newer stuff that has to be either replaced or repaired after only a couple years of use.
You are clubbing all the 1% into a single group. There's a study by Saez and Zucman of Berkley/LSE that talks about how clubbing the entire 1% into a single group is disingenuous -- The other wealth gapâ"the 1% vs the 0.01%.
Most of the 1% to
The surge in 1% is entirely attributable to the growth in capital of the
Most government policies favor the really rich and *punish* the hardworking upper middle classes. In fact, I would argue in favor of Reagan-esque tax policies for these folks, who are for the most part well educated, successful individuals in banking, law, medicine, technology, consulting and so on. These are the ones who are really building the economy, but the ones who are being punished by the government and vilified by the mass media who club them with the truly wealthy.
Imagine a successful husband and wife earning $150k/year, working in a white collar job (lawyers, doctors, consultants, IT -- take your pick). According to the IRS, making $343k/year puts you in the top 1% (by income). But what about wealth? Well, that's supposedly $8.4MM.
Some simple math will make it evident that a husband and wife earning (an average) of $171k for 40 years (assume raises and lower starter incomes are factored into the average) who save 15% of their annual income, with a starting principal of $10000 will have ~$5.4 MM at the end of their careers. Assume that they invested in a home that cost $300k early in their careers, whose value has gone up 5X in the 30 year time that they had to pay off the mortgage. Assume that they more or less maxed out their 401K, giving them $17,500.00/year for 40 years each, which is ~$1.4MM. At best, they have $8.4 MM, assuming market crashes, children's education, and life threatening diseases didn't wipe out their savings.
However, by virtue of having $8.4 MM, suddenly, these people are being placed in the *same* category as someone with enough capital to buy legislation or pay an army of Cravath lawyers. That is not factoring in any smart investing in what's been a pretty bullish run (minus the recent crisis) or basic fiscal conservatism.
Ballmer works at Mercedes?
Tesla could do what Lexus did, and focus on customer service. Besides, they already have a head-start...
When big established manufacturers (Think Honda, Toyota, GM and Ford) build electric vehicles, prices are bound to come down. Even more so when patents on battery technologies expire / gas prices get higher. Until then, Hybrids are the best compromise.
Meanwhile, government agencies use the same exploit without any fear of retaliation (even buys them with your money)
No I don't want hybrid drives. I'm on my third year on my OCZ Agility2. In the same time 3 1TB spinning drives have developed bad sectors. I'll keep them separate...
(I like your controller idea, kinda similar to what Intel does on newer chipsets)
but the SSD will wipe the floor with the HDD. That's why you install one smallish SSD for OS and APPS, and a big HDD for data and such
Tape is far from dead...