I am no quarrel with anyone willfully giving what they have earned to charity, etc. It is just evil when an invisible hand forces you because some faceless entity decides what is good and what is bad. That is as evil as any religous entity telling you that you are going to hell because you don't share in their faith.

Providing a monthly check for simply doing nothing is a disaster waiting to happen. You always have to ask the question how much and where does it come from? Then you realize that your utopian system has herpes.

You may choose to call me evil for having the audacity to say that everyone needs goto work to create some value in the world. I say its more evil to create a system that encourages people to because hopelessly dependent on a few "enlightned" leaders to provide them their daily gruel.

It's funny how people put all this faith in "economists" who claim to have create ideas about to run an economy but I have yet to see said economists run any business any better then us "groundlings".

Being an atheist I can't comment on a "protestant" work ethic. You do things you hate to surivive because most of us do not want to starve and die. Its as simple as that.

Its not because sewage work is not important. You don't understand the markets if you make this statement. The sewage worker gets paid less because it requires little brain power and there are plenty of people that could do it. There are far fewer that can do derivatives trading. Its more than need that drive price. The reason I get paid alot to design IC's is not because it is more important than the guy cleans the toilet. Its because there are alot less people that can do this skilled labor and I spent 20 years of my life training my self to do it. I can learn to clean a toilet in about 10 minutes.

Because you can't consume more than you produce. Period. Sure, you can get away with for awhile when the group is large enough but over long timescales it doesn't work. Sure, it sounds nice to pay people to sit around and b e arts-fartsy if they want to. That is the land of rainbows and unicorns. It the world where you die when you don't eat, these people need to figure how to fund their own interests.

Why should I have to work 60 hours a week making sure a supply chain is in order so that someone can do nothing and simply consume? Sorry, the idea is still dumb. You have to go to work, even if you hate it, to keep your belly full and a roof over your head. Sure, I feel we need basic arbitration in society (i.e. traffic lights, law enforcement, etc) and am more than willing to pay for this service. I do not think we need to contribute to fund to people who do not wish to work.

>>Milton Friedman and others have suggested the "basic income" where each person would receive enough to cover basic costs without regard to need

Sorry but that idea is dumb. You would have a large amount of the population do the absolute minimum because they have a big sugary tit to latch on to.
Humans are like sharks. The want to swim around, eat things, and then make baby sharks.

Just imagine if sharks had their food given to them. We would end up with way to many baby sharks.

Believe it or not, it is not bad thing to work a good portion of the day to earn what you need to survive. Stealing from others on a large scale simply doesn't work long term.

I have 4 monitors on my machine (2x 9500 GT cards). Took be 5 minutes to get setup in Windows. Still have to find a X configuration that works on all 4. It should not take a day of searching through forums, etc to get multiple to work in any distro.. Multi-monitor setups are not that uncommon and I think this points to a problem with X architecture has not kept up.

That is probably a true statement given that they have no concern for human rights. With over a billion people, they have a bunch of test units to spare. Just look at the test subjects they knocked off for the bodies exhibit. Just think about what they can accomplish when you don't have to worry where your "units under test" come from.

If your target is synthesis for an FPGA I would go with Verilog. Here is the bottom line: Any synthesis function you could do in VHDL could always be done in Verilog with fewer lines of code and will look alot simpler. VHDL is very verbose. If you search the internet there was a neat article about a Verilog vs. VHDL "competition" where one had to synthesize a logic function (targeting real hardware) in a fixed period of time. Of the people that finished, those using verilog were able to yield results that could run at higher clock speeds with fewer lines of code.

I would give it all the the Ron Paul Campaign. He is the only one in the pack that deserves a vote.