Are you so ignorant to not know that there was encryption on paper long before it existed in computers?
Safes are not the proper analogy, paper encryption is.
Socialist redistribution is not voluntary.
You're confusing love making with rape.
You should be able to have 28 % lower salary expenses. This is HUGE and you can easily out compete the other firms. ANY serious entrepeneur would immediately use such a tactic, anyone who cares about money and profits would. (Side bar, this is a glaring example of why free markets and profit-driven thinking is actually a good thing sometimes)
Seriously, if anybody believes this bollocks, put your money where your mouth is and go all-female software firm.
Oh wait, you won't actually do it? I guess you just want to harass people with fake statistics rather than actually act on it.
Don't forget that period in the 70's when Bernstein exposed the CIA as controlling most of the mainstream news in the USA.
How Americas Most Powerful News Media Worked Hand in Glove with the Central Intelligence Agency and Why the Church Committee Covered It Up
And yes, that's the same Bernstein that broke Watergate.
Here's the problem: Social Justice Warriors (SJW) always attack speech they don't agree by saying 'it's offensive', 'it's racist', 'it's the patriarchy', 'it's oppressive' or 'it's hate speech'.
To protect free speech one must protect the unpopular things said by unpopular people.
Nobody needs to defend the right of a popular person saying things nobody objects to.
I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that if you post anything negative about the invaders in Germany you get censored for 'hate speech' because it might incite violence. Meanwhile the uneducated and extremist fighting age men swarming into Germany, assaulting the natives, popping off guns in the streets, bring their criminality and incompatible culture to soak up the free benefits while Germany goes bankrupt. you better lock up your wives and lock up your husbands cos they raping everyone up in here.
Your argument falls flat on it's face. Your neighbour could be a waste of space good for nothing shithead who chooses to not work and live off the dole.
In fact, it could turn out that if you DON'T provide him free electricity water and phone service, that he would then choose to work on his own, but since these services are provided, he chooses not to work.
In either of these cases the baseline of well-being for the country is worse under these freeloading policies.
Some people make good decisions, some people make bad decisions. You probably want to avoid subsidizing bad decisions if you're going with the utilitarian argument.
But hold on... Who cares about the utilitarian argument? If I can show that it's morally wrong for the government to bring a gun into the negotiation between every other party in the country (price fixing) then who cares about the utilitarian argument?
If I can show you that by killing homeless people, we're all better off in total, does that make it right? Of course not. Utilitarian arguments are pointless.
Price fixing is immoral. You can show this with just two principles:
It doesn't even take very complex thinking. If you want to see if something the government is doing is immoral, just imagine a neighbor you don't like is taking the same action. If you think it's wrong for your bad neighbor to force prices between other people to a certain level at the barrel of a gun, then it's wrong for the government to do it.
Utilitarian arguments don't help. 'But it's democracy and elected officials' doesn't make it right either.
If your elected officials said 'we're going to start our homeless extermination program for the good of the country' it's still immoral.
If you hold a direct ballot and a majority of the population votes to exterminate the homeless, it's still immoral.
Fuck you slashdot. The great amount of poo in this article has triggered me and now I need a safe room with kiddy toys, low lights, soft music, hookers and blow to get through it. I'll send you the bill.
Or not... Quoting my American aunt: Why should I care? I've nothing to hide...
(And yeah... little does she know... but that's her thought process.)
Great! Tell her I've been recording her in the shower and sharing it with my buddies. Also I couldn't help notice she likes to Monica Lewinski herself with a cigar while watching her pr0n. I mean I wouldn't complain, but it's right up the poop shoot and she makes a face like she ate a lemon when she orgasms.
Pass on a message from her dermatologist for me: yes it is herpes. She must have caught it while she was married, from her husband from that one time he slept with a prostitute in Panama. I guess she got him back since your cousin timmy was sired by the nextdoor neighbour.
Glad to hear her mammogram looked normal. It's good news since she couldn't afford the treatment, her bank account looks as barren as an Ethiopian's picnic. Must be her gambling habit at the slot machines.
I'm making her year end review public at her workplace, she won't mind being the only one to reveal it. Not like anyone will use that information to sideline her from her next promotion.
It wouldn't matter anyway since I found evidence that she committed approximately 450 fellonies and midemeanors, I was able to use google's AI to compare her suspect activities against the innumerable laws and regulations. She might be a terror wrist. Oops, that's a bug in the system. She can wait in our black sites while we work it out. Now what was it she said again?
The act clearly states on page 1740
The fact that you can even hit submit after typing this asinine statement is amazing. Keep it up. Next you will tell me that all the married bachelors approve of this message.
How about instead you take issue with the government that has granted them the local monopoly?
That was the case in my town and people got pissed at town hall for accepting a $1M bribe to grant the monopoly.
So you advocate guns and violence to extract money from people who don't support your cause. Fraud and counterfeiting to steal wealth from people. Yet you say the libertarians don't care about others?
I guess if I someone came to your house, held you up at gunpoint, stole your valuables and then as they left said 'oh don't worry, the money is for a good cause and I'm your elected representative' you'd be okay with it.
Who's to say that if you carried out your immoral plan and after all the money was spent you ended up with a bunch of non-starter antibiotics, anyone would be better off? Even if you come out with 5 or 10 new drugs, what if that was one of the worse ways the wealth could have been spent and actually we could have made 10 times the progress by not initiating force against others and allowing voluntarism to take it's course?
The two things government supporters always forget:
It's bloody easy to point out, hey I got this result right here!!
It's a lot harder to evaluate even the prima facia cost benefit.
It's many orders of magnitudes harder to evaluate the real cost benefit, including the hidden costs. That theft and counterfeiting ain't Free (as in speech AND as in beer). You've prevented other human actions including progress, savings and job creation. But since it's effectively impossible to go find someone who you screwed out of a job or a health treatment by stealing the wealth and wasting it on your idea instead, I guess they don't exist.
I suspect they know this and they're going to try and introduce laws that force Facebook/Google/Apple/etc to act as extensions of GCHQ. To what extent these companies go along with it will be the most fascinating fight of the coming years.
It's a fixed fight and it was over before it began.
I've got a bad feeling about this.