Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:But . . . (Score 1) 387

Treason has a very specific definition under the US Constitution. But you're obviously not concerned with that little detail, are you?

The US government and it's politicians and bureaucrats violate the crap out of the US Constitution 500 times before breakfast and are not at all concerned with that little detail.

Why should anyone else concern themselves with that little detail? Why even bother with trials? Other gangs...Crips, Bloods, MS13, Latin Kings, etc etc don't.

At this point with the US government having abandoned nearly all pretense it is bound by the agreement between it and the people which gave it legitimacy, those gangs have the same single claim to being legitimate as the US government and which determines how large an area they control and how much control they have within their 'turf'. That is the amount of deadly force each can bring to bear on their enemies and not much else.


Comment Re:I use linux because (Score 1) 239

Instead I do everything Windowsy inside a VM on top of Linux.

So instead of maintaining one operating sytem you maintain 2.

Not necessarily.

Some VMs simply update with the rest of the host OS software applications and the win version & SP environment variables are a selectable variable within the VM application. The various virtual OS flavors in this type of VM typically do not update themselves independently.


Comment Re:Clintons Evil Knows No Bounds (Score 1) 405

The interesting thing is that this is truly a Kang v. Kodos election. Sure one is less bad than the other, but they're both terrible by historical standards. This is the election where a minor party would have a chance and we are.

The wrong lizard might get in if we voted other than (R) or (D).

Sad that the US's crowning achievement is to copy a side-gag from a sci-fi/comedy novel, even knowing beforehand it's a failed strategy as that's the joke.

People have lost so much trust in their fellow citizens (rightly or wrongly) that they don't believe it is possible for enough people to make good choices for anyone other than an (R) or (D) candidate to have any chance.


Comment Re:A UBI can actually foster more jobs (Score 1) 877

Comment Re:Holy flamebait batman! (Score 1) 877

UBI is a modern version of Communism and as all such schemes it will end up in destruction, misery, murder and poverty.

The countries that are 'half way there' are also either getting out of it or they are going towards self destruction, all forms of collectivism end up in economic destruction, some take longer some get there quicker.

Comment Re:Holy flamebait batman! (Score 1) 877

The only thing that has no basis in reality is the idea that UBI will lead to prosperity instead of economic destruction. I explain that UBI is a modern version of Communism and as with all forms of collectivism this one too, will eat itself and the people will end up miserable, oppressed, some will be dead and everybody will be poor.

Comment Re:Ellen Pao (Score 1) 608

Who pays the debts? USA pays the debts? First of all there is no law requiring that USA pays all debts. Secondly USA does not pay any debts, it prints money and buys Treasuries off of the market through the Fed, it does not pay debts, it returns paper that is being devalued with each newly printed (or electronically created) note. Returning paper that is devalued is the opposite of 'paying debts'. USA should pay debts though but it is impossible because USA debts are completely unpayable by the USA economy and can never be paid. Thus USA debts will be defaulted as they were *multiple times*, one very obvious time was when Nixon defaulted on the gold payable by the Fed for US dollars held by foreign governments. This happened in 1971. If you don't understand that USA doesn't pay debts at all that's not my problem, that's your public government education fault.

Defaulting on the unpayable debts in an honest fashion through restructuring and some form of a reduced payment program would be preferable for the USA economy to the collapse based on inflation (money printing) that US government is choosing to go with.

User Journal

Journal Journal: UBI is the modern version of Communism 1

In the last year or so there have been numerous stories on /. on the subject of Universal Basic Income (UBI). Many so called 'libertarians' left a number of comments on how they are supporting UBI because they think it might be more efficient than other forms of welfare.

Comment Re:basic income (Score 1) 877

I guess you didn't actually read anything I wrote, I explained it in the comment. Why should I repeat myself if you are not paying attention?

The State will have to confiscate the means of production otherwise the producers will not trade in the country where they own the means of production. That's because trading is a *2 way street*, both sides have to *produce* something of value to the other side.

With a large portion of the population not producing anything but being subsidized from the income of the producers the producer will lose twice (2 times) in that transaction.

The first time the producer will lose when the government will confiscate his productive output in form of various taxes to pass that money to the UBI recipients. The second time the producer will lose when the UBI recipient will come to the producer to give the producer *HIS OWN MONEY* in exchange for the goods that the producer produced.

That's not a trade at all, that's not 'buying'. Thus the producer will not trade in the country where he is taxed for the benefit of the UBI recipients. The producer will trade in countries where people will produce something *IN EXCHANGE* for what the producer offers.

This means that the producer will not be taxed in USA, just like Apple cannot be taxed on the income made outside of the country. BUT for the UBI to exist somebody has to be taxed and it has to be *net producer* who must be taxed, the net UBI recipient cannot be taxed for this to work (unless you figured out a way to repeal the natural laws of conservation of energy, mass and momentum and thus invented a perpetual motion machine).

I don't know how else to explain it to you better than this, which is pretty much the same thing I said in the comment you responded to. You might be trolling with that question of-course, in which case I tip my hat.

Ta ta.

Comment Re:Ellen Pao (Score 1) 608

Well, you are a dumb ass, which is why you think you 'hear' things. Somalia is not an anarchist country any more than the States are. Somalia doesn't have a single federal government, yet there are plenty of local governments. It is not an anarchist country, it is a county that fought for its independence from the Royalty and from the Communists and is now free from those people.

Comment Re:Ellen Pao (Score 1) 608

I don't have problems with people exercising ability to prevent governments from oppressing them, to me that is what TPP is. Ability to fight against a government in court and force it to accept freedom of the individual and company.

Now, I don't believe governments should be able to meddle in any business or money at all, but a collectivist may have a different point of view.

Slashdot Top Deals

If a train station is a place where a train stops, what's a workstation?