Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


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

Comment Re:we need more disenfranchisement (Score 1) 40

It definitely has been devastating that more people than normally would go to college are pressed in to it.

It doesn't surprise me that you would say that, as denying education to people is a standard conservative technique to ensure the continued stagnation of economic mobility. You also over-focused my statement of "higher education", which includes things like trade school that are also vastly beneficial to high school graduates who otherwise find themselves with no path into jobs that pay a liveable wage.

And Leftism is so extreme and ridiculous, it's indistinguishable from a parody.

For whatever "Leftism" means to you, I suppose. If you were to actually look at people who are actually involved in politics in the US, you would find that your idea of "Leftism" describes exactly zero elected federal politicians.

Comment Re:we need more disenfranchisement (Score 1) 40

The part I find most amusing about the usual north-south divisions (I've heard others suggest a straight extension of the Mason-Dixon line as well) is that then the Mexican border becomes entirely the responsibility of the south, but they won't have the economic resources to make it happen. Although as they won't have any jobs for the Mexicans to venture north in pursuit of, it might become a moot point. They would really have to worry more about their northern border, as they would need to reinforce it to keep people from fleeing to the north in hopes of jobs, education, and health care.

And the border bit becomes even more interesting if secession starts with Texas... They have the largest part of the Mexican border of any state, if they go first they suddenly find themselves with a bill and not enough income to cover it.

Comment Re:we need more disenfranchisement (Score 1) 40

it's been so fundamentally changed by you guys at this point.

Yeah, it really sucked ass when people started to be credited as full time workers when they worked only 40 hours a week. It was awful when average workers started to get the weekends off, that really was havoc for our economy. The devastation of people being able to put their children through higher education is incalculable as well.

By our dogma, taxes would be low here but entrepreneurship would high and the economy would be booming

That plan has been tried many times over, and not once has it ever come even the slightest bit close to something that could be approximated as a vague resemblance to the promises that it came with. It has been tried in many different parts of the world, at many different times, and every time the result has been the same - it has been an abysmal failure for everyone who is not in the top one-tenth of one percent of the economy.

Meanwhile your parody of what the non-conservatives in this country want for a plan is so far removed from the truth that it isn't even worth quoting.

Comment Re:we need more disenfranchisement (Score 1) 40

I would ask how you see your opinion of people who "hate" America as being somehow connected to reality, but I don't see any reason to expect you to answer such a question. The notion however of you not being on "a mission to fundamentally change the country" is a lie in and of itself. You most certainly are trying to change the country, even if it may be that you aspire to change it back to the 18 50s.

my peeps would certainly need to build a wall to keep you people out from nagging us about everything from the weather to the size of our Cokes

In what alternate universe are there cross-border issues about such things?

I suspect the Right-wing side would need a massive defense appartus, and a DMZ might also be apropos.

First of all, if a division occurred along political majority lines (red states v blue states), the red zone wouldn't be bringing in enough revenue to build a "massive defense appartus" (sic). If you applied some even stranger Reaganomics to pretend that you somehow could do that, what on earth would you be defending yourself from? Your construction would almost certainly need to be done to hold back the exodus from your territory.

Comment Re:we need more disenfranchisement (Score 1) 40

I don't know that I've ever heard anyone propose an east/west division, I'd be curious to hear which side you would think to be more appealing as you would find "commies" (by whatever bizarre twisted definition you use for that word) on both sides who likely wouldn't be excited to leave for the other side. Were you inspired by the old east/west Germany in that suggestion?

That said..

Because, there's not exactly anywhere else in the world that's as "backwards" and therefore suitable for me.

I hear Somalia is pretty temperate this time of year. If you like snow, Afghanistan might work out as well.

On a more serious note, why is your philosophy so special that some part of the country needs to be preserved for it? You want to throw other people out for their philosophies, why do you get to stay put?

Comment Re:Holy flamebait batman! (Score 1) 883

I asserted that Stern was an international communist,

Indeed you made that claim.

and produced research proving such.

No, you provided no such research. Perhaps you meant to and forgot to include a link? I'll give you a chance to provide one now.

You haven't offered one fact throughout any of this.

Then apparently you are not reading what I write. I can't fix that for you, you will choose to read what you choose to read.

.You just show up and wag your finger and lecture me about my "behavior"

Show up? I started this thread. I have pointed out many times before how hard to the right slashdot leans. You can pretend otherwise if you want. As for your behavior, you haven't provided any facts - while launching into one baseless attack against me after another - so it is about all you give me to reply to. If you would care to provide an actual fact, we can discuss it.

and pretend that your delicate sensibilities have been violated somehow by my "tone".

I never once claimed to be "violated", for whatever you think that means. You have, however, claimed more than once that I or others did that to you.

Try and add the FACT that temp data is being manipulated and corrupted to a conversation on global warming; see how that goes. http://realclimatescience.com/...

Where does the data come from? The blog claims it exists but offers no source whatsoever. Why should I believe them when they have a very obvious agenda?

Try to contradict a Black Lives Matter activist by giving proof that there is no such thing as "Driving while black" (at least in New Jersey) http://www.city-journal.org/ht... and see how that goes

First of all, that is from 2002 - it's well over a decade old. Second, it is discussing speeding on a stretch of freeway and it is discussing the rates at which drivers are pulled over for it - it is impossible to actually say how many people are speeding over a course of time as it is impossible to examine every one of them. Third, the "driving while black" pertains as much to driving through the city as anything, and more specifically is about being pulled over for a trivial - or even wholly fabricated - reason.

How in the world would you know if Slashdot was leftwing, if you've never offer a rightwing opinion?

That makes no sense whatsoever. Slashdot routinely shows itself to be hard-right. Why would I want to offer up a voice to the choir - especially when it contradicts my own beliefs?

For virtually every article on Slashdot where there is a leftwing opinion, try adding a rightwing one.

I don't have time to wait for "leftwing" articles, they show up extremely rarely here. I comment on generally 1-2 a week and I'm not going to hold my breath for the needle to fall into the haystack.

That's how lefties roll; they "moderate away" anything they don't want to hear.

You've shown repeatedly how you earn the poor karma score you have. Try discussing matters in a mature fashion, using actual facts, and we'll see what happens. Sitting around crying about your imagined conspiracy does not help you at all.

That's how they oppress.

In other words, it doesn't happen. I thought maybe you'd be able to provide facts to the contrary, but you have so far completely and utterly failed to do so. Care to try yet?

Comment Re:we need more disenfranchisement (Score 1) 40

It makes a lot more sense than your idea to restrict it to people who own land, although neither is actually a good idea. The number - whatever it actually is - of people who don't pay federal income tax also includes a lot of retired people, and the actions of the federal government often have a great impact on their lives.

Comment Re:Holy flamebait batman! (Score 1) 883

I've seen more and more people saying that they believe that it's going to have to happen, not just that it is going to happen.

That is not an endorsement of it as an idea. Most climate change scientists agree that climate change is occurring, but that doesn't not mean they think it is good.

Economics is a technology (and so is currency)

No, economics - at least in the context of the vast overwhelming majority of people who think they understand it - is pseudoscience. It almost without fail has more to do with how groups of people feel about things than anything else, it's sociology without the impediment of the scientific method.

and the issue is being driven by technology,

No, it is being driven by human greed. More jobs are lost to places where people will accept lower wages than are lost to technological advancements. Sure fewer people shoe horses and make buggy whips now but that was not an industry with a huge number of employees in it before the automobile reached a point where people could afford it.

As per usual.

I will not challenge your right to have an opinion. However if you present it here I will exercise my right to show where your opinion is not connected to reality.

Comment Re:Holy flamebait batman! (Score 4, Insightful) 883

You lefties simply have no tolerance for people who are being oppressed by you.

That is a very strange accusation, there. How are you being "oppressed" by "lefties"? You are posting angry, fact-free, offensive rants on a conservative-dominated board and you are likely being moderated down for being a trolling flamer. If you don't want to be moderated down for being a trolling flamer, try trolling and flaming less.

The entire look-down-the-nose attitude of your post is very revealing

You seem to be trying to see things that are simply not there.

And all of that vitriol is aimed at me,

I see vitriol coming from you. I responded by showing where you were completely disconnected from reality. I'd be interested in knowing where you think I directed vitriol at you. The closest I came to vitriol in my previous reply to you was directed at your nonsensical rant about the SEIU, yet anyone who viewed both what you said and what I replied with would certainly agree the anger came from your side.

Despite the fact that I see opinions I disagree with, I don't immediately harass the posters

You are attacking me in your reply. You haven't presented anything in your comments yet that is the least bit supported by facts.

or moderate them at all.

Perhaps you are an exception but I have never before heard of someone who had sufficiently terrible karma to post at 0 and yet was granted moderator points. I have excellent karma and almost never see moderation points.

I guess it's just you approach people in a way that shows that you don't give a shit what they think

Another strange assumption there. You have quite simply shown that you have no respect whatsoever for other opinions, or any facts that counter your opinions. I would be willing to have a discussion on these matters with you but you have not shown the slightest bit of interest in such a discussion.

and you post and moderate

I post because I have something to say. I do not force anyone to read what I say, they are free to ignore it if they so choose. As I already mentioned, I almost never see moderator points here. And if you know how moderator points work here you would know that you cannot moderate in a discussion where you have posted.

because you feel the need to exercise your authority over everyone

In what way does posting exercise authority? You are free to post just as much as I am.

it's what lefties do, sadly.

Wait a minute, didn't you just say before that someone else was spewing vitriol and wanted only to harass others? Didn't you accuse someone else of not giving a shit about what others think?

Comment Re:we need more disenfranchisement (Score 1) 40

I think it is an orthogonal measurement of worse. We're left with a choice between two candidates where for most of us we have to choose which set of morals we value least and then vote for the candidate that disrespects that set the most (in the assumption that they will therefore respect the other more). It should be well known by now that I am a big supporter of Bernie Sanders; I was happy to see that he brought Clinton's platform a little further left (ie, closer to the center) at the convention. Now the choice is between far-far-far-far-right and middle-right; previously it would have been far-far-far-far-right and regular far right.

Comment Re:Holy flamebait batman! (Score 4, Insightful) 883

Slashdot has always leaned Left.

With the exception of the front-page articles, the staff, and the readers who comment on stories, perhaps. What would that leave that would represent slashdot, I'm not sure. Maybe the server itself has a Hillary sticker on it (which was likely placed there as a joke in response to the email controversy?)

I reliably lose points for expressing rightwing opinions of any kind

For some reason you post at zero. I'm not going to dig into your comment history to figure out why, that is for you to do. If you think you have been moderated unfairly, you can always take it up with the slashdot staff and they will almost certainly correct it. The conservatives I have seen who comment at less than +1 are all in that situation for being offensive trolls, not for sharing conservative opinion.

articles such as this that espouse leftwing dogma are regularly in the news feeds here

Regularly as in once every 6-8 weeks? I don't recall a single such "leftwing dogma" article on the front page more recently than late August. By comparison, we have pro-rightwing articles at least once a week - generally much more often than that.

and the SEIU can only be charitably called a leftwing brownshirt factory.

Here's a tip for you; that kind of blatant trolling does deserve down-moderation. When you approach people that way you are showing that you don't give a shit what they have to say and that you are posting only because you feel the need to be heard.

Comment Re:Holy flamebait batman! (Score 4, Insightful) 883

There's no excuse for anyone on Slashdot, presumably in the well-paying tech field, to be living month-to-month.

Well-paying tech field? Tell that legend to the people who have jobs in the Bay Area but cannot afford to live there. Or tell it to the recent CSci grads all around the country who find the jobs they expected have vanished and there is no longer a way in to programming for most people with only a 4 year degree. Tell that to admins who are seeing their jobs rapidly outsourced. Tell that to techs finding their entry level jobs simply don't exist any more.

Comment Holy flamebait batman! (Score 4, Insightful) 883

It is well known that the majority voice - both in staff and readers - at slashdot has leaned conservative for over a decade now. UBI is a deeply unpopular idea here, and the fact that it is in this article being promoted by a (former) union leader means that it will be get about as warm of a welcoming here as ebola. I expect one of the next comments in here will either contain or be followed in signature with the usual bit about two wolves and a sheep deciding dinner.

The bigger problem with this article though is that it really doesn't belong here. This is not a technology issue, or even a science issue. This is an economics issue, and a monetary issue. The jobs aren't going away because people here are being replaced by better technology, the jobs are going away here because people are being replaced by workers in other countries who can work for less. These actions are of course being rewarded by the boards of the companies who are doing this.

It is, of course, a fact that careers are a foreign concept to most workers now in this country. Few people who are in the labor force now will stay with one employer more than a decade at a time. Retirement is quickly becoming a passing dream for the majority of workers as well.

Comment Re:Trump supporters? (Score 1) 40

Modern slavery is the inner city neighborhoods of the cities that Leftists run.

No. Modern slavery is paying people wages that are so low they have no chance to improve their lives. Modern slavery is denying people any opportunity to acquire skills and education to qualify for better jobs. Modern slavery is allowing poor neighborhoods and their infrastructure to deteriorate by funnelling that money into other projects (including additional tax breaks in an already regressive taxation system).

And the Nazi's were national socialists.

They were socialists in name only. As is typical of hard right movements around the world they abused the very meaning of words to try to elicit sympathy from other nations.

Fascism is just nationalistic Leftism.

Wrong again. Fascism is the extreme concentration of power - political especially but other forms as well. This is a characteristic of the right. Who keeps telling us about "a government small enough to drown in a bathtub"? That is a pitch line of the hard right fascists who want to concentrate power into the hands of a small collection of people who would be enshrined in such a way that they could never be removed by the commoners.

The only reason the American Left is not fascist is because y'all are globalists, and hate this country for its foundations.

No. The "American Left" - for as little of that as remains today - is not fascist because fascism is incompatible with the goals of the left. You might as well in the same breath ask why the Pope doesn't promote Buddhism in France.

Slashdot Top Deals

Scientists will study your brain to learn more about your distant cousin, Man.