Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re:Color me skeptical (Score 2) 399

The point is that it should be enough to live with dignity, i.e. a roof over your head and enough food to eat, but if you want to take vacations or not share an apartment with two other roo,mates then you have to work to get extra money. That is why it is called basic income, it provides for the basic necessities but not much more.

Comment Re:Color me skeptical (Score 1) 399

And that's kind of the point. We are reaching a time in human history when we have more people than we have productive jobs for them to do, because of automation and overall increased productivity due to technology. We have to admit to ourselves that, some point soon, we have to be okay with allowing people to not work and still get a livable income. Working should give you above and beyond the minimum, if you want nice vacations, bigger home, etc.

Comment Re:Color me skeptical (Score 2) 399

That logic makes no sense. That is like saying if you make $2000 a month at your job you have no reason to work a side job on the weekends because it only pays $500. It's still $500 more than you had before. Every dollar has the same value it did, unless you are printing money to pay for your basic income. Almost everyone owns a television, does that mean televisions are no longer worth anything?

Comment Re:Cheap (Score 1) 626

You don't have to be coming from one of the countries to be barred from entering the US, you just have to be a citizen of one of them. Most effected people I know were out of the country for business or educational travel (going to a conference) and then found themselves stuck in, say, Paris because of the ban.

Comment Re:Judge should learn the law (Score 1) 476

In short, no. Ending H-1B's is not "detrimental to the interests" of Washington state or the United States

It is in the sense that you had 100 employees that were forcefully taken away from you overnight. Maybe in the long run it is not extremely detrimental, but you can't get people to pick up their work on a dime.

Comment Re:Judge should learn the law (Score 5, Insightful) 476

Also, the judge implies that aliens in foreign countries have Constitutional rights, which is complete lunacy.

Where are you reading that? The judge specifically motivates the stay by saying that the states have sufficiently demonstrated that they are suffering immediate injury from the ban. That is what is in question, the "would be detrimental to the interests of the United States" part. Washington is arguing that the ban itself is detrimental, and the judge is ruling that the White House has not made sufficient justification that the harm avoided by the ban outweighs that which it itself causes.

Slashdot Top Deals

You can't go home again, unless you set $HOME.