It does actually depend on what the money gets spent on. If a person uses it to buy Japanese cartoon porn then the only local stimulation is to the delivery guys and represents a small percentage of the overall cost--assuming you buy your cartoon porn in sufficient bulk. On the other hand if those tax dollars went to lay the first fiber optic lines, then it was a good investment.

Secondly, this idea that private companies are so much more efficient than government really needs to be proved. I've worked in or with 5 Fortune 100 companies and the amount of wasted money and man-hours I've seen boggles the mind. I'm sure government waste is at least as bad, but the difference is when public money is used they are under obligation to give detailed spending reports so you know when it's wasted. Private companies, even publicly traded ones, only have to show a profit and loss sheet. And they do a good job burying those losses as various expenses in order to protect their own asses.

Think of it like open source software. Government, at least in theory, is supposed to be transparent so you can see all the flaws and you are free to try and fix them. Companies tell you to trust them. That they know best and everything is great so you should give them your money (401k). Personally I think they're both good for different things, but if you don't like the government or taxes so much then either get constructive and fix it, or move to a different country.

You're correct in that too many people on the left seem to think the purpose of stimulus is just to "save/create jobs." But too many people on the right use that to blind themselves and sit comfortable in the idea that the invisible hand will magically solve everything without that pesky gubmint stealin' their tax monies.

The primary benefit of stimulus should be infrastructure. Putting people to work and keynsian multipliers are all just gravy. Unfortunately infrastructure has become is all the more important in the modern era where fear of dinging a companies quarterly earnings report has choked of most private investment in the future. Keynes didn't get that either. You don't build something just to build it, you need to have an eye toward future value.

The railroads, telegraph, telephone, interstate, and internet were all funded, at least in part, with public money and those investments have paid for themselves many times over. As per your example, the Panama Canal was a publicly funded project that probably paid for itself (hard to quantify the cost of all those malaria deaths). Similar investments in domestic energy, and wireless communications should have started 20 years ago. There's nothing wrong, and a lot right, about the government building something and then selling or leasing it to private companies with an agreement to serve the public good.

Stimulus certainly can be a good idea. Now as for the way the current administration has been spending that money... Umm... Not so good.

You joke, but I remember on my 15th birthday I had the option of going to a comic book and game convention, or a school dance. It was a tough decision for a 15-year-old. I ultimately went to the dance and ended up hooking up with my first girlfriend as a result of it--which surprised me more than anybody. If I'd gone to that comic convention I'd probably still be a virgin to this day.

Where in the world did you find someone who'd never read it?

Ummm... anywhere in the southern United States. Although the percentage that may have read it anywhere in the US is probably pretty small.

If you'd said how many people haven't seen a parody or reference to the balcony scene on a cartoon or sitcom then the number would be much lower.

As for the crap that takes place in high school English classes across the country where they do something with Romeo and Juliet I really can't call that reading although I can think of no term for it.

I get your point but I just wanted to point out that the people "on the top" are doing better than ever in the global economy. It's the upper-middle class that's taking it on the chin. Outsourcing drives down the cost of labor which increases profit margins and/or lowers prices. While prices have gone down some, most of those gains have gone into obscene executive pay and shareholder dividends.

The upper-middle class was an anomaly sitting between the two kinds of people in this world. Those people that work for their money, and those people that expect their money to work for them.

To be fair, the upper-middle class slit their own throats by using debt to offset the stagnation of wages, and grow their quality of life, leaving ourselves without a safety net. But as an upper-middle classman that avoided debt and thought he might be within spitting distance of that second kind of people someday--I can say it was a fun dream while it lasted.

As for the fairness of the system I can't really claim to know what is fair in a system this large, but I am suspicious of any system that widens the gap between rich and poor. Because when you look at the shanty towns in Mexico where the factory packed up and left for China when they found out they could pay $0.40/hour instead of $1.20/hour and you see what they did to the water, the birth defects, and the people left behind with work related injuries you wonder how much it really helped them.

Granted coding isn't the scorched earth business that auto making is, but you get my point.

I know I'm late to the party but I wanted to thank you for starting this thread. I'm in pretty much the same boat; as my G5 tower needs to be upgraded (more for software compatibility reasons than performance), but I can't afford the cost of the current Mac Pros. Also, I've been thinking it's time to go portable anyway, but buying a MacBook Pro isn't any cheaper and I need the screen real estate for my work (Graphic Designer/Web Programmer).

Anyway, some of the replies were helpful and it's nice to know I'm not the only one that thinks Apple has a huge hole in their lineup. I miss the clones.

So which is it; A piece of crap, or better than all the other cellphones in the US? I don't think you can really have it both ways.

I understand being sick of all the hype surrounding the iPhone, it's gone past the point of absurd. But it's funny you would focus your anger on Apple for selling a better phone rather than at the cell phone companies for not letting us buy something better. Or more importantly, for not offering better calling and data plans.

The biggest problem I have with the iPhone is AT&T. I paid my $200 dollar fine to get away from them a few years ago so I don't care how "cool" their phones are I won't be going back.

I can't believe how far I had to scroll before someone pointed out the hypocrisy of the OP saying we have a right to pirate because Nintendo doesn't include enough DRM. Encouraging a company to implement DRM on /.? That's usually the kind of grist this mill feeds on like sharks to chum. But apparently the need to blindly support anything that justifies piracy wins out.

Yes, if only we could all be as tolerant of opposing viewpoints as yourself. Your eloquence shows a deep understanding of the issues. I'm sure you're accurate in labeling anyone that doesn't agree with you as a "fucktard" and "butt-buddy" and you are right to fear them. There is nothing more frightening than an attack from an enraged butt-buddy. I'm sure your libertarian militia-mates will "watch your back" while you wait for the Ron Paul revolution to come charging to your rescue.

Or might there be another reason for your anger? Perhaps that you are unable to come up with a better argument so you resort to righteous indignation and profanity to stand in place of information or simple reason?

Is it more likely Slashdot and the butt-buddies are out to get you, or that you might get modded negatively because you are in fact wrong? In which case you may get angry rather than doing something more difficult like reassessing your flawed outlook on life?

Do you put the asterisk in place of the "u" in "fuck" so that God can't hear you type it?

Seriously, if you don't want to swear or offend anybody then don't swear. Swapping a letter isn't really fooling anyone.

Although, Slashdot may have a filter for the F-Bomb so if that's the case you won't be seeing this f*cking post.

You're right, prefacing things with "I'm no expert" and "I could be wrong" shows that I was obviously spouting off and declaring myself the foremost authority on the topic. I get your point, I could have looked into the topic more before posting, and I bow to your /. policing abilities.

What's interesting is that two people (including the OP) commented before you and provided the information without getting modded informative. You swoop in with righteous indignation by your side and get insightful karma. I guess it shows we love our commentary more than news. I'll be sure not to ask for references and post with a more arrogant tone to attract more mod points in the future. You have taught me well.

Do you have a reference for this?

I'm no expert, but I don't see how the mothers antibodies could be protecting the child after delivery. And if her antibodies could be transferred I don't think they would disappear. That's one of the more amazing things to me about fetal development (my wife is pregnant now) that the mother and child never exchange blood through the umbilical cord. The placenta transfers nutrients and oxygen but prevents blood mixing.

But I could be wrong, maybe antibodies get through as well, it just doesn't seem likely.

Damn! Where can I invest?

Also, I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

Yes, but at the theater I can tell my wife to be quiet and I can enjoy the movie. At home... no such luck.

And I do truly hope there is a special place in hell for child molesters and people that talk in the theater.

Hey FireStormZ,

We clashed a while back on some story here about Gitmo, I think.

Anyway, you keep bringing up the Federalist Papers, and I think you mean to be supporting the Anti-Federalist Papers since the Federalist Papers were about expanding the reach of the federal government after the failure of the Articles of Confederation.

The entire existence of the Constitution is because originally the founders/framers wanted, "states to do most of the heavy lifting in governing" so they wrote the Articles of Confederation which failed utterly. The Constitution was written to expand the powers of the federal government and the Federalist Papers were written to support that expansion of federal power. The Anti-Fedralist Papers were written in opposition to the expansion of that power. It is probably due to the influence of the anti-federalist that we got the Bill of Rights so they do deserve more credit than they usually receive.

If not, let me know which articles of the Federalist Papers you are referring to, I could always use a refresher.