Now that that's finally over, back to code! :)
Oh, I'm sorry, did I stumble into the wrong party?
Where's the party for people that support an open country with strong privacy rights and a dynamic business environment?
And its not entirely clear he'll fix those, but there's hope.
I don't trust Obama on those issues at all, given his record. Bringing sanity to the war on terror isn't that important to him.
McCain also said he would close Guantanamo and end torture.
I'm sorry, but this party looks like a bunch of folks obsessing over a pretty politician who is moderately awful on the issues after 8 years of one who was completely awful on the issues, and not nearly as pretty.
And you should care about unionism. The 94% of Americans who aren't in unions are going to be fleeced by protectionist bills to pad the pockets of the powerful unions that support the Democratic Party.
I agree that for me, torture trumps unions. I don't like unions, but they are fading. Torture is just unacceptable.
When anti-China tariffs come down the line, you can thank the unions. Obama will not deny them. You can also nix the idea of school choice under an Obama administration, since the National Teacher's Union is a strong supporter of the Democratic Party. It's no wonder that Obama's plan for education is basically "more money! more money!". The unions couldn't have written a more favorable plan themselves.
I'd rather have weak, declining unions than strong anti-science conservatives like Ms. Palin running loose.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Rhee
PS, I think you are right about "card check", which seems to me like one of the most important issues in this election which has gotten approximately zero public debate.
- Social Democrats (Democrats)
- Christian Democrats (Republicans)
- Liberals (Libertarians)
- Greens
Here the Greens and the Liberals (note that "liberal" outside of the US implies classical liberalism) grew up a lot as being a part of main-stream politics. I really wish that were possible in the US because it forces the other points in the political spectrum to actually deal with reality and softens their rhetoric in a pragmatic, but effective way. German Greens nearly as crack-potted as American ones as a result.
And so far as protectionism goes. This is just another feeling that I am certain _most_ Americans will start swinging in the other direction on. The next year will see China<->U.S. sentiments on both sides growing very tense.
And high taxes? Get this straight: When the FED/Treasury "prints" money, that is a tax!!! And the last 8 years we've seen massive amounts this form of debt.
In addition, unions have many legal rights outside of a normal, voluntary gathering of people. In many states, they can force new employees of a company to join. Democrats are currently pushing for legislation to eliminate secret ballots for the formation of unions. When employee preferences are no longer secret, they can be coerced and threatened into supporting the union, which should enable Democrats to increase their union base. In addition, unions can force their employers to bargain with them by law, instead of by voluntary agreement by both parties. Federal law prohibits its agencies from paying contractors less than the union price, which is often high above the market price of similar services.
It is no coincidence that heavily unionized sectors of our economy tend to be failing, bloated, and stagnant. The big ones are undoubtedly a negative influence on American society. And they undoubtedly run the economic program of the Democratic Party; it surely isn't run by any coherent economic school of thought that I can recognize.
I'm not a Democrat. I have never been a member of any political party and hopefully never will. You do seem to have in for the Democrats though. Yes, they are in bed with Union officials and people that abuse the intents of a union. And yes, the Republicans are a bunch of rat bastards as well ;).
I really think that in lieu of the recent Wall Street bailouts and given who benefited, you should go "hawking" your "Democrats give too many handouts" somewhere else. Its falling on deaf ears. I have never heard either party provide a coherent economic plan. And that goes back to Reagonmics. They've have 20++ years to show that "trickle down" does anything but further stretch the socio-economic fabric.
I vote for my perceived integrity of the person. I don't much care whether they swing right or left, as long as they get stuff done and do so with integrity.
As to your assertion that the rich live in 70% tax brackets, this is quite untrue. The 70% bracket is unfair but few Americans actually find themselves in this bracket. Those in this bracket are high-wage earners, mostly doctors and lawyers, that don't have much outlets for tax reduction. This group is unfairly punished at the moment and it would be wise to fix this problem.
If you as an entrepreneur find yourself even remotely close to a 70% tax bracket, I highly encourage you to post something to HN like "Ask HN: Please help me find a tax planner with two brain cells to rub together" ;).
There are lots of risks entrepreneurs take. But one reward is great opportunity to reduce tax both as you go and after a big payoff.
As to your feeling that you wouldn't want to live in a a country that never had Reaganomics...there are many great Americans (those that created what we have now) that lived before 1980 that do not share your feelings.
I'm not trying to be abusive. I'm writing this to provide additional perspective.
There is some truth to the old Republican saw that the Republican Party is a coalition of ideologies, while the Democratic Party is a coalition of interest groups. It just so happens that a particularly stupid and nasty ideology that most Republicans don't really like has been in the ascendancy since Bush brought it in by stealth. Hopefully, that will change.
Farmers get help from both sides but if you look at who votes on specific bills there is significantly more support on the Republican side.
As to old people when they where talking about privatizing social security they where going to increase SS taxes to pay for their plan and not actually reduce spending.
PS: What I think is odd about Republican support is how their support of these groups is in opposition of their stated ideals of free trade (except for sugar) etc.
With regards to Wall St., AIG has received almost $123 billion in government-backed loans. If anything, it seems like the non-union, free market insurance industry is failing, bloated, and stagnant.
You're joking, but a lot of people actually voted for him for equally trivial reasons.
Certainly, knowing the answer to that question, or knowing what a bubble sort even is, doesn't make or break a candidate. But all else being equal, wouldn't you rather a president who took at least one course on computer science?
Sure it is a little thing, but I found myself saying "all other things being equal" a lot about Obama. All those things added up: I voted for him.
Obama is smarter than McCain. He's smarter than Bush. He's smarter than me, if you can believe it.
But do I care if Obama can:
1) Fix my toilet?
2) Balance my books?
3) Remove my appendix?
4) Parge my lath?
5) Sort my integers?
No. All trivia.
Unfortunately, making the government responsible for appendix-removal is one of the things which Obama wants to do. Comparing my experiences in US hospitals ("Oh hi, here's a bed and two nurses, your surgeon and his team will be along in ten minutes") to my experiences in Australian hospitals ("Oh hi, here's a wheelchair, please wait here for six hours") I really am not keen to see the US system become more like the Australian one.
The trick would be to design a system where some minimum is guaranteed for everyone, and things are nicer for those willing to pay more.
INCONCEIVABLE!
Indeed, but have you asked that question of presidential candidates?
Senator McCain was asked the same question six months earlier. The staff, realizing the question might be asked again, prepared Obama with an answer.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/business/02digi.html?_r=2&...
COME ON. We all know Obama didn't come up with that answer but his on the ball staffers make him look good. And Just like a CEO has to delegate a lot of work, the president has to delegate nearly everything.
Obama might be human gold with a soft diamondy center, but unless he actually has people who can do what needs to be done then it's useless. I think it's highly illustrated by the McCain campaign that he didn't have subordinates capable of doing the job right because he looked as warn out and tired as Bush does currently. McCain looked physically flabbergasted by what he was asked, he'd have looked better just holding up the frigging piece of paper his speech writers gave him.
But won't the managerial magic prevent the guy that can't push a button from working at the till there or at least fire him quickly?
I would have been more impressed if he said the MLB instituting a hard salary cap rather than that silly luxury tax.
Did we expect him to answer like a prospective google hire? A modified quick sort thats guarded not to recurse too many levels deep to avoid any stack overflow errors? I'm impressed that he made an effort to connect at the techie-level.
I think the intent of the tech-savvy staffers who briefed him was like when a comedian makes a reference to the Yankees while performing in NYC
"But a note of caution is in order here. The hacker community has some specific, primarily defensive political interests — two of them are defending free-speech rights and fending off "intellectual-property" power grabs that would make open source illegal...But beyond that, most hackers view attempts to systematize the hacker attitude into an explicit political program with suspicion; we've learned, the hard way, that these attempts are divisive and distracting. If someone tries to recruit you to march on your capitol in the name of the hacker attitude, they've missed the point. The right response is probably “Shut up and show them the code.”
In any case, I wasn't aware it was a reddit meme.
Although I love Fark, sometimes I'm tempted to use the same jokes here and that's just wrong.
Save me from myself!