Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?


by MadUndergrad (#34947254) Attached to: Michigan Governor Wants 'Open Source' Economic Model

Or we didn't have to start trading with China, or could have imposed tariffs tied in directly to indices of abuse and waste as an incentive for them to improve. Or a thousand other ways we could have gone about the issue without giving the base of our economy away wholesale.

Comment: Re:Hit them back (Score 1) 783

by MadUndergrad (#34909068) Attached to: Wikileaks To Name Swiss Bank Tax Evaders

In that situation, you probably would be paying 100 times more for your car, food and house. Because they're nicer. You see, if you have more money, you're going to get more benefit from it.

The guy who is earning 10000 a year might get a welfare check and foodstamps for his taxes, as well as some environmental and health protection. At 1000000 a year you'd be getting police protection of your stuff, military protection of your assets and investments, political power (that comes nearly free by virtue of just having the money), subsidies for your investments or business, the kind of stability that allows your business to even function, etc.

The other guy is likely to be hassled by the cops as much as protected by them. He has no foreign investments that require a powerful military and diplomatic structure for protection. A much smaller military would be sufficient to prevent invasion. Most of all any benefits that keep him alive and not starving are keeping your workers alive and well and not rioting outside your door. Like someone else around here said, taxes buy civilisation.

Comment: Re:Logic Fail (Score 1) 382

by MadUndergrad (#34801634) Attached to: College Students Lack Scientific Literacy

How does the existence of the Tea Party illustrate that people are missing basic logic tools?....The basic point is that the government cannot continue to spend more than it takes in indefinitely without a collapse at some point. Raising taxes does not solve the problem.

The fact that you take this idiotic statement as a gospel truth -as indicated by the certainty with which you write it- illustrates the problem. If the rest of them think like that (and it seems they do) then you have proved GP's point. The first part is correct, sure, but the second statement wouldn't be worth responding to if it weren't such a depressingly common "fact".

Comment: Re:Survival? (Score 2) 272

by MadUndergrad (#34654688) Attached to: The Tipping Point of Humanness

The point GP is making is that many of those diseases cause people or animals to act/move/look slightly "off", and noticing that was key to avoiding them and avoiding infection. The rabid person doesn't look normal. It's not so much a physical thing, it's a behavior thing which still plays into "appearance". It's perfectly natural that a revulsion reaction would be an evolutionary defense for this.

Likewise computer animations are often slightly "off" in the same way - the muscle groups may not work together like they should, or reactions may not be what we expect, or slower than usual.
