In the end, I generally agree with you, but I don't think it's accurate that the debt crisis is resolved by letting the Bush tax cuts expire. Tax increase would obviously help, but it won't solve it alone.

The debt crisis was born of a few factors:

-Stimulus package (temp, self-correcting since it's ending)
-Massive increase in federal spending in the 2000's bread by two wars, homeland security, senior drug benefit, medicare, medicaid
-Tax revenue declines due to Bush tax cuts
-Sudden sharp declines in income and capital gains tax revenues due to economic collapse

We can't solve the whole thing by letting the Bush tax cuts expire. In fact, I would argue the first step in resolving it is get the economy back on track to increase income tax revenues naturally as the unemployment rate would fall, and pay would increase. I would also argue that we're gonna have to massively cut defense spending at some point. This could be done many different ways, such as pulling out of Iraq and/or Afghanistan, etc. But it's gonna have to be done at some point, although it maybe difficult to do in the short run. That leaves us with what is currently being debated by Congress and the President. I'm actually pretty perplexed that they're prioritizing the debt issue without first remedying the economy. I think the debt is a very important issue, but I also don't believe it will be resolved until unemployment returns to more normal rates, unless we're refusing to acknowledge what leaders may already know - it ain't gonna get better for a long long time regardless of what the gov't does, so we might as well stop adding to the debt.

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^MarineGunrock:
What we really need is a law that says no member of congress shall be allowed to receive any money from any lobbying firm, business or individual who is a high-level employee (board member type guys) of any large company worth over "x" amount of dollars. Loopholes need to be closed, but social programs also need to be cut or seriously re-vamped. What REALLY needs to happen is to close behemoth and redundant federal offices that are better left to states or that sates already have.

Well, I'd definitely love to see some sort of reform aimed at the outright bribery we see going on in government. I'm not sure how we get that to happen, though.
As far as the debt goes, my opinion is that all the Congress can do in 2011 is set the budget for 2011 and 2012. Come 2013, it'll be a new Congress, and possibly a new President. There will be another new Congress in 2015, and another in 2017, plus a definite non-Obama President in the White House.
A little mentioned fact about this debt "crisis" is that all we need to do to balance the budget is for Congress to do nothing. No more Doc fixes, no more AMT patches, no more extension of the Bush tax cuts, etc. If we just let current law play out as it was written, the budget problem will no longer be an issue.
Even if congress doesn't do that, fixing our health care system has always been the real problem with the long-term budget. If we could get our medical costs down to just the level of the second-most expensive country in the world (Germany), then we'd be seeing big budget surpluses year after year. Maybe the HCR bill passed will do that once it's all in effect (in 2017!), but it's way too early to be putting those into the budget estimates. Maybe by 2020 we'll find out that we've actually put ourselves on track to be cheaper than Germany, and our budget picture will look really awesome.
I say we just focus on getting people back to work right now, and worry about the long-term debt in the long-term, especially since it might not actually be a problem in the long-term.

>> ^MarineGunrock:

What we really need is a law that says no member of congress shall be allowed to receive any money from any lobbying firm, business or individual who is a high-level employee (board member type guys) of any large company worth over "x" amount of dollars. Loopholes need to be closed, but social programs also need to be cut or seriously re-vamped. What REALLY needs to happen is to close behemoth and redundant federal offices that are better left to states or that sates already have.


Well, I'd definitely love to see some sort of reform aimed at the outright bribery we see going on in government. I'm not sure how we get that to happen, though.

As far as the debt goes, my opinion is that all the Congress can do in 2011 is set the budget for 2011 and 2012. Come 2013, it'll be a new Congress, and possibly a new President. There will be another new Congress in 2015, and another in 2017, plus a definite non-Obama President in the White House.

A little mentioned fact about this debt "crisis" is that all we need to do to balance the budget is for Congress to do nothing. No more Doc fixes, no more AMT patches, no more extension of the Bush tax cuts, etc. If we just let current law play out as it was written, the budget problem will no longer be an issue.

Even if congress doesn't do that, fixing our health care system has always been the real problem with the long-term budget. If we could get our medical costs down to just the level of the second-most expensive country in the world (Germany), then we'd be seeing big budget surpluses year after year. Maybe the HCR bill passed will do that once it's all in effect (in 2017!), but it's way too early to be putting those into the budget estimates. Maybe by 2020 we'll find out that we've actually put ourselves on track to be cheaper than Germany, and our budget picture will look really awesome.

I say we just focus on getting people back to work right now, and worry about the long-term debt in the long-term, especially since it might not actually be a problem in the long-term.

Oh @netruner, how I love thee.(seriously, no sarcasm. I think you're one of the most valuable members of the sift.) Yes, I realize that both parties are to blame. Some more than others. I made my earlier comment based on an article I read the other day that discussed the dems turning down a bill that would amount to a balanced budget by 2050 (and even be pulling in several billion more than we'd be spending, from what I remember) because republicans didn't want to raise taxes, though now that I think about it, those taxes were probably on large businesses and loopholes.



What we really need is a law that says no member of congress shall be allowed to receive any money from any lobbying firm, business or individual who is a high-level employee (board member type guys) of any large company worth over "x" amount of dollars. Loopholes need to be closed, but social programs also need to be cut or seriously re-vamped. What REALLY needs to happen is to close behemoth and redundant federal offices that are better left to states or that sates already have.

@dannym3141

Can't quote that behemoth without trying to figure out all the embedded coding to only pick your newest stuff.

Anyway, I just wanted to address the last line of it. I have no first hand knowledge of Amsterdam, but according to their wiki they limit their coffeehouse (weed, food, coffee/drink, no alcohol) to only selling small quantities of weed and other rules:

In the Netherlands, the selling of cannabis is "illegal, but not punishable", so the law is not enforced in establishments following these nationwide rules taken from the wiki page:

no advertising
no hard drug sales on the premises
no sales to anyone under the age of 18
no sales transactions exceeding 5 grams
no public disturbances

For some offenses, a business may be forced to close for three to six months, for others, completely; all this is detailed in official policies.

-------------------------------

So it's not as if they allow anyone, anywhere, anytime to do whatever they wish....it's controlled to some degree. They also have closed shops due to proximity to schools and I believe I've read articles where they want to close access to coffeeshops to tourists. So......I can only assume the mindset of many tourists toward drug use is a nuisance at a minimum. And there will be those who argue is anti-drug mindset, etc.

And it might be a little bit of a lot of things, but I think it speaks to a failure in education namely the complete lack of when approaching a lot of "un-approved" topics. Where you end up with polar opposite opinions, 1) no one should do it ever, 2) everyone should do it, as much as possible. It applies mostly to drugs, alcohol, tobacco, and sex in the US. It evens out a little in people (and if it doesn't it usually goes really bad) when they get past college-age when it comes to alcohol, tobacco and sex, but drugs seem to stick with them whether it be to the forbidden nature of it or addiction.

I guess with sex, unless you end up with something incurable you can recover (even a pregnancy). Tobacco you can quit, but it does have consequences for some who are genetically unlucky. Alcohol, liver issues but worse are drunk driving and just overall bad decision making that could lead to a record.

And then drugs, illegal or prescription, sometimes people become too reliant on them...especially if they affect pain and mood...and they often even get intertwined where the brain associates lack of mood suppressors/enhancers as pain. Personally I don't see why many people would risk using their drug of choice regularly if it means potentially losing their job when a drug test comes around or other consequences...and that's where I see it as an addiction when they want the job and the drug but at some point they will conflict and unwillingness to change one to keep the other.

Anyway, it's one of those things where you could go back and forth on it all day long. But in the end I think it boils down to how much other people's choices affect others. If using whatever doesn't have a noticeable impact on others then fine. But you run the spectrum of smoking in restaurants to drunk driving as to how much of an impact is noticeable. And on that, I am done posting about this as it's guaranteed to turn into some sort of political/religion discussion.

As soon as the taser stops, the pain is 100% gone. The only residual effect is you feel like you had a brisk workout.
>> ^Lawdeedaw:

>> ^TheSofaKing:
I've been tasered and I got it for 5 seconds. It is the worst pain I have ever felt by miles. I've explained the feeling as follows: remember the WORST time you hit your funny bone... multiply by 1 million and put it over your entire body.

And after the taser? Is it the less-lethal behemoth everyone makes it out to be? Did it leave you disabled? Psychological effects? Me not being tasered, I have no clue. I just go by what the masses say. I would love to write a book on the subject...

>> ^TheSofaKing:
I've been tasered and I got it for 5 seconds. It is the worst pain I have ever felt by miles. I've explained the feeling as follows: remember the WORST time you hit your funny bone... multiply by 1 million and put it over your entire body.


And after the taser? Is it the less-lethal behemoth everyone makes it out to be? Did it leave you disabled? Psychological effects? Me not being tasered, I have no clue. I just go by what the masses say. I would love to write a book on the subject...

The landings are awesome when they engage reverse thrusters. It boggles the mind to see that behemoth come to a full stop and actually start backing up in a matter of only a 3500 feet.

I love the man. I beg to differ with him on one thing, however...were I in his situation, I would embrace other people's prayers for recovery...not out of a faith in their gods, but in faith of collective intention and a very real sense that we are all creating reality as we know it, however miniscule or behemoth the manifestations.

lol @ around 0:39, the moron even puts his hand out thinking that's gonna stop a moving behemoth of metal.

>> ^chilaxe:

Good job... use our superior intelligence as tech nerds to add to the difficulties of some uneducated working class family.


Damn straight. It's called a learning experience.

Now she knows that it's not cool to act like a dumb stuck up antagonizing bitch.

And now her parents know that actually paying attention to whatever the hell their naive offspring does on the behemoth mosh pit called "The Internet" is part of parenting nowadays.

Yay fer learning!!

I'd be having deer stew for dinner and a little fawn would be going to a shelter if me an my lil doggy where in that situation. I cant believe that woman held back after seeing her dog like that, wow words do a lot when it comes down to you and a deer, My honest guess is that the dog would of been put down or died from internal injury. Although on second though I am a behemoth of muscle to be reckoned with, maybe that woman is no match for a 120 pound deer.

Not a happy video, although obviously has its place.

I don't universally scorn Apple, but they have been systematically tarnishing their own image for the last several years. I think the "vs" ads were the last positive thing they did in that regard.

Historically, Mac's bread and butter were the creative industries and now they're stifling the creativity of their users. They're driving off their faithful user base and now they're primarily left with the "snobby douchebag" market who only buys their stuff as a status symbol.

Then there's the lawsuits. They shut down Think Secret, went after Psystar and BluWiki, and most recently they've threatened Xiph. They're behaving like the RIAA.

Speaking of which, there's the DRM. They eventually caved and went DRM-free on their music, but not video content.

They're doing all these things as the free and open mindset is taking hold. They're fighting trends which are good for consumers and they still have the audacity to act like their shit don't stink. The iPad probably wouldn't be such a huge joke if they hadn't hyped it up like the Segway.

Just a few years ago they launched the iPod. MP3 players had been around for a while and other companies even had far superior products, but they marketed the iPod well and managed to become ubiquitous. They were the epitome of "hip"; now they look out of touch. The iPad unveiling reminds me of McCain's green screen speech.

>> ^dag:

Look, there is one very big mistake that Apple has made. They are losing the culture war. VideoSift skews a bit younger than me - I think the median age is about 29 - and the dislike and mistrust of Apple seems to be pretty universal among you all. We can blame the closed nature of the iPhone OS, those douchy "Mac vs. PC" ads, or maybe just that Apple is no longer the beleaguered, scrappy underdog. For whatever reason, hearts and minds are not with Apple at the moment.
e>> ^xxovercastxx:
Yes, because selling independent games was never profitable until Apple offered to play morality police and charge you 30% for the privilege.
>> ^dag:
And for all the squealing about Jobs' choke-hold on the platform - it's good to remember that Apple has empowered a whole generation of "little guy" developers to make good money from the app ecosystem - wresting power from the established game behemoths like EA. Good luck making a little game on other platforms - AND actually making dosh from it. The same kind of disruption-- upsetting the applecart of the big publishing companies-- appears to be in the works for self-published authors.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

We can argue the economics all day- I would say that the scale of the Apple App environment dwarves any bright spots you find for particular independent game developers.

Look, there is one very big mistake that Apple has made. They are losing the culture war. VideoSift skews a bit younger than me - I think the median age is about 29 - and the dislike and mistrust of Apple seems to be pretty universal among you all. We can blame the closed nature of the iPhone OS, those douchy "Mac vs. PC" ads, or maybe just that Apple is no longer the beleaguered, scrappy underdog. For whatever reason, hearts and minds are not with Apple at the moment.

>> ^xxovercastxx:

Yes, because selling independent games was never profitable until Apple offered to play morality police and charge you 30% for the privilege.
>> ^dag:
And for all the squealing about Jobs' choke-hold on the platform - it's good to remember that Apple has empowered a whole generation of "little guy" developers to make good money from the app ecosystem - wresting power from the established game behemoths like EA. Good luck making a little game on other platforms - AND actually making dosh from it. The same kind of disruption-- upsetting the applecart of the big publishing companies-- appears to be in the works for self-published authors.

Yes, because selling independent games was never profitable until Apple offered to play morality police and charge you 30% for the privilege.

>> ^dag:

And for all the squealing about Jobs' choke-hold on the platform - it's good to remember that Apple has empowered a whole generation of "little guy" developers to make good money from the app ecosystem - wresting power from the established game behemoths like EA. Good luck making a little game on other platforms - AND actually making dosh from it. The same kind of disruption-- upsetting the applecart of the big publishing companies-- appears to be in the works for self-published authors.

>> ^dag:

I'm sorry wait - are you saying that Windows changed a paradigm by inventing a GUI?
I would argue that Apple - yes, has invented a paradigm changing GUI - (again). Flicking to scroll around a capacitive touchscreen all seems very passe in perfect 20/20 hindsight - but so-called smart phones weren't doing it before the iPhone. Have a look at a Nokia or Windows Mobile phone from that era- and it's pretty clear. static icons, optimised for a stylus or control pad, nothing harnessing the power of your finger. The Android phones are very good- I might get one some day - but they owe a debt of innovation to Apple for blazing the trail.
I'm sure that getting a game distributed through EA or Steam would be great, and they may have better terms than Apple - but I'd argue that single hacker working in his basement to make something cool has a very slim chance in brokering a deal with EA or Valve. The App store is making a lot of these single programmers very rich - and I think that's a good, disruptive thing.
>> ^EDD:
>> ^dag:
Apple has once again changed the paradigm of how we use computers.
Apple has empowered a whole generation of "little guy" developers to make good money from the app ecosystem - wresting power from the established game behemoths like EA.

"Changed the paradigm"? What are you smoking, mate? They might have changed the paradigm if they invented the touch screen (they didn't). They might have changed the paradigm if they invented a new, ultra-popular activity that we use computers for, like twitter or facebook or e-mail (they didn't). They might have changed the paradigm if they invented the mouse or a GUI like Windows (they didn't). They might have changed the paradigm if they invented MS Office or at least an equal alternative to at least one of its products (they haven't). But a simple rework on an ages-old tablet device which is only becoming popular now because of the brand and the drop in price which they can take very little, if any, credit for? Puhh-lease.
And as for your second argument - try and compare Apple terms for iPhone devs to EA Partners terms or Valve's Steam terms. You'll find that there are few publishers with shittier deals for game and software devs than Apple. And by the way - moving into the social mini-game market isn't exactly "wresting power" from publishers of AAA console and PC publishers like EA.


Whatchu talkin' 'bout Willis? Hahaha...see what I did there? I said that thing Gary Coleman used to say and now he's dead. Just as dead as the horse you guys are kicking...