Windows 7 Forums

Welcome to Windows 7 Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find support and solutions for any problems regarding your Windows 7 PC be it Dell, HP, Acer, Asus or a custom build. We also provide an extensive Windows 7 tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks.


Windows 7: Byte Rights: While You Were Out

03 Oct 2011   #21
Catswold

Windows 7
 
 

Political discussions are frowned on in this forum, but with that caveat and with apologies to the moderators:
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by lehnerus2000 View Post
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Catswold View Post
Fact: Corporations never pay taxes, any such costs accrued by them are automatically passed on to those who buy their products, therefore any movement to "tax the corporations more" is nothing more but a means of placing more taxes on the people--except in this case, that tax is hidden from the people.
That is the result of badly written, corrupt and/or outdated laws.

It is simple to compute the input and output costs (the corporations actually keep collate that data themselves).
We don't live in the 1800's anymore. Work that would have required thousands of accountants and taken months to complete, can now be performed in minutes by computers.

They could be taxed on the "retail" price of their products and services.
The tax should be sliding scale based on the percentage markup (e.g. mark your prices up 100% and get taxed at 100%).
No matter how you write the laws, the costs will be passed along to the consumer and for anyone to attempt to prevent that will increase the complexity of tax-law exponentially and will destroy the profitability of those corporations, Corporations must by able to pass along their costs, or they cannot make a profit and without profit, those companies will not exist, the jobs they create will no longer exist and thus the stream of revenue will cease.

If you think that we would all be better off with the old mom and pop stores instead of large corporations, you are mistaken. It requires large sources of capital in order to invest in research and development and invent the many things we take for granted everyday.

The most economically successful societies have always been the least regulated. In such an environment, everyone wins, the consumer wins through buying products made cheaper through the economies of scale available only to0 large commercial interests, the employees win because when the company profits, wages go up, the government wins because when companies are profitable, revenues increase, and the stockholders win because their stock values go up and their dividends increase.

The most tightly regulated economies are the least successful--which is why socialism and communist invariably fail as economic models.

[quote]
Quote:
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Catswold View Post
Oh yeah, on occasion when a company kills someone through negligence, those in charge of the company (CEO, CFO, President, etc.) are penalized as individuals. It is not possible to penalize everyone who is part of a corporation, therefore penalizing them financially is the only means of enforcing laws.
Why should everyone in the corporation be punished?
Why not punish those who were involved and those who were supposed to be overseeing the company's operations?
Fining a corporation only punishes the general public and the shareholders.

That's why corporations cover up manufacturing defects.
There have been many examples of companies (think automotive) not performing recalls, because the lawyers and accountants calculated that court fines would be less than the cost of a product recall.

If the law was, the BOD is civilly and criminally responsible for actions of their corporations (except in the case of actions performed by external unaffiliated person(s) or rogue employees) the corporations would "clean up their acts" overnight.
I agree with your basic argument, but identifying who is responsible and who should be held responsible aside from the lower down people who merely did what they were told is very difficult--in private businesses as it is in government.

Example: At what point is a corporate executive (or BOD) responsible for the neglect of a single employee or a single manager who is concealing his actions? Did they exercise sufficient "due diligence?" In the case of the Tylenol contamination/poisoning, was security sufficiently tight? Was supervision properly exercised?

Any investigation automatically penalizes the entire corporations at least as much as a blanket fine, both in costs and in man power and distraction from pursuing their business.

Personally I would like to see more "hard time" prison sentences handed out for "white collar" criminals--such as those you identify. I think serving time in Attica or Folsom would be a much better deterrent than a couple of years at "Club Fed."
Quote:
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Catswold View Post
Liberty and freedom are on life support, but it is government far more than private industry who is threatening them.
If you live in a "Democratic" society, why are you scared of the Government?
Could it be that the Government passes laws that benefit special interest groups (e.g. corporations, unions, religious groups, etc.) to the detriment of the majority of the citizenry?

Eliminate the influence of special interest groups and make the politicians do what the majority of voters tell them to.
Of course if you are in a minority group, things might not be so rosy.
Well first, I don' live in a "democratic government," I live in a republic, a system in which the states have defined powers and jurisdiction and the powers of the federal government are strictly and precisely laid out in a charter (the Constitution).

The closer a government is to the people, the more responsive it is to their needs. I prefer that the federal government be restricted to those areas in which they are uniquely suited to function and leave the remainder of governing to local government. The problem isn't government, it is too much government.

As former President Gerald Ford said: "A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you have."

The government should be at the sufferance of the people, not in control of them. As we say here, "a government of the people, by the people, and for the people."

Government has its functions: to defend its citizens from foreign and domestic enemies, to ensure that each citizen has the opportunity to succeed--or fail--as their own abilities allow, to provide an environment in which a persons level of financial and personal success is dependent solely on their willingness to sacrifice and strive for that success.

What we see all too often is government trying to limit the success of one in the interest of a nebulous and capricious concept of "fairness." Trying to ensure equality of outcome rather than of opportunity. Too many people see success as a zero sum game rather than a limitless resource. Just because one person is successful does not prevent another from being the same. Government has a tendency to impose limits on one to further the success of another--either for political reasons or to achieve some assumed noble goal--the "green movement" and "green energy" is a perfect example.

Government's job is not to protect people from themselves or their own actions, it is to protect them from outside interference. Let the market place decide who succeeds and who fails, not the government. Also, let the people pay the price for their own ignorance and willful neglect.

In the case of corporations, government should ensure that accurate and full information is available; it should not be trying to make decisions on that information in the place of the individual. Yes smoking is bad for you, but the decision whether to smoke or not should be the individual's decision, not the government's.

Government was correct to force the tobacco industry (and all of the others like Monsanto and asbestos, etc) to reveal the truth, but that is the point at which their activity should cease. Once the facts are known, the people through the power of their pocketbooks should decide who succeeds and who fails.

Sorry for being so verbose and again I apologize to the moderators for going Political. I won't respond again because of the admonition against political discussion.

Enjoyed the exchange though, lehnerus2000.


My System SpecsSystem Spec
.
03 Oct 2011   #22
lhorwinkle

Win 7
 
 

Quote:
Eliminate the influence of special interest groups and make the politicians do what the majority of voters tell them to.
Who are these special interest groups? Aren't they voters?
Which special interest groups would you target? (Exxon?)
Which ones would you not target? (labor unions?)
My System SpecsSystem Spec
03 Oct 2011   #23
lehnerus2000

W7 Ultimate SP1, LM18 MATE, W10IP VM, W10 Home, #All 64 bit
 
 
I gave some examples

I also apologise to the moderators.

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Catswold View Post
Political discussions are frowned on in this forum, but with that caveat and with apologies to the moderators:
...
No matter how you write the laws, the costs will be passed along to the consumer and for anyone to attempt to prevent that will increase the complexity of tax-law exponentially and will destroy the profitability of those corporations, Corporations must by able to pass along their costs, or they cannot make a profit and without profit, those companies will not exist, the jobs they create will no longer exist and thus the stream of revenue will cease.
I never said that companies SHOULDN'T be allowed to make profits.
IMO, there is a difference between reasonable profit and "gouging".

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Catswold View Post
If you think that we would all be better off with the old mom and pop stores instead of large corporations, you are mistaken.
Small businesses employ more people than corporations (comparatively).
Therefore, if the goal of the Government is to reduce unemployment, it should actually favour small businesses over giant corporations.

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Catswold View Post
It requires large sources of capital in order to invest in research and development and invent the many things we take for granted everyday.
The trouble is that those large resources can be used to buy of politicians, instead of being used for R&D (because it's cheaper).

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Catswold View Post
The most economically successful societies have always been the least regulated. In such an environment, everyone wins, the consumer wins through buying products made cheaper through the economies of scale available only to0 large commercial interests, the employees win because when the company profits, wages go up, the government wins because when companies are profitable, revenues increase, and the stockholders win because their stock values go up and their dividends increase.

The most tightly regulated economies are the least successful--which is why socialism and communist invariably fail as economic models.
Which country has the most environmental regulations, USA or China?
Which of those countries has the best environment?

Regulations aren't inherently bad, unless they are badly written and/or poorly thought out.
Also good laws/regulations are useless without proper oversight.
It's illegal to kill people (good law) but if there aren't any police, it is basically a pointless law.

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Catswold View Post
Trying to ensure equality of outcome rather than of opportunity. Too many people see success as a zero sum game rather than a limitless resource. Just because one person is successful does not prevent another from being the same.
It is closer to zero sum than limitless.
The amount of money that is available at a given time isn't infinite.
Supposedly the amount of useful money can only increase, if productivity increases.

Simple example.
I produce something that everyone, everywhere wants and is willing to pay for.
In a few years I accumulate (and hoard) 100s of billions of dollars (Bill Gates is a pauper compared to me).
After a while, the amount of cash that can circulate in the economy (i.e. do any work) becomes less than my personal holdings.
The Government has to print money, so that banks can give it out to their customers.
Inflation goes through the roof.
The economy stalls.
Disaster

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Catswold View Post
Enjoyed the exchange though, lehnerus2000.
Thank you for your civil points.

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by lhorwinkle View Post
Quote:
Eliminate the influence of special interest groups and make the politicians do what the majority of voters tell them to.
Who are these special interest groups? Aren't they voters?
They get to vote just like everyone else.
Why should they ALSO get to "buy off" politicians?

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by lhorwinkle View Post
Which special interest groups would you target? (Exxon?)
Which ones would you not target? (labor unions?)
If you are a citizen, a company (or some other group) and you are unwilling (not unable) to pay taxes to the Government, why should the Government protect your assets with police and military units (paid for by upstanding tax payers)?

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by lehnerus2000 View Post
... (e.g. corporations, unions, religious groups, etc.) ...
We could also add (if you like):
  • Sports Clubs
  • Casino owners
My System SpecsSystem Spec
.

03 Oct 2011   #24
Brink

64-bit Windows 10 Pro
 
 

warning   Warning
Let's keep the politics out of this shall we before it turns ugly, and just keep the discussion only about the article instead.

My System SpecsSystem Spec
04 Oct 2011   #25
Brink

64-bit Windows 10 Pro
 
 
Update:

Byte Rights: Think of the Children, But Not Too Carefully

Quote:
Apparently, I am an Internet child-raping fiend. How else could I be against something called the Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act? It's even supported by sheriffs associations and the Department of Justice, among others, and your representative may be voting on it soon (hint, hint).

Turns out, what's at issue here has nothing to do with children and sex—in fact, it would be particularly hard to find a child pornographer with this law. It's a callous way of making anyone concerned about online freedom sound like a slavering pervert, an old trick of over-the-top lawmakers. The naming of the act is often inverse to how horrible it is. If they wanted to dump toxins in the water supply, they'd call it the Save Kittens Act and claim the opposition were cat-hating Hitlers.

What the law is really about is data retention. Data retention policies mandate that ISPs keep data on all their customers for some predetermined time (usually around a year), in case the police pop by and want to look at someone's records. Of course, the problem is that if you know you're going to be committing a crime, you just go somewhere exempt from data retention like a library or coffee shop. As a tool for catching hardened criminals, this is less than useless. But for snooping on people who might file-share or coordinate a protest, it's perfect. The data they want gathered isn't just your temporary IP at all times, it's also your name, address, phone number, credit card, and bank account.

I don't actually want to allege that the government wants to spy on its citizens by looking for any shade of gray or dissent online, but acts like these make it hard not to wonder.
Source: Maximum PC | Byte Rights: Think of the Children, But Not Too Carefully
My System SpecsSystem Spec
04 Oct 2011   #26
lehnerus2000

W7 Ultimate SP1, LM18 MATE, W10IP VM, W10 Home, #All 64 bit
 
 
Orwell here we come

It seems that our democratically elected representatives, use "Nineteen Eighty-Four" as a "how to" guide for government.

Nineteen Eighty-Four - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Ministry of Peace (Minipax)

Minipax reports on Oceania's perpetual war.

The Ministry of Truth (Minitrue)
The Ministry of Truth controls information: news, entertainment, education, and the arts. Winston Smith works in the Minitrue RecDep (Records Department), "rectifying" historical records to concord with Big Brother's current pronouncements, thus everything the Party says is true.

The Ministry of Love (Miniluv)
The Ministry of Love identifies, monitors, arrests, and converts real and imagined dissidents. In Winston's experience, the dissident is beaten and tortured, then, when near-broken, is sent to Room 101 to face "the worst thing in the world" — until love for Big Brother and the Party replaces dissension.

The Ministry of Plenty (Miniplenty)
The Ministry of Plenty rations and controls food, goods, and domestic production; every fiscal quarter, the Miniplenty publishes false claims of having raised the standard of living, when it has, in fact, reduced rations, availability, and production. The Minitrue substantiates the Miniplenty claims by revising historical records to report numbers supporting the current, "increased rations".

Or in other words, "Take that you democracy-hating, socialist, paedophiliac, IP pirating, terrorist lovers!"
My System SpecsSystem Spec
Reply

 Byte Rights: While You Were Out




Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search




Similar help and support threads
Thread Forum
Cannot Delete 0 Byte File on Desktop
Hi all, First of all, im new here, today actually, I have looked many different forums and different solutions but nothing is working to delete this file from my desktop. I let my sister borrow my laptop while I was away, and she had downloaded these torrent's to my system. Leaving the torrent...
General Discussion
Cannot delete 0 Byte File
I have a 0 byte file that is in my pictures and I cannot delete/copy/cut it. It's been on my computer for a few years and I've tried to do a lot to get rid of it. The original picture is long gone. When I attempt to open the file, there is no program on my system that can open it. Help please?
Music, Pictures & Video
Undeletable 0 Byte File
http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w38/aozgolo/Persist.jpg I've had this file on my computer desktop for a couple of months now, it is titled "www.p4ac.com .com.com ", is 0 bytes, has no file association, and cannot be removed by any process I have thus tried. -F5 Refresh does nothing...
General Discussion
initial 0 byte partition
When I clean installed W7 it would create 3 partitions 0 byte = unallocated 100MB - reserved and 80GB (the rest) = install Somehow, I eventually got rid of that 0 byte partition during one of my reinstalls. I thought I knew how I did it, but apparently not. I am trying to install W8 on a...
General Discussion
Users with administrative rights don't get all rights
I did not see this addressed in several searches. What I have found with several new installations is that the very first username you establish has rights beyond any other subsequent users you add even if you give them "administrative" rights. This specific problem that having is that I need to...
Network & Sharing


Our Sites

Site Links

About Us

Find Us

Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

© Designer Media Ltd

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:59.

Twitter Facebook Google+



Windows 7 Forums

Seven Forums Android App Seven Forums IOS App