The Daily WTF: Curious Perversions in Information Technology

TGV · 2012-12-03 Reply Admin

operagost:
TGV:
Why do I get the nagging feeling that this is a US-based operation?
I don't know-- why? I'm simply dying to know.

It might have been the standards for treating employees, which reminded me the Foxconn factories. But then I noticed the names were all weird, and there was talk of bonuses. So there you are.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

I'm pretty sure this large software company was not Microsoft. I mean, they don't spend money on R&D, do they? Just steal others ideas?

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Dave Insurgent:
If Socialism is an interface, you're only referring to the DictatorshipSocialism implementation

I'm curious what, if any, other implementations exist.

Dave Insurgent:
those behaviors are the very spirit of capitalism. Take as much as you can, from anyone, from everyone.

I think you're referring to theft, which, by the way, is openly advocated by socialism. Take from the productive and hand it out to people who haven't earned it.

Capitalism is "Take as much as you can, from anyone, from everyone, with their consent." No one forces you to pay $2,000 for a TV. The buyer and seller agree on the price, otherwise no transaction occurs. As soon as a transaction is not voluntary -- when there is some element of force involved -- you are moving toward one of the criminal "isms" such as socialism.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

[quote user="dkf"][quote] Do the world a favor. Remind any manager who thinks like this that they are turning themselves into a part of the machine that is easily replaceable by a cheaper one.[/quote]

Why? That's called "progress". Costs are supposed to come down as new efficiencies are found.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

C-Derb:
operagost:
ObiWayneKenobi:
I love how to cut costs they remove things like taking time to refactor code and fix leaky roofs, but presumably leave in "important" things which are 99% of the time useless crap (pretty new feature for Clueless Client X that doesn't need to be done)
Sadly yes this is "business as usual" in the USA. As long as the executives get hefty bonuses, that's all that matters. Go capitalism!
Stalin and Mao killed millions with their policies. Go communism!
Oh boy, here we go. Look, Capitalism, Socialism, Communism, etc....they've all got the exact same Achilles heel: Greed. It's just that with Capitalism it takes greed a little bit longer to destroy society. But greed will eventually win. It always does.

Who doesn't love money ?

snoofle · 2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Randy:
As soon as a transaction is not voluntary -- when there is some element of force involved -- you are moving toward one of the criminal "isms" such as socialism.

Hmmm. Here in the US, the IRS doesn't let you choose how much to pay in taxes, or when; it's mandatory. If you don't, they will eventually come after you and make your life miserable.

We may well be on our way...

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Randy:
As soon as a transaction is not voluntary -- when there is some element of force involved -- you are moving toward one of the criminal "isms" such as socialism.

Oh, god, another bloody anarchist.

PiisAWheeL · 2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Gaza Rullz:
C-Derb:
operagost:
ObiWayneKenobi:
I love how to cut costs they remove things like taking time to refactor code and fix leaky roofs, but presumably leave in "important" things which are 99% of the time useless crap (pretty new feature for Clueless Client X that doesn't need to be done)
Sadly yes this is "business as usual" in the USA. As long as the executives get hefty bonuses, that's all that matters. Go capitalism!
Stalin and Mao killed millions with their policies. Go communism!
Oh boy, here we go. Look, Capitalism, Socialism, Communism, etc....they've all got the exact same Achilles heel: Greed. It's just that with Capitalism it takes greed a little bit longer to destroy society. But greed will eventually win. It always does.
Who doesn't love money ?

I believe Margaret Thatcher said is best: "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other peoples money."

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

snoofle:
Randy:
As soon as a transaction is not voluntary -- when there is some element of force involved -- you are moving toward one of the criminal "isms" such as socialism.
Hmmm. Here in the US, the IRS doesn't let you choose how much to pay in taxes, or when; it's mandatory. If you don't, they will eventually come after you and make your life miserable.
We may well be on our way...

May??? I thought that was abundantly clear. We just re-elected someone who openly advocates and implements socialist and marxist ideas.

Not that his most visible opponent was much better. Politics today seems to be a debate between "should we bankrupt the country at ten thousand miles an hour" or "no we should keep it below nine thousand nine hundred miles an hour".

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

trtrwtf:
Randy:
As soon as a transaction is not voluntary -- when there is some element of force involved -- you are moving toward one of the criminal "isms" such as socialism.
Oh, god, another bloody anarchist.

Do you just throw insults around at random? Or do you truly equate "no theft" with "no laws"?

(Hint: they could hardly be farther apart.)

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Randy:
May??? I thought that was abundantly clear. We just re-elected someone who openly advocates and implements socialist and marxist ideas.

And may I be the first to say: nyah, nyah!

Not that his most visible opponent was much better. Politics today seems to be a debate between "should we bankrupt the country at ten thousand miles an hour" or "no we should keep it below nine thousand nine hundred miles an hour".

So you're an anarchist who wants to go back to the Clinton economy? I'm getting confused.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Randy:
trtrwtf:
Randy:
As soon as a transaction is not voluntary -- when there is some element of force involved -- you are moving toward one of the criminal "isms" such as socialism.
Oh, god, another bloody anarchist.
Do you just throw insults around at random? Or do you truly equate "no theft" with "no laws"?
(Hint: they could hardly be farther apart.)

Someone who wants to repeal the government is usually aome flavor of anarchist. You're the Norquist flavor, but I see no real difference between you and the spotty twerps in the park with their circle-A tattoos. Parasites, the bunch of you.

PiisAWheeL · 2012-12-03 Reply Admin

The roof! The roof! The roof in on fi-... in the basement! We don't need no water it is under lots of snow!

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Randy:
I think you're referring to theft, which, by the way, is openly advocated by socialism. Take from the productive and hand it out to people who haven't earned it.
Capitalism is "Take as much as you can, from anyone, from everyone, with their consent." No one forces you to pay $2,000 for a TV. The buyer and seller agree on the price, otherwise no transaction occurs. As soon as a transaction is not voluntary -- when there is some element of force involved -- you are moving toward one of the criminal "isms" such as socialism.

What a gloriously naive view.

You're not nearly the capitalist you think you are, and you've not "earned" nearly as much as you think you have. The truly poor, dying, diseased, desperate have not "earned" that, either. This is the part where you use some guise over Social Darwinism (as though you even understand the concept) and pretend that somehow, one human being is really worth thousands and thousands of "others".

I'm curious what, if any, other implementations exist.

Canada has a DemocraticSocialism implementation. It obviously makes concessions to play along with others, but it's there, if you look.

Also your suggestion that wealth redistribution is theft is laughable. Next you'll say taxes are. It's not a matter of kicking in your door because you made a reasonable living. The amount of money you will make in your lifetime is trivial compared to those that truly oppose wealth redistribution. You cannot start wars. You cannot sway governments. You are no one, yet you live happily conscripted by their rhetoric. The people that truly pull the strings against socialism are the ones that make more in a day than you make in a year. More in a year than you'll obviously make in your life.

Capitalism "takes" from the productive and hands it to the owners - who do nothing but accumulate more wealth (also known as power). That's no more or less theft than any form of redistribution of an estate once it's owner passes, or taxation.

Your assertion that this is theft fails to consider that the means that the capitalist acquired ownership was also theft. No one owned the land and the resources that they appointed to themselves, however long ago. So take. As much as you can. More than you could ever need. So much that it deprives others of health and well-being. But no - it's suggesting that every human alive have some sense of a fair shot at a life free of pain and suffering, without despair or fear; at a cost that is immeasurably small to the fewest of our kind, that is criminal.

Your stupid is showing.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

trtrwtf:
Randy:
trtrwtf:
Randy:
As soon as a transaction is not voluntary -- when there is some element of force involved -- you are moving toward one of the criminal "isms" such as socialism.
Oh, god, another bloody anarchist.
Do you just throw insults around at random? Or do you truly equate "no theft" with "no laws"?
(Hint: they could hardly be farther apart.)

Someone who wants to repeal the government is usually aome flavor of anarchist. You're the Norquist flavor, but I see no real difference between you and the spotty twerps in the park with their circle-A tattoos. Parasites, the bunch of you.

I'm opposed to people with guns telling you what you may and may not buy and from whom and at what price.

I'm not opposed to laws against theft. Rather, I'd like to see prohibitions on theft made much stronger and more comprehensive.

And a parasite is one who eats what another produces, without compensation. In other words, a thief. Or a socialist. Keep fishing, though, maybe you can eventually come up with an insult that doesn't apply to your ideas more than mine.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Dave Insurgent:
... you dolt.

Why do Marxists think ad-hominem attacks support their credibility, when all it does is destroy it?

Dave Insurgent:
You don't own the means of production just because you're the one who does the work.

"Work" === "Means of production". Marxists are typically self-contradictory, but not always in the same sentence.

[free-market] Capitalism is sum of voluntary exchanges between pairs of willing participants, without coercion by a third party. Don't confuse this with "Corporatism", which is "businesses" preferentially supported by the state.

Just because no willing party is interested in a transaction with you does not mean there is something inherently wrong with a free market system.

ContraCorners · 2012-12-03 Reply Admin

So, I read this as "to get the R&D budget down to 12% of total spending, we'll need to cut $30M from the R&D budget."

Am I the only one wondering why Building Maintenance was part of the R&D budget?

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Randy:
I'm opposed to people with guns telling you what you may and may not buy and from whom and at what price.
I'm not opposed to laws against theft. Rather, I'd like to see prohibitions on theft made much stronger and more comprehensive.

And a parasite is one who eats what another produces, without compensation. In other words, a thief. Or a socialist. Keep fishing, though, maybe you can eventually come up with an insult that doesn't apply to your ideas more than mine.

So, who pays for the guys with the guns who implement the laws against theft? Or the guys with the big red trucks who come and keep the fire in your neighbor's house from spreading to your house? Or the roads that the guys in the red trucks drive on to get to your neighbor's house to keep your house from burning down?

You live in a socialist country, and you want to live in a socialist country. Your problem is, you want to have it without paying for it - like any anarchist. The shoe fits, punk. Now go join some mosh pit somewhere and leave the economics to the grownups.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Dave Insurgent:
Capitalism "takes" from the productive and hands it to the owners - who do nothing

So when a farmer drives a tractor to plow his field, the farmer is productive but all the people who made the tractor are not? Capital -- things that make a worker's life easier and more productive -- has value too. It isn't just "the workers" who produce.

You'd rather all farms be run by manual labor alone. A man and a hoe. Oops -- the hoe is capital too. Just use your bare fingers then.

Dave Insurgent:
Your stupid is showing.

Why is it that everything you say has to include an insult? Do you think that will persuade me? That I will cower in fear of your scathing disapproval?

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Randy:
Dave Insurgent:
If Socialism is an interface, you're only referring to the DictatorshipSocialism implementation
I'm curious what, if any, other implementations exist.

For examples of non-dictatorship socialism, look at any prosperous first-world country. UK, Canada, France, Germany...

Even the US has pretty significant socialist aspects to the government. What is Social Security? What is Unemployment insurance? What is FEMA doing to help people in the areas damaged by Hurricane Sandy? What is a Fire Department?

Dave Insurgent:
those behaviors are the very spirit of capitalism. Take as much as you can, from anyone, from everyone.
I think you're referring to theft, which, by the way, is openly advocated by socialism. Take from the productive and hand it out to people who haven't earned it.
Capitalism is "Take as much as you can, from anyone, from everyone, with their consent." No one forces you to pay $2,000 for a TV. The buyer and seller agree on the price, otherwise no transaction occurs. As soon as a transaction is not voluntary -- when there is some element of force involved -- you are moving toward one of the criminal "isms" such as socialism.

Yes, that's right. And nobody "forces" anybody to work as a waiter in a restaurant for less than minimum wage. They made a bad decision to be born to poor parents and to receive a bad education. They could have chosen from many more profitable occupations such as "burglar" and "drug mule".

b.t.w. Socialism is actually good for rich people. If you don't believe me, ask Louis XVI.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Publius:
"Work" === "Means of production". Marxists are typically self-contradictory, but not always in the same sentence.

From Wikipedia:

Means of production refers to physical, non-human inputs used in production—the factories, machines, and tools used to produce wealth

Try to type the words in to the box on the screen before you type them in to the other box on the screen. But it's cool, you know what ad-hominem is. Oh wait, no you don't, because my argument wasn't against his person. I called him a dolt as a result of my argument against him. So that's 0 for 2 on Wikipedia usage.

[free-market] Capitalism is sum of voluntary exchanges between pairs of willing participants, without coercion by a third party. Don't confuse this with "Corporatism", which is "businesses" preferentially supported by the state.

This oversimplification fails to consider - probably due to your lack of understanding of the term means of production - that not every entity has a "fair chance" regardless of preferential treatment by the state. The capitalist entity is still bound, by its very existence, to pursue profit at any cost - this can't possibly be in the interest of the greater good. It's about each entity behaving as if it were the only one behaving the way it is (polluting, intellectual property, as an example). It's also about the fact that as power converges (which is an inevitable result of competition: some win, some lose, those that win grow bigger and make it more difficult for anyone to complete) and you end up with oligarchies.

Just because no willing party is interested in a transaction with you does *not* mean there is something inherently wrong with a free market system.

It does when the transaction involves something essential to my survival, like say air or water or food. It does when it means that many suffer for the benefit of the few (which again is a consequence of consolidation of wealth: which is the goal of capitalism

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

trtrwtf:
the spotty twerps in the park with their circle-A tattoos. Parasites, the bunch of you.

Oh, please, I beg you, oh champion of socialist policy, Parasites (defined as "a person who receives support, advantage, or the like, from another or others without giving any useful or proper return, as one who lives on the hospitality of others.") in exactly what way?

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

trtrwtf:
So, who pays for the guys with the guns who implement the laws against theft? Or the guys with the big red trucks who come and keep the fire in your neighbor's house from spreading to your house? Or the roads that the guys in the red trucks drive on to get to your neighbor's house to keep your house from burning down?

Who told you the only way to pay for things you want is to steal?

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Publius:
[free-market] Capitalism is sum of voluntary exchanges between pairs of willing participants, without coercion by a third party. Don't confuse this with "Corporatism", which is "businesses" preferentially supported by the state.

I cannot imagine a society where capitalism will not eventually breed corporatism.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

No this could never happen in the U.S. Hey wait what's that creaking so

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Svensson:
Even the US has pretty significant socialist aspects to the government. What is Social Security? What is Unemployment insurance? What is FEMA doing to help people in the areas damaged by Hurricane Sandy? What is a Fire Department?

It's true, you never heard anyone squawk so loud as the former republicans whose houses took some water in the hurricane. All of a sudden, they're lining up for their suck at the teat.

Which of course they should have, like anyone - I'd just like to hear them own up to it, join in, and start making this a better country instead of whinging all day about having to put in their bit to make it work.

But of course these guys will be back on the anti-government bandwagon just as soon as they've got their handout and spent it.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Randy:
trtrwtf:
So, who pays for the guys with the guns who implement the laws against theft? Or the guys with the big red trucks who come and keep the fire in your neighbor's house from spreading to your house? Or the roads that the guys in the red trucks drive on to get to your neighbor's house to keep your house from burning down?
Who told you the only way to pay for things you want is to steal?

You did, when you compared taxation to theft. I consider it a civic duty, but I guess that's out of fashion with some people.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

C-Derb:
I cannot imagine a society where capitalism will not eventually breed corporatism.

Imagine, if you can, a society where capitalists don't buy legislators because legislators don't have the power to screw around with the economy driving benefits to the aforesaid corporatists while making it punishable by violence for anyone else to start up a competing business.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

operagost:
ObiWayneKenobi:
I love how to cut costs they remove things like taking time to refactor code and fix leaky roofs, but presumably leave in "important" things which are 99% of the time useless crap (pretty new feature for Clueless Client X that doesn't need to be done)
Sadly yes this is "business as usual" in the USA. As long as the executives get hefty bonuses, that's all that matters. Go capitalism!
Stalin and Mao killed millions with their policies. Go communism!

Yes, because that's the only other choice. Go false dichotomies!

ObiWayneKenobi · 2012-12-03 Reply Admin

snoofle:
Randy:
As soon as a transaction is not voluntary -- when there is some element of force involved -- you are moving toward one of the criminal "isms" such as socialism.
Hmmm. Here in the US, the IRS doesn't let you choose how much to pay in taxes, or when; it's mandatory. If you don't, they will eventually come after you and make your life miserable.
We may well be on our way...

It's worse than that. It's actually voluntary (check the actual income tax law), but they claim it's mandatory and use force to "prove" that it's mandatory.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Randy:
Dave Insurgent:
Capitalism "takes" from the productive and hands it to the owners - who do nothing
So when a farmer drives a tractor to plow his field, the farmer is productive but all the people who made the tractor are not? Capital -- things that make a worker's life easier and more productive -- has value too. It isn't just "the workers" who produce.

Except that you just said it is: the workers produced the machine which enables another worker to produce food. That's no the same thing as "owners" in the context of what I said. The money that the farmer pays for that machine, which is of great utility, doesn't go in to the pockets of the workers at nearly the rate of the businessman who owns the factory. How does he own the factory? Certainly not, in all but a very, very few number of cases, by his own labor. No, he acquired it through investment, likely through money and connections supplied to him by family and friends. He will continue to grow wealthier and wealthier while those that actually do the work in his shop gain very little. They trod along, hoping that they are producing enough profit for him that he wont fire one of them or undertake some other affront to their health and safety in the name of Profit. I would concede this to be a hypothetical, perhaps even hyperbolic argument against capitalism were it not for the fact that it's happening every day all over the country. The only way you can endorse this system is if you are already a holder of wealth, or foolish enough to think that one day you will be. And again - wealth is not a sum you can think of right now. Having a million dollars in the bank does not make you wealthy. Everyone here should expect, in order to enjoy a modest retirement, an easy million in the bank. You don't have nearly as much to fear from socialism as you think. Like it has been said, see Canada, France, UK, etc. for actual non-dictatorial implementations of socialist democracy.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Randy:
May??? I thought that was abundantly clear. We just re-elected someone who openly advocates and implements socialist and marxist ideas.

Oh STFU. Your Fox News fantasy of what Obama stood for is completely the opposite to what he actually stands for.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Publius:
trtrwtf:
the spotty twerps in the park with their circle-A tattoos. Parasites, the bunch of you.
Oh, please, I beg you, oh champion of socialist policy, Parasites (defined as "a person who receives support, advantage, or the like, from another or others without giving any useful or proper return, as one who lives on the hospitality of others.") in exactly what way?

In that they want the favors of government - police, armies, roads, regulation of food and drug purity, that sort of good stuff - without paying for it. Parasites by definition - your definition.

Read a newspaper - a bunch of nimrods running this country off the cliff to save their donors from paying their fair share. (And then they have the godalmighty nerve to call someone else an elitist? Some kind of neck these guys got, I'll tell you what)

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

TGV:
Why do I get the nagging feeling that this is a US-based operation?

Unlikely. The potential liability would send most corporate lawyers into convulsions.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

ObiWayneKenobi:
It's worse than that. It's actually voluntary (check the actual income tax law), but they claim it's mandatory and use force to "prove" that it's mandatory.

Income tax law is a pretty big book. Can you maybe provide a reference?

ObiWayneKenobi · 2012-12-03 Reply Admin

trtrwtf:
ObiWayneKenobi:
It's worse than that. It's actually voluntary (check the actual income tax law), but they claim it's mandatory and use force to "prove" that it's mandatory.

Income tax law is a pretty big book. Can you maybe provide a reference?

How about you provide a reference saying where it's required to pay it? Because from the documentaries I've seen, nobody in the IRS seems to know the passage that states that... perhaps you could help them find it?

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Xing:
As long as the repair is pushed to the next fiscal year, the executives can collect their bonus for hitting cost cutting targets.

And even better, since next year is going to see costs sky-rocket because they need to rebuild / or buy a building, the executives will simply quit and get a new job boosting about how they slashed spending at their last job!

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Jeff:
C-Derb:
I cannot imagine a society where capitalism will not eventually breed corporatism.
Imagine, if you can, a society where capitalists don't buy legislators because legislators don't have the power to screw around with the economy driving benefits to the aforesaid corporatists while making it punishable by violence for anyone else to start up a competing business.

So let me get this straight: legislation is bad, because it allows capitalists to treat us in ways that are awful. But no legislation is good, because then capitalists would treat us well? This is because a capitalist is only a corporatist when there is a state to be bought? As soon as that state disappears, the same entities that hold the power would no longer be able to hold that power despite their immense wealth and influence over much more than just government? Or what, they'd just play nice all of a sudden?

From a reset-button point of view, sure, I'd like to see it play out in some kind of simulation. But from where we are? You're basically just completely removing the safety from a gun. It's not like, in the absence of lobbying and money in politics, suddenly Wal-Mart is going to go "oh geez, all this ma' and pa' shops opened up and we have no idea what to do!"

The consolidation of power by a few people has many outcomes, corporatism being just one of them. None of them are Good For You. The difference is that with a government, and I mean a real democratically elected government that is afraid of its people as they should be, their interest is everyone. In the cast of any form of capitalism, free market or not, the interest is within the entity first. It's incredibly simple. They will kill as many people as it takes, through working conditions or negligence, as long as the net change is profit.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

ObiWayneKenobi:
trtrwtf:
ObiWayneKenobi:
It's worse than that. It's actually voluntary (check the actual income tax law), but they claim it's mandatory and use force to "prove" that it's mandatory.

Income tax law is a pretty big book. Can you maybe provide a reference?

How about you provide a reference saying where it's required to pay it? Because from the documentaries I've seen, nobody in the IRS seems to know the passage that states that... perhaps you could help them find it?

I'm at work, earning money and keeping the economy rolling, so I can't really do a lot of research right at the moment. Since you seemed pretty sure, I figured you might have some sort of idea what you were talking about. No such luck though.

Unfortunately, I don't have time to really read through it and evaluate it right now, but google returned this, seems like it might be relevant.

http://www.quatloos.com/taxscams/taxprot2.htm

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Is US Code Title 26 Chapter 1 not sufficient? http://uscode.house.gov/download/title_26.shtml

Under authority derived from the Constitution, Article I Section 8 http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

If you have a citation proving tax is voluntary I'd surely love to see it.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

ObiWayneKenobi:
trtrwtf:
ObiWayneKenobi:
It's worse than that. It's actually voluntary (check the actual income tax law), but they claim it's mandatory and use force to "prove" that it's mandatory.

Income tax law is a pretty big book. Can you maybe provide a reference?

How about you provide a reference saying where it's required to pay it? Because from the documentaries I've seen, nobody in the IRS seems to know the passage that states that... perhaps you could help them find it?

How about you just don't pay your taxes and let us know how that works out for you? Maybe you could use your saved tax dollars to hire a lawyer who can provide a reference?

Mason Wheeler · 2012-12-03 Reply Admin

lanmind:
I once working in a poultry slaughter house as network admin. I don't recall why, but for some reason the place had been (thankfully, only for a few weeks) overrun by flies.

...maybe because you were in a poultry slaughter house?

Before Pasteur and omne vivum ex ovo, people used to think that raw meat was literally where flies came from.

ObiWayneKenobi · 2012-12-03 Reply Admin

C-Derb:
ObiWayneKenobi:
trtrwtf:
ObiWayneKenobi:
It's worse than that. It's actually voluntary (check the actual income tax law), but they claim it's mandatory and use force to "prove" that it's mandatory.

Income tax law is a pretty big book. Can you maybe provide a reference?

How about you provide a reference saying where it's required to pay it? Because from the documentaries I've seen, nobody in the IRS seems to know the passage that states that... perhaps you could help them find it?
How about you just don't pay your taxes and let us know how that works out for you? Maybe you could use your saved tax dollars to hire a lawyer who can provide a reference?

That was the point. The income tax law said it was voluntary, but the government says its mandatory and uses force (i.e. police) to enforce it being mandatory. I recall a documentary where they interviewed some IRS guy and asked him to show where it said income tax was mandatory, and he said something ridiculous like "It's mandatory because we have proven it through prosecution in court".

Incidentally the Supreme Court also ruled at one point that it was unconstitutional to tax labor, yet the income tax does just that. Go figure.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

ObiWayneKenobi:
That was the point. The income tax law said it was voluntary, but the government says its mandatory and uses force (i.e. police) to enforce it being mandatory. I recall a documentary where they interviewed some IRS guy and asked him to show where it said income tax was mandatory, and he said something ridiculous like "It's mandatory because we have proven it through prosecution in court".

Seriously? You remember in a documentary you saw where someone interviewed "some IRS guy" and asked him to cite chapter and verse of the tax code, and he couldn't do it - and that's why you think it's voluntary?

What the holy fucking crap are you smoking?

Mason Wheeler · 2012-12-03 Reply Admin

operagost:
ObiWayneKenobi:
I love how to cut costs they remove things like taking time to refactor code and fix leaky roofs, but presumably leave in "important" things which are 99% of the time useless crap (pretty new feature for Clueless Client X that doesn't need to be done)
Sadly yes this is "business as usual" in the USA. As long as the executives get hefty bonuses, that's all that matters. Go capitalism!
Stalin and Mao killed millions with their policies. Go communism!

I think a big part of the confusion is that what we call "capitalism" these days... isn't. Capitalism was defined by Adam Smith, but if you were to read what he wrote about it, (note: actually read, with some degree of reading comprehension skill required, as opposed to simply cherry-picking a few specific ideas,) what he describes is a shockingly different system than right-wingers today hold as the capitalist ideal.

The term was hijacked by Ayn Rand and replaced with a system that, highly vocal professions of "freedom" notwithstanding, bear a much closer resemblance to fascism than to capitalism. These days, if you go around advocating the true capitalist ideals that Adam Smith taught, you're likely to get called a socialist.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Dave Insurgent:
The money that the farmer pays for that machine, which is of great utility, doesn't go in to the pockets of the workers at nearly the rate of the businessman who owns the factory.

But the factory was also built by laborers, who were paid for their work, which is why the factory costs so much. And so it goes, back layer by layer, every capital tool was made by workers. It isn't just the "front line" visible worker who has merit, and the capital is evil and exploitative.

BTW I don't often see a factory or other large capital item owned by "a businessman". Most of them are owned by corporations. Think railroads, for example. The corporation, in turn, is owned by millions of shareholders, potentially including you. These shareholders lend their modest resources to the corporation in hopes that the corporation will find a way to make an improvement, also known as a return on investment.

As an investor, if you know you are going to lose money, you'll probably not loan your money to that corporation. No, you hope to come out ahead. And when two companies are bidding for your money, you'll be likely to choose the one you think will reward you better. This is the "insatiable lust for profits" that statists cannot tolerate.

As an investor, you may also discover that there aren't many people who can reliably produce a return on your investment. Thus, you may be willing to provide a reward to the few who can. Let's call it a bonus. Someone gives you a hundred dollars return on your investment, and you happily reward that good behavior with a two dollar bonus. So do the other million investors -- gladly, voluntarily. That business leader who knew how to do what few others could earned a two million dollar bonus. Yes, earned it, by virtue of the wealth he produced with his superior abilities.

I know some people hate to see someone rewarded for achievement, but it was all voluntary. No theft required.

By the way, thanks for finally curtailing your habit of hurling insults.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

ObiWayneKenobi:
C-Derb:
ObiWayneKenobi:
trtrwtf:
ObiWayneKenobi:
It's worse than that. It's actually voluntary (check the actual income tax law), but they claim it's mandatory and use force to "prove" that it's mandatory.

Income tax law is a pretty big book. Can you maybe provide a reference?

How about you provide a reference saying where it's required to pay it? Because from the documentaries I've seen, nobody in the IRS seems to know the passage that states that... perhaps you could help them find it?
How about you just don't pay your taxes and let us know how that works out for you? Maybe you could use your saved tax dollars to hire a lawyer who can provide a reference?

That was the point. The income tax law said it was voluntary, but the government says its mandatory and uses force (i.e. police) to enforce it being mandatory. I recall a documentary where they interviewed some IRS guy and asked him to show where it said income tax was mandatory, and he said something ridiculous like "It's mandatory because we have proven it through prosecution in court".

So your problem is with the court. That's part of how this country works: Laws get written, courts interpret them. Apparently the court has said that the law states you must pay taxes. Disagreeing and regurgitating circular logic doesn't change anything.

In the meantime, fill out another 1040-EZ and be on your way.

ObiWayneKenobi · 2012-12-03 Reply Admin

America isn't capitalist anyways, it's corporatist, and that's a big part why things are so fucked up. Everything revolves around big business and the inevitable lobbying that they do.

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Mason Wheeler:
I think a big part of the confusion is that what we call "capitalism" these days... isn't. Capitalism was defined by Adam Smith, but if you were to read what he wrote about it, (note: actually read, with some degree of reading comprehension skill required, as opposed to simply cherry-picking a few specific ideas,) what he describes is a shockingly different system than right-wingers today hold as the capitalist ideal.
The term was hijacked by Ayn Rand and replaced with a system that, highly vocal professions of "freedom" notwithstanding, bear a much closer resemblance to fascism than to capitalism. These days, if you go around advocating the true capitalist ideals that Adam Smith taught, you're likely to get called a socialist.

This. /thread - everyone go do your homework now!

2012-12-03 Reply Admin

Randy:
trtrwtf:
Randy:
As soon as a transaction is not voluntary -- when there is some element of force involved -- you are moving toward one of the criminal "isms" such as socialism.
Oh, god, another bloody anarchist.
Do you just throw insults around at random? Or do you truly equate "no theft" with "no laws"?
(Hint: they could hardly be farther apart.)

Anarchism != no laws

Anarchism == no arbitrary authority hierarchy

Regardless, I agree with you that the comparison was utterly incorrect

The Budget is Through the Roof

Leave a comment on “The Budget is Through the Roof”