SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
CNET, Business Insider, techcrunch and many others report on Hillary's beef with "on-demand/gig economy". Specifically:
"Many Americans are making extra money renting out a small room, designing websites, selling products they design themselves at home, or even driving their own car," Clinton said during a speech at the New School in New York City. "This on-demand, or so-called 'gig economy,' is creating exciting opportunities and unleashing innovation. But it's also raising hard questions about workplace protections and what a good job will look like in the future."
"Fair pay and fair scheduling, paid family leave and earned sick days, child care are essential to our competitiveness and growth," the former secretary of state said, referring to benefits not accorded to independent contractors such as drivers at Uber.
Meanwhile, others are quick to point that her "main super PAC decisively favored Uber over conventional cabs by a 25:1 margin" (doh, she didn't say Uber is bad, only that it is evil toward its empl... err... contractors) and Rand Paul tweets: "America shouldn't take advice on the sharing economy from someone who has been driven around in a limo for 30 years." (yeah, Dr Paul, zillions of male gynecologists were never pregnant, of course they know nothing about giving birth).
Original Submission
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday July 15 2015, @12:03PM
Fine. You can quibble over the percentages and what not, my points were:
Yeap, you may pay with some inefficiencies, but... why is this a problem?
The way I see, the law of diminishing returns guarantees that, if you attempt to maximize something close to the extreme, you'll be sacrificing a lot more for a lot less closeness to the optimum.
.
Now, going back to these percentages. No doubt all the computation you carried will lead to an amount of less than 80% taxes, isn't it?
Oh, wow! Look, they can have a better society for even less than 80% taxes!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 15 2015, @01:07PM
now there's an oxymoron if ever i saw one
you can try to sugarcoat is all you like, but what you're really advocating is theft
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 15 2015, @01:18PM
Ok, "theft done well" if you so like. Does it change the truth value of the rest?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday July 15 2015, @02:32PM
You presume that people actually have a "right to live". The "right to life" that people talk about, is simply the right not to be killed by government, or another person. There is no "right" to life's necessities, much less life's niceties. A person who is to stupid, or to lazy, or whatever to actually PRODUCE SOMETHING simply doesn't deserve to eat.
Theft done well.
Theft done well, or otherwised, earns you a bullet in the head, where I come from. If you need a pound of flour, and you know that I have ten pounds in my pantry, you don't have the right to waltz in and take it. But, I, on the other hand, DO HAVE THE RIGHT to blow you into eternity when I catch you in the pantry. You, and all your socialist friends who encouraged you to take what is mine.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday July 15 2015, @11:34PM
(I like your certitude of an attack on your pantry. Not if but when, eh?)
All I said is "others chose to share their wealth by redistribution through taxes and it works quite well for them".
If you don't like it, then all it follows is that you don't like it * [xkcd.com]; it's not like the reality changes because of that.
(now, wipe that foam on the corner of you mouth and sleep well: no Finnish people is going to attack your pantry tonight, nor will I)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Wednesday July 15 2015, @05:28PM
sudo mod me up
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 16 2015, @10:21PM
inheritence has nothing to do with capitalism
wtf are you smoking dude?
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Friday July 17 2015, @08:52AM
sudo mod me up
(Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Wednesday July 15 2015, @01:46PM
Finland is also highly homogeneous (for every definition of that word) with almost no immigration. In fact, it is nigh impossible for you to do anything really different (like homeschooling your kid, or having your baby sleep in the same room as you so that you can keep an eye on him/her etc.) without social services banging on your door. It is not possible to live in Finland without learning Finnish. Sounds logical but this is a barrier for most educated people who already have learned C++ and Java. You end up with poor people who are emigrating to Finland for doing most of menial labor in the hope that their children seeing better future. Which is noble, but out of question for most people.