Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!



Ask Slashdot: Would You Pay For Websites Without Trolls?

udachny Re:Very subjective (378 comments)

By all of this you do mean that I reply to thread participants, yes I write replies as much as I can, what an observation.

2 days ago

Ask Slashdot: Would You Pay For Websites Without Trolls?

udachny Re:Very subjective (378 comments)

One man's troll is another man's insightful or informative comment.

The vast majority of participants here regard large number of my comments as 'troll' for example, here is my journal where I make it clear what my positions and views are.

I actually dedicated some of the journal entries to my comments being moderated into oblivion for no other reason that people disagree with me.

Latest comments marked as 'troll' or 'flamebait'.

There are obvious trolls on this site, no question about it, however when you start looking at the context, in which comments are moderated to 'troll', shouldn't you start wondering? When users' comments are moderated to 'troll' that reply to my comments by noting that my comments are not actually 'trolling', they themselves are moderated as 'trolls'.

Here is an example of one of the moderators 'explaining' why he moderated my comment the way he did:

If you make labour cost too high, less of it will be bought

This is meaningless and really the reason I'm modding you down. You have tried to equate rising wages to labor cost to anti-business. The rest of the post is either statement of facts (redundant as it does not lend to an argument) or statements of opinion about orthogonal concerns (offtopic). Specifically, your only point, that I can see, was to characterize a business running at a loss as a hobby and then what that means to you. Let's nevermind the horrendous losses Amazon suffered around the millenium, it was only a hobby.

2 days ago

Not Just For ThinkPads Anymore: Lenovo Gets OK To Buy IBM Server Line

udachny Re:"Less profitable" (93 comments)

Just 10 minutes ago I explained to somebody here, who did not understand the basic principles of economy, such as capital formation based on savings, why the Chinese are buyin USA property and then I see this story and comments. The reason that the Chinese can and are buying USA property anx productive assets is that they cannot exchange their productive output for American output. The USA worker is made unproductive by American government and the foreigners, who export 500Billion USD/year more than USA exports to them (trade defficit) need to get rid of the dollars that are collecting dust and causing rising prices in their countries.

IBM sold this because they were offered a large cash amount (2,000,000,000) and 3,00,000,000 in Lenovo stock, and now IBM will enjoy productivity of a Chinese company that is not subjected to the insane USA anti-individual freedom rules, regulations, taxes and inflation. IBM will get rid of some American employees, who are made too expensive by USA government (I am not at all talking about salaries here, so do not bother) in a country where savings and productivity are punished, not rewarded since US government killed the free market.

4 days ago

Humans Need Not Apply: a Video About the Robot Revolution and Jobs

udachny Re: labour cost (303 comments)

Same user, backup account. Typed on the phone, so there have to be some writing errors there somewhere.

I am getting USA worker productivity numbers from real unemployment numbers, including those who gave up looking, those on disability and early ss and the 500 Billion USD/year trade deficit USA has been running for the last 20 years. I am gettinv more worker productivity numbers from monthly non farming payroll numbers, which show non existing manufacturing, fairly small mining and large service and government sectors, all of which are the reason for negative productivity. Americans are incapable of producing enough for themselves or to repay the foreigners for the stuff that comes from abroad, the 40-50 billion usd a month trade deficit is the proof of this simple concept. All of you exports, including all exported services are not enough to pay for the imports, that is your negative productivity. Americans are exporting the difference in inflated dollars and bonds, which are proving to be the theft of foreign productivity, since all the trillions that the foreigners hold for you raise their prices, while Americans have been spared the full wrath of inflation they are creating. Of-course inflation in USA is a number of times higher than the official numbers, it easily exceeds 10% per year as is clear from all of the asset bubbles that the Fed is creating and the rising cost of living should be obvious even to you, unless your buttler does the shopping.

A productive economy creates what it consumes either directly or in enough exports to cover all imports and then some. Americans lost that ability when they defaulted on the dollar 43 years ago.

The fact that the wealthy Chinese are buying up your houses is the exact opposite of what you believe. It shows that they have thd productivity and that to get rid of their dollars they have to go all the way to the USA to dump them, bringing the Fed generated inflation right back to you. They will buy the houses that your inflation allowed to be built ( the Fed created inflation to pump up the asset prices, they have been doing it since the default on the dollar). They are and will continue buying up all of your still productive assets too, companies, lands. Your welfare state will turn all of your welfare recipients into beggars on the streets, their only saving grace will be foreign companies hiring them at lowest labour prices, since they are made by USA government so unproductive, due to complete destruction of the capital, that you lost all of your factories that mattered and cannot be hired by other Americans. The part time jobs in the service sector will only get you as far as the foreigners will let you go, and they are tired of subsidising the unproductive Americans.

There is no capital without savings and people with savings do not lend to people that allowed themselves (and indeed cheered themselves) into this situation, where productivity is punished by regulations laws, taxes, inflation and generally anti-freedom ideology. Ideology of government taxing, borrowing and inflating (printing) to spend is ideology of destruction of the real economy and you are right in the middle of it, which is likely why you are blind to it.

As to business cycle, it does not need a solution, it is a normal process, where excess spendings are restructured back into productive capacity. The Fed trying to 'solve it' creates much more violent recessions and of course depressions, which are taking down your economy. The spending that needed to be stopped hasn't been, the unproductive were propped up for decades with all this money printing, while savers and the productive were chased out of town with laws, taxes and the inflation. The resulting lack of proper cleaning procedure (restructuring of misallocated resources) was delayed by the government and the Fed and now has enough potential energy that when it turns into kinetic will wipe out whatever remains of your centrally planned economy (and it is all centrally planned, that is your Fed and government with all the printing, taxes and laws that destroyed the dollar and the frer market).

Enjoy whatever limited time you have.

4 days ago

Cisco To Slash Up To 6,000 Jobs -- 8% of Its Workforce -- In "Reorganization"

udachny Re:Everything hits poor people harder (206 comments)

The fundamental problem is the basic concept of "earning."...... in an equitable society everyone would receive the same compensation for putting in a decent day's work, contributing to society as a whole, whether they were making sandwiches for others to eat or performing surgery.

- wow, that's not an equitable society, that's a society that cannot differentiate between value and cannot discover relative prices for things. Question to you: is an airplane worth more than a keyboard or a voodoo doll?

Once you realise that things are not worth the same to people then you will realise just how retarded your ideas on what an 'equitable' society are.

I don't care about voodoo dolls but if I need a surgery I can't avoid having it or I may die. To me the value of a voodoo doll is 0, the value of surgery is the worth of my life (to me), which is infinite. So I would pay exactly 0 for a voodoo doll and would pay what it takes for a surgery, which is why the voodoo doll maker will never make the same amount as a surgeon, you moron.

5 days ago

Cisco To Slash Up To 6,000 Jobs -- 8% of Its Workforce -- In "Reorganization"

udachny Re:While Buying Back $1.5 Billion In Stock (206 comments)

I already explained it here, but let's address your specific concern.

When your conclusions stop making sense, challenge your premises. You assume that US debt is risk free and that Cisco stock will tank and that Cisco will have to pay the debt back. Let's examine these assumptions.

You base your assumption that US debt is risk free on the GDP and CPI and other inflation numbers provided to you by the helping hand of the government and some non-government organizations that rate debt (like Moody's, Standard & Poor's, Fitch) but the licenses that these rating agencies hold depend on government allowing these companies to rate sovereign debt (and especially USA debt).

A while back we already talked about another rating agency, that had its license to rate US bonds suspended by the government for providing a junk bond rating to the US bonds, Egan Jones. Egan Jones is paid to rate securities by buyers of securities, while Moody's and such are paid by the issuers of securities. So there is first of all huge bias and secondly the entire business model of the rating agencies requires that they do not rate US bonds anything but 'risk free', but in reality US bonds are junk, I talked about it too.

The other assumption is that Cisco stock will tank, well, if Cisco is using the borrowed money to consolidate its stock (buy it for itself) then it doesn't have to tank, it actually is going to grow in value relative to the US dollars. With the layoffs, the US operations will be much cheaper for Cisco, US workers are extremely expensive given all of the government labor laws, 'anti-discrimination' laws, taxes and all other regulations.

Finally will Cisco have to pay back the cost of borrowing? Sure, but they do have money off-shore they can use, after all, that's how they are securing these loans. Secondly, they borrow in US dollars and that currency is being devalued on a daily basis. The Fed is making sure that inflation will wipe out Cisco's debt in real terms, and since the interest rates are very low, it won't be much of that they will have to pay back in nominal terms either.

AFAIC Cisco stock is more valuable than sovereign USA bond market. Bonds are a promise to pay US dollars in the future, and AFAIC the dollars are being destroyed, so dollars in the future are also destroyed. The only reason it didn't collapse yet is people like China are not dumping their entire position yet, but they are hedging by buying and mining more and more gold.

about a week ago

Cisco To Slash Up To 6,000 Jobs -- 8% of Its Workforce -- In "Reorganization"

udachny Re:While Buying Back $1.5 Billion In Stock (206 comments)

Like I said, companies are borrowing in the USA from money supply inflated by the Fed using their foreign reserves that companies earned and are holding abroad as collateral in order to consolidate ownership and try and beat inflation. The money is borrowed at very low rate of interest due to money not coming from any savings but being brought into existance with Jannet Yellen's magic touch. This is absolutely rational behavior, since the Fed wants to inflate asset bubbles and provides existing large companies with the cash to do it, people do it.

Of-course this misallocation of resources is destroying the dollar, preventing people from making any interest on savings and inflating savings away, which is why senior citizens are working again, in this economy those who want to work are laid off and those who want to retire cannot.

about a week ago

Every Day Is Goof-Off-At-Work Day At the US Patent and Trademark Office

udachny Re:Where do I sign up? (326 comments)

It's a good thing that those billion year old laws of gravity were still at play, when you fell of your chair, you didn't hit the ceiling and didn't go out of the window.

Pretending that laws that govern nature do not work will not work out well, if you pretend that gravity is too old of an idea to work, why don't you step out of your window? I mean all the way down, every second that you didn't hit the ground yet you may still be under impression that you are correct and gravity isn't there.

Denying the normal laws of economics is no different. You can pretend that by denying normal economics and applying your Keynesian nonsense you are flying, but you are only flying until you hit the ground and it will be too late to realize that jut like gravity, capitalist free market economic principles don't go anywhere, they never stop applying and they will bring you back to reality in a short order.

about a week ago

Comcast Drops Spurious Fees When Customer Reveals Recording

udachny Re:What about Oregon and Washington? (364 comments)

"Not liking" federal government is one thing, having the contract between the federal government and the States (Constitution) broken by the federal government is another thing altogether. The federal government broke the contract long time ago, all States SHOULD secede. If the current powers of the feds were in the original Constitution NOT A SINGLE STATE WOULD HAVE JOINED IN to be ruled by this insane oppressive regime.

EU is nothing like the original USA, USA was built on the promise of individual freedom, freedom from government, not a gigantic all consuming socialist/fascist welfare state.

about a week ago

The Fiercest Rivalry In Tech: Uber vs. Lyft

udachny good (125 comments)

In a normal free market environment I would simply say let the market sort them out, this is war, there can be no rules as long as the government does not participate in any of it. The ones with the deepest pockets will win, which is correct from the perspective of the market rewarding some of them more than others.

Of-course the participation of government completely skews the picture, the Federal reserve is creating so much inflation that all this newly created cash has to go somewhere, so it goes into the stock market and the financing and IPOs for companies that would not get financing in a normal market environment but they are getting it now, because there is no yield anywhere due to government depressed interest rates. My point is that there are all these asset, bond, dollar bubbles that are going to implode in a terrible way, you don't know what will happen to any of these companies at that time except that it won't be pretty for the entire economy.

(as a side note, just observed some /. bug, where it reported 12 comments on this story and then in half a minute 11 comments, hmm).

about a week ago

China Smartphone Maker Xiaomi Apologizes For Unauthorized Data Access

udachny Re:Apologies not accepted (64 comments)

What do you mean, don't you know, governments don't look backward, they only look forward.

Don't you wish it worked like that for just normal people? You killed somebody? Just apologize, we don't look backward, we look forward, so with an apology you are free to go.

about two weeks ago

Every Day Is Goof-Off-At-Work Day At the US Patent and Trademark Office

udachny Re:Where do I sign up? (326 comments)

(same user, backup account)

no its not 100% correct/
its 100% ignorant and stupid.

- now you see, that's a flame.

you like a military that will defend you?

- the only function of a government is to defend the citizens from an attack, defend their lives and private property. Of-course instead of that the governments are actually destroying freedoms and rights, murdering people around the world, where there is no business for any of that intervention and creating a gigantic police and surveillance state. Military defence can be paid for Constitutionally, with direct apportioned taxes and/or with excise taxes, and the illegal income tax is neither of these.

In fact in order to go to war or to do defence what government should do is this: Congress has to state what the defence budget is going to be and then apportion collection of taxes for that purpose directly, proportionately to the population of the states (direct apportioned tax). All was have to be paid for, not put on debt for the future generations to pay for and not via inflation either, government must not be allowed to print cash.

you like clearn water and air?

- yes, which is why government should stay out of business altogether, so that the society becomes wealthy due to absence of government in free market capitalistic economy and wealthy societies can take care of their water and air without government intervention. Governments have no business in clean air and water but they certainly destroy plenty of air and water, the bigger the government, the more dictatorial it is, the worse the environmental outcomes are, this is history. The wealthier the economy is due to less government intervention, the more money (production) society can allocate to these causes.

you like a social safety net that keeps the weakest from falling too far?

- no. The only thing that can actually keep weakest from falling too far is a wealthy growing free market capitalist economy, government has no business, no authority in any of these and there is no moral right to steal from anybody to subsidise anybody else, regardless of how weak they are and how wealthy somebody else is that you want to steal from.

you like a postal system?

- not a government postal system.

you like you drivable roads?

- not a government roads.

you like food safety inspections and standards?

- not a government safety and standards.

you like fireman to save your house, and police to catch bad guys?

- not a government firemen and not a government police force either.

then guess what: pay your taxes and stfu.

- fuck you, you piece of shit (now that's a flamebait, definitely is, but you see AFAIC you are a piece of shit for all of your assumptions and for your conclusion, you are a piece of stinky excrement for telling people how they should live their lives, so you are an anti human, anti freedom POS from my perspective).

Every citizen pays their taxes (or should) willingingly, if grudgingly, because they understand that these things cost money.

- wrong. Every person should want freedom, not oppression, and if you want oppression because you were brainwashed into it in the so called 'public schools', then you are not a human worthy of having a discussion with.

about two weeks ago

Judge Rejects $324.5 Million Settlement For Tech Workers, Argues For More

udachny Re:And yet (268 comments)

Free assembly is one expression of democracy (though I am against democracy, don't get me wrong, I am against mobocracy), however you are correct.

Another expression of democracy is free association. It absolutely 100% does not matter who is deciding not to associate with you, be it a girl next door, a club of interests or an employer for whatever reasons, that's completely irrelevant. I want people to be free to discriminate or not based on their own ideas and believes, and you are telling me that you can't handle that freedom, freedom of association.

Freedom of assembly is absolutely not impeded in any way by any private party, be it an employer or anybody else. Freedom of assembly can only be impeded by government. The entire concept of rights is completely misunderstood by vast majority of people that have gone through the public brain washing system, so called schools, that teach you nothing.

Rights are protection against government abuse, nothing else, everything else is either an entitlement (that nobody should have) or an obligation (that nobody should be imposed upon by any government).

Corporations are a front, a fiction, they are a fiction and behind every corporation there is a person or a group of people. AFAIC corporations shouldn't even be established by government laws, government has nothing to do with business, a corporation in fact is a self governing body, nothing else. You may want to figure out where the word comes from in the first place, the only purpose of government involvement in corporation is registration. Registration of corporation is what 'citizens devised' (and it wasn't citizens actually that devised it, you are wrong on that too).

However I am not arguing pro or against corporate charter here, I am talking about the reasons that people start their own businesses, corporations or anything else. A BUSINESS, a business for the purpose of generating profits, not a 'corporation' for the purpose of incorporating a legal entity. Government shouldn't have anything to do with people running businesses, that is my point. Whether corporations should be legal entities that are given any special treatment? NO! Owners of joint stock companies that eventually became corporations for the sake of simplicity of regulations shouldn't be hidden behind corporate facade from litigation.

I disagree as a general principle with the entire idea that there should be ANY form of protection of private individuals behind corporate facade in case the individuals (or the company) are sued or become liable in any way.

Yes, I am against special privileges that government provides to anybody, anybody at all, including all people, all living or dead creatures, all legal or illegal entities. Of-course I am completely against the very concept of having any federal power over people in the first place and hopefully over time, given the facts of life, such as freedom of movement of information (the Internet), freedom of movement at all (transportation, immigration, emigration) eventually people do away with federations, with dictatorial entities that are trying to steal their property and lives from them.

Governments' "Limited Liability" garbage is what created possibility to create gigantic faceless entities, known as modern 'corporations' that removed private liability from the company owners. This is a moral hazard that government created and this moral hazard is what makes it possible for the modern stock market to exist not by virtue of the real business value, real earnings, long term goals, but by virtue of government created guarantee and protection that destroys the principle of running a private business that incontrovertibly adds value by its activity in a normal free market rather than extracting capital from unsophisticated 'investors', who are really unaware of what is going on around them. This is a moral hazard and it was created by governments.

Apple and Google or anybody else must be within their absolute rights (and I am an atheist, otherwise I would have added 'god given' there, as is I would say 'nature given') to come to any agreement among themselves to not hire you or anybody based on whatever criteria that suits them and you shouldn't be compelled under any circumstances to take any position within those companies.

about two weeks ago

E-Visits To the Doctor To Top 75 Million In the US, Canada This Year

udachny Re:Saves the hospitals money (35 comments)

The patient gets plenty of benefits from this, one being not having to go to the clinic and wait in line, not having to drive somewhere, not having to interrupt your day. With mobile Internet you should be able to connect to a doctor on the go.

There are costs associated with setting the system up and training the stuff to work with it, to maintain and support it, but the benefits are for both, the hospitals, clinics and for patients.

In any case, you are not forced to use it.

about two weeks ago

Judge Rejects $324.5 Million Settlement For Tech Workers, Argues For More

udachny Re:And yet (268 comments)

False, the reason you are modding down every one of my comments (and a few others like you) is because I am too effective at expressing the opinions that you are personally against, which only means you have a bias that is not based on rationality of legality, you have a different type of bias that requires that anybody with the opinion that destroys all of your arguments flat is silenced.

The only reason to mod down every comment in a row i s to silence the opposition, there are no other reasons here.

about two weeks ago

Judge Rejects $324.5 Million Settlement For Tech Workers, Argues For More

udachny Re:And yet (268 comments)

I am not against unions that do not derive their power from government, so if you want to start your own union, you should be able to, however as an employer, I should not be compelled to work with a union, so I should be able to fire all people in the union, it's my discretion. Agreement between two companies not to hire employees from each other is suboptimal, but nowhere near the scale of damage that government causes with rules and regulations and taxation and inflation. As I said, the problem here is not that Apple and Google decided to agree not to hire from each other, the problem is that there are so few companies in the first place that such agreements can even be noticed.

How small and pathetic is the true state of USA economy when such irrelevant to the larger picture agreements become items of discussion? I will tell you how sad, small and pathetic the true state of USA economy is.

34% of American households feel they are worse off now than in 2008. So more than a third of American households feel that during today's so called "recovery" they are worse off than during the year 2008, the year when the economic crisis hit USA.

Again, the problem is so few employers are out there and unamerican unconstitutional decisions like this one by this court will not help at all, not even a little, it only makes it worse.

Anyway, enjoy my last comment here, I had to use my backup account to leave this one. The moderators are already in full swing right now all over my comments, as they often are, making sure that I cannot participate in this discussion. Once they push the 'karma' low enough, I'll not be able to continue leave comments for a while, which is the point I take it, to ensure that the echo-chamber is unchallenged.

about two weeks ago

States That Raised Minimum Wage See No Slow-Down In Job Growth

udachny Re:Crazy (778 comments)

Free market (market free from government regulations) capitalist (as in, private ownership and operation of property) economy sets prices that are most efficient in that economy, and labor costs (wages) are also prices. Without government interference they are set where the market is willing to set them and this price discovery is what is important to allocate scarce resources correctly to push businesses towards productive output that the market desires.

You are saying that a business that does not pay your artificial price floor for labor is "a parasite upon the economy", however you are still assuming that people are willing to work for the price (wages) that employers are hiring at. If the business is unable to hire people at lower wages and the same business is unable to raise consumer prices to match its expenses on wages, then what you have is a market pressure for that business to find way to cut costs in some other manner or in fact to shut down, and that is exactly what economic activity requires: FREE MARKET ALLOCATES SCARCE RESOURCES IN THE MOST EFFICIENT MANNER. Without your government intrusion, free market signals to all the participants in the market as to what businesses should exist, what economic output is valuable and what the prices should be.

You are saying: let's force all businesses to pay artificial prices for labor and pretend that this does not hurt efficiency, does not hurt the actual market. It does, it eliminates free market price discovery, creates inefficiencies, prevents employment, prevents scarce resources from being allocated in the way, that market approves of most.

You are creating the parasite economy, not free market without price controls.

about 1 month ago

States That Raised Minimum Wage See No Slow-Down In Job Growth

udachny Re:Crazy (778 comments)

Since I do have artificial /. limits on the number of posts per day, I will reply to you from my backup account. Don't worry, I won't pretend to be somebody else, that's not what this account is for, it's the same user, just under a different name.

Spending money on consumables does not grow the economy, especially the USA economy, which buys those consumables from abroad. It doesn't increase competitive pressures in the USA economy to produce, the only competitive pressures in the USA are in distribution and sales, but that's where a small number of very large economies of scale, such as WM dominate, specifically because they hire people at lowest prices and push suppliers to sell to WM at lowest prices as well.

Customers that get their income from welfare or from laws that steal that money from somebody else first are not real customers. The real trade is done between parties that produce, the so called trade between those, who live on welfare (or are benefiting from any type of theft, including taxes and borrowing that go towards minimum wages) is not real trade.

You see the point of trade is to exchange something, it makes sense for me to trade my productive output with others, who also have productive output, where I can get something from them I myself do not produce - comparative advantage is the name of the game.

When governments tell me (as an employer) that I must hit their artificial price floors, I cannot magically expand my overall earnings to provide any more money to anybody that I am already paying. I actually have a number of people that are paid below what you would consider a legal 'minimum wage', while vast majority of my employees are paid much more than any such price floor. The reason is very simple: productivity.

I don't throw people out if I can use their labour at the price, at which it makes sense for me to buy that labour. If the labour price is artificially raised, I would rather not hire anybody in that category at all, I would only be considering people that are definitely more productive than those, who are barely making it to the artificial price floor. There is a substantial difference between a worker that can produce high output and a worker that can barely move, however I can find use for those who barely move but they will not be making anywhere near what you think 'minimum wage' should be. They are fine with it, those are students and they do in fact need these jobs, they are getting experience that will help them to find better jobs later. Some of my student workers are very good, making more than what you think minimum wage should be.

My point is this: I will not have people at minimum wage, that doesn't even make sense. I will have people much below it and people much above it. Minimum wage is an artificial construct that has no meaning to me as an employer, there is nobody who is worth specifically that amount that I employ.

Now, the people that you are talking about, they are mostly in services industry, they are cleaners, stocking personnel, people with very little skills, not anybody with any real skills, those people command higher than minimum wage salaries. Placing artificial government price controls on labour price does a very simple thing: ensures that fewer people in that category are hired and those who are hired are going to be in higher categories of workers.

I definitely can see some business hiring an overqualified person with no job experience even to clean toilets, rather than hiring much less 'learned' counterparts, so the only thing that minimum wage does in that category is it prevents people without experience and without any extra qualifications from entering the work force.

Of-course the modern 'mainstream economists' will muddy the waters and try to sell you all sorts of nonsense as to how they think the economy works and how higher minimum wages will grow the economy, it's all nonsense and propaganda for the political elite that is in power, it has nothing to do with the actual economy and hiring and pricing. The actual economy will find a way to work around these price controls - hiring people that are much more qualified than necessary for jobs that shouldn't need those qualifications, ensuring that jobs go to the more connected people rather than considering people from the entire job market, etc.

As to your 'negative sum' and all that, sure, one way to deal with the increase in minimum wage is to raise your prices. Well, that IS happening. What do you think news like this are all about? It's inflation and all the price controls and laws and regulations, taxes, that's what it is. And Hershey's raising prices by 10% that just one tiny drop in a bucket of the overall prices going up, they are going up much faster than any government numbers indicate or admit to.

Product quality and portion sizes are going down, prices are going up, gov't can even claim that this is somehow indicating a 'growing economy'. But if you spend 10% more on Hershey's it doesn't mean your standard of living is better, the exact opposite is the case. To listen to the mainstream nonsense, you are in danger when prices fall. Well, I hope you are getting your fill of the great economic news, prices are not falling, they are going up just fine, so don't be scared, your wallet won't be emptied slower, it will be emptied faster, so you are all good.

about 1 month ago

Lyft's New York Launch Halted By Restraining Order

udachny Re:The death of the American dream (92 comments)

I take it you believe that everything should fall right on your lap the moment you START a business? This is the game - you start a business and ONE of many businesses will succeed and it takes YEARS to succeed. I know that majority of you here don't understand such concepts as long term vision and you believe that you have to be rich already to make it in the world, but damn, when did this change occur, WHO told you that you should become a millionaire 4.5 years after starting a business exactly? Majority of business owners only make it into the black by around that mark.

By the way even without talent hard work beats talent that does not do hard work. I am not confirming anything that you wrote, I am telling you straight out: your claim (and this subsequent comment) doesn't make any sense. Nobody becomes a millionaire or a billionaire right away in business, it takes years, possibly decades if your business is even viable and profitable in the first place.

about a month ago


udachny hasn't submitted any stories.



udachny udachny writes  |  about 2 years ago

on the logical fallacies (evolution, free market, morality of gov't, business, etc.)

on European recession and the fact that it takes the aim off the US problems, which are much greater

on IPO regulations, that prevent public investors from gaining anything without a huge gamble from early stages of company formation, while denying companies an access to public investment funds at the time, they need it most. Also on kickstarter as a temporary market solution.

on investments, the final solution.

on elections, Obama's coming win due to Romney's and Ryan's commitment to out-Democrat the Democrats and 'save' Medicare and SS.

on Indian space program and the threat of gov't violence to achieve it (of-course similar to what USSR and USA and China were doing in terms of financing such grand schemes)

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>