-
Website
http://venturebeat.com/ -
Original page
http://venturebeat.com/2007/11/13/exclusive-barack-obama-to-name-a-chief-technology-officer/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
--Hi, great article, but I think you meant exploitation
The reality is, illegal immigrants are here to stay. Signing some new legislation isn't going to magically make them disappear; more importantly, America's economic infrastructure probably depends on them more than one might think. Even MORE importantly, illegal immigrants are people too, you insensitive prick. This country was built by them. Each and every one of them is here for the same reason: it was even worse where they came from. Now, is America the great melting pot, the Land of Opportunity I thought it was, or is it a place where people like you can sit on your asses and complain all day about how the world can't move fast enough to make them happy, while not a single selfless thought passes through their brains? Get off your high horse, man.
And now, onto my main comment:
Obama rocks my socks off.
It was built on people that were hard workers; wanted to learn enligsh; and assimilated. These illegal aliens are a bunch of hispanics that speak whatever language they want, don't pay taxes, and are ruining our health care system and public education system.
But I do like the tech ideas that Obama has...
That is so preposterous I can't even summon up any admiration for the high idealism that must underlie such a position. Perhaps you are familiar with Pascal's wise observation that while man is neither angel nor beast, he who would act the angel acts the beast.
I don't myself believe that America needs more people to keep our economy running smoothly. There was very nearly no immigration at all into the U.S.A. from 1945 to 1965, yet the economy boomed as never before. How did that happen? A national economy is a very flexible and ingenious thing, certainly able to cope with shortages, of labor or anything else, by means other than immigration. It might raise wages, or automate, or outsource. Indeed, many economists tell us that automation, and technological advance in general, is retarded by a large supply of cheap manual labor.
I do not want these people. I don't think I am a callous person—I am pretty sure than no-one who knows me would describe me so—but I am not generous towards strangers with things I own that are precious to me, that I have struggled and sweated to acquire. If the stranger has a hard-luck story I may do him the courtesy of listening to it; but the world, you know, is full of hard-luck stories.
Of course we can deport 12 million people if we want to. Our nation has, by acts of collective will, done far more difficult things than that. If sensible policies were implemented, great numbers of illegal immigrants would anyway self-deport.
It comes to this:
1. Do you want to invite the government into regulating the internet?
or
2. Would you rather rely on the free market.
The Net Neutrality bill is yet another example of a bill that sounds like a good idea, but once you give the government the right to regulate the internet, where will it stop.
"Net-Neutrality" is inviting the government onto the internet to regulate it, vs. companies deciding how to regulate it based on the free market
Ask yourself this. Would you like to invite the FCC control of the internet? Or an FCC-type bureaucracy? I'd rather keep the government out of it..
IOW, Net Neutrality is a bandaid.
Except that Net Neutrality used to be required when broadband was classified as a communications service. A couple of years ago, the FCC was convinced (one can only wonder by whom) to change the status to an information service, to which the common carriers regulations do not apply. So all this hoo-ha about "too much regulation" is unfounded, the Internet used to have Net Neutrality and now that it's gone people are worried (which is understandable). For companies, capitalism means increasing profits and decreasing costs. For consumers, this means paying more for worse service.
My opinion on privacy:
I would love for Obama to address the issue of oversight. I am all for giving our security institutions the tools they need. However data should only be gathered on supposed terrorists, and oversight should be used to insure that those tools aren't being abused. We're at a critical time where the government can now begin to collect data on most of its citizens: The next president needs to set precedent that the data collected and the tools themselves won't be abused.
for the public forum let us discuss the federal reserve and council on foreign relations.
http://askaslacker.blogspot.com/
100% Customizable Flash Media Webcasting!
212.584.2408