I was with you until you threw in the whine about abortion. All your lip service about defeating large, tyrannical government goes out the window when you have official thugs peering into every doctor's examining room to make sure nothing unapproved goes on there. Robert Ringer, hello and goodbye.
These photos desperately need some enhancement to bring out people's faces.
Can anybody imagine a cop today helping get a cat out of a tree? A more likely scenario: grandmother asks cop for help; cop tasers and handcuffs her, and gets her charged with resisting arrest and assaulting an officer. He testifies that he feared for his life.
Apparently in the author's fevered brain, drug companies could be robbed of all their profits and yet they'd STILL continue to churn out life-saving drugs.
Meanwhile, back in the real world, individuals and the companies they form are motivated by the expectation of actual returns on their investments. Something the left wing likes to call "greed".
How wonderful it must be to live in Mr. Carson's world, where annoying reality is forever banished.
You don't make it clear why Twitter "demanded that Twitpic abandon its trademark application", preferring instead simply to rant about how evil "intellectual property" is (in your mind). I'm curious: would you make it perfectly legal to sell, say, clothing that pretends to be made by some famous designer, but is actually a cheap knockoff? If yes, please explain why doing so is not fraud. The real label may signify high quality, while the knockoff may fall apart the first time the garment is cleaned, and this is perfectly ok with you?
If, on the other hand, you would not consider it fair business practice to fake a garment label, could you please explain where you would draw the line, without succumbing to horrible, terrible (in your mind) "intellectual property" laws?
In this particular case, I expect that Twitter IS probably whining about a product which they think sounds too much like Twitter, and if that is true, I would rule against them (assuming Twitpic's logo is clearly different, etc.). I would not throw the baby out with the bathwater and sanction a free-for-all of fakery, however, as you are apparently determined to do.
This pompous and pretentious attitude on the part of the city government makes me glad, yet again, that I live safely away from this nonsense. What next? Historic outhouse destroyed, and the home "owner" is required to build an exact replica, complete with 1000 pounds of replica, uhhh...
I'm puzzled that the author has managed to avoid the one word that would succinctly describe the cause for the upcoming collapse: debt. The government has borrowed obscene amounts of money and poured most of it down extravagant rat holes, with military glut heading the list. Now the bill is coming due. Interest rates can't be held down forever, especially now that astute observers are starting to realize that the debt can't possibly be paid. On Panic Day, when the entire world dumps U.S. debt obligations at any price, the crash will have arrived.
I hope you're right about a ban on Bitcoin being unenforceable. I'm worried that the miners, who also verify transactions, might be detectable by government thugs. There will follow high-profile busts, as a warning to people not to defy the criminals in government. Only very bold people would continue to use Bitcoin under such circumstances.
editor's note: It's actually kind of cute and quaint, watching these old-school politicians try to come to grips with their complete inability to "ban" cyptocurrencies. Sorry, Joe, they're inherently outside your jurisdiction
It's quite analogous to the drug war, I think. Criminal politicians certainly have not succeeded, and will not succeed, at preventing people from consuming the drugs they choose to consume, but they have succeeded, and will continue to succeed, at ruining people's lives when, through some random quirk of chance or momentary lapse in caution, they catch them. Once Bitcoin is illegal, I'm expecting people to continue using it (or some other, newer protocol which is also illegal), but I'm also expecting to read about ongoing busts, life-ruining actions on the part of scum-of-the-earth government thugs. For this reason, it's hard for me to apply the terms "cute and quaint" to the rantings of Joe Manchin and the rest of his gang.
[editor's note: It may not look it, but this is a pretty well-reasoned thesis, and food for thought - SAT]
The linked column does NOT call for companies to voluntarily consider whether paid sick leave and vacation might be good for their bottom lines. Rather, it calls for a new, more muscular government to mandate these things. I'm a bit baffled as to why you're calling that "well-reasoned", SAT.