The point should be clear as day by now; if you can't extract the basic message and argument from his comment then you have no basis for inserting yourself into the debate. Please don't waste any more of my time.
375 karma · joined May 26, 2008
The point should be clear as day by now; if you can't extract the basic message and argument from his comment then you have no basis for inserting yourself into the debate. Please don't waste any more of my time.
In fact, private prisons and unionized guards aren't even on the same side, due to the former hiring largely non-union labor. And the private prison industry has been growing and lobbying faster than ever:
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/09/26/328486/us-privat...
Hellhole: Is long-term solitary confinement torture?
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/03/30/090330fa_fact_...
>Synthesizing properties
>Dot-syntax for accessing getters/setters
>Garbage Collection
>Blocks (closures)
>Automatic Reference Counting
>Weak references
Sorry, but none of these things make the language any simpler — they all add yet another style of doing things that only raises the bar and the learning curve for new developers when reading existing code, in precisely the same way that C++ and Perl have done. And this is true even of garbage collection (which, by the way, is deprecated in 10.8), because it needs to coexist with other frameworks and code that might not be garbage-collected, and more importantly because all heap-allocated C buffers consequently require their own low-level wrappers (e.g., NSAllocateCollectable, objc_memmove_collectable, etc.).
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7137480/how-do-i-add-ppc-...
http://www.cocoabuilder.com/archive/xcode/299924-no-ppc-from...
Oh yes it does — they can, and they do.
This is how Wuala works, if I understand correctly. And let's not forget AeroFS. While these products are somewhat similar, I absolutely love seeing apps of this nature (syncing distributed P2P) proliferate.
Responses like yours only reinforce my thesis: your philosophy can never be practiced successfully. Where it fails, the problem is only ever due to some sort of impurity or oversight in implementation. The market can never be "free enough".
That fact doesn't validate Austrian-school-thinking — merely that it worked better than Soviet central-planning given the global political and economic environment at the time, which says almost nothing. And even if you're arguing merely in favor of increased economic liberalization, this comparison still holds no value because social democracy has nothing to do with central planning! The points don't even exist along a linear axis — they are apples and oranges. The debate all over the world right now is about how best to implement social democracy, and comparing those two extreme economic philosophies doesn't contribute anything at all. To pretend it does is disingenuous.
The worst thing about right-wing followers of Austrian school thinking is that they refuse to consider the social outcomes when "market freedom" is taken too far; they are bent on destroying society as it exists and recreating a weak image of it inside their economic framework. Even von Hayek himself acknowledged the need for a basic social support system. This type of thinking is highly simplified, almost always ideologically-applied, and extremely toxic to our social fabric.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/deceptivecadence/2012/01/02/1444828...
One of the most predictable things about Austrian advocates is their inability to conceive of alternatives beyond some kind of cartoon-stereotype Soviet command-economy. You seem to be aware of social democracy, so you are knowingly assuming a false dichotomy to make your point. I'd say it's even more intellectually dishonest when one considers that no one ever argues for a centrally-planned economy. At the very best, such a comparison holds no value today in evaluating Austrian-school thinking.
Well, then I'm glad to find someone else who isn't under the impression that continuing and intensifying de-regulation and privatization will somehow solve our present economic crisis.
Read David Harvey's A Brief History of Neoliberalism (http://www.amazon.com/Brief-History-Neoliberalism-David-Harv...) for a stunning exposition of the social and economic crises that have developed around the world as a result of governments attempting to apply this philosophy.
You see, that's funny, because a much more obvious example can be found in free-market austrian-school economic policies.