MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Dec 28, 09 - 07:00 pm Comment from: breeze

MDN : Indeed.

Dec 28, 09 - 07:03 pm Comment from: Deus Ex Technica

Please, oh please let the "Pay Czar" speak out against Apple on this one. Having the gov't threaten the iPods of the governed would surely ignite a much needed revolt!

Dec 28, 09 - 07:10 pm Comment from: breeze

Deus Ex Technica : You're an idiot in the first degree.

Maybe Tim can finally afford to buy the house that he rents (used to rent)?

Of course, most of that money will go to one of Barack Obama's spending programs that give money to people who didn't earn it.

@Josh
Wished I could disagree with you Josh, but sadly you hit the nail square on the head on that one.




Magic word: moral, something thats in short supply unless your a banker.

Maybe MDN should make their New years Resolution to turn this back to a site for Mac news, and keep politics out.

Dec 28, 09 - 08:07 pm Comment from: chaz

@Artist I'll second that!!

@Josh

If only we could bring back President Bush and VP Cheney and then taxpayers could be confident that their money was being given to upstanding pillars of the corporate world like Haliburton or Custer Battles.

Dec 28, 09 - 08:24 pm Comment from: DogGone

@ Deux Ex
Apple doesn't need a bailout since they have not lost money for over a decade.
Cook and Co. are doing a good job and probably deserve the wage. The options are a bonus and pay off when they can be cashed in.

I would be annoyed if Apple were paying bonuses and giving pay rises if the management team were losing money.

The stock brokers have put together a system that allows them to pat themselves on the back financially even when they perform poorly.

Does that make sense to you for that to happen? If it does please explain why.

@ Deus Ex Machina

It could be worse: what the heck was a birth control czar and what did one have to do to attract his attention.

Actually, don't tell me. I'm not certain I could cope with the mental image.

Dec 28, 09 - 08:28 pm Comment from: HMCIV

Too bad Tim Cook's stock payout was in shares of General Motors

@ MCCFR,

Barack Obama on the one hand, and George W. Bush on the other, do not exactly exhaust the alternatives. You've committed the fallacy of the "false choice".

Translation: In the here and now, Barack Obama is President. Not Bush. Furthermore, I have never advocated for George W. Bush. And furthermore again, the wrongs of George W. Bush do not mitigate the even greater wrongs of Barack Obama.

I wonder, in your entire life, have you ever employed anything even resembling a thought process?

(Just kidding. I don't really wonder - because I know that you haven't.)

The even greater wrongs of Obama? Wait, greater than committing hundreds of thousands of of American soldiers to a winless, thankless, brutal and pointless situation in Iraq for no valid reason? Being responsible for the slaughter of tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians (and don't suggest that I'm talking about Iraqi soldiers; I'm not; I mean men, women, and children who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time when US troops decided to bomb, shoot, etc, at will)? Being responsible for pouring billions of dollars into corrupt US corporations run by cronies and neo-con criminals? Being responsible for _destroying_ America's reputation in the international community?

Well! Obama must be pretty bad! All for suggesting that it's a crying shame that the US can't find enough compassion to have universal health care... or daring to suggest that perhaps corporations should consider paying even a fraction of their fair share of taxes...

How dare he! The _socialist_! He should damn well be impeached!

Dec 28, 09 - 09:46 pm Comment from: MidWest Mac

This is funny shit to watch unfold.

Cook gets stock options, and suddenly the parrots on the left and right find reason to bicker. Go away!

I don't want the government being "compassionate" with MY money - or with anyone else's money for that matter. It is not
my responsibility to pay for other people's healthcare. That's their job. (The only exceptions being for the truly disabled, and they're already covered anyway.)

What other things will be declared a "right" by the liberals? Will it also be my responsibility to help a perfect stranger by
a house. What else?

The goverent has no constitutional authority to be "charitable" with OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY. Charity is private. Not forced. My responsibility is to my family. Not everyone else.

Josh…

If only I had your wisdom and passion for abuse.

If Barack Obama isn't so far removed from Bush 43 (or the status quo in any case), who do "conservatives" get their panties in such a tightly-twisted bunch about his existence. And if he is so far removed, maybe you could quantify your prediction of how his policies will inflict or have already inflicted more damage than his predecessor inflicted in eight years.

Maybe you could do this with some empirical proof based on year-over-year statistical analysis. That may be difficult given that he's got another 22 days before the first anniversary of taking office, but I'm sure that - given your intellectual prowess - you'll manage something.

Maybe you could describe the electorally-viable alternative to a traditional centre-right candidate? Obviously, there's a spectrum - borrow-and-spend, tax-and-spend (there may even be a tax-and-repay: OK, I was joking - there aren't enough people that brave); and then there's social policy - is the Government involved in people's lives or not? Liberal? Conservative?

According to people like Beck et al, the Government shouldn't be involved in the health care business at all. Should the US Government shut down Medicare and Medicaid? Maybe it should shut down the Veteran's Administration? Ah, to hell with it, let's shut down the FAA, the TSA, the SEC, the FDA - what's the worst that could happen?

And we can all get behind the idea that the banking industry should be given carte blanche to behave in a cavalier fashion inimical to the needs of society, get bailed out by the taxpayer when it goes pear-shaped and then complain about being victimised when society tries to rein them in.

If you're expressing a preference for the Libertarian party, some of their policies may work in an ideal world . However, this is not an ideal world. People need authorities that have responsibility and accountability for when things go wrong which just isn't going to be the case if the FDA is replaced with any kind of third-party testing/certification regime. And don't even get me started on the idea of removing the regulatory framework on medical professionals.

I am but a humble student waiting for guidance, please feel free to share your towering genius…

Dec 28, 09 - 10:09 pm Comment from: ron

Josh is correct. Let's get rid of this loser in 2012, that is after we have demolished the dumbocrats in 2010.

I'm all for people being paid what they are worth. If the libs tax them too much they'll move out of the country.

What a mean-spirited SOB you must be... If ever you or family suffer a personal tragedy--loss of a house in a disaster, for example (and believe it or not I'm not wishing this on you) I hope your neighbours look you in the eye and say "Charity is private. Not forced. My responsibility is to my family. Not everyone else." And then see how you feel about compassion.

I don't want the government being "compassionate" with MY money - or with anyone else's money for that matter. It is not
my responsibility to pay for other people's healthcare.

And it's not anyone else's job to pay for the education that you received, or the education that your children or the children in your family receive. Why should other people pay for their Macbooks or their educational iPods?

And why should anyone else pay if the fire department has to come round and put out a forest fire that endangers your house? I live in a city miles away from trees. Get yourself a frickin' bucket and go down to the local lake.

And why should I pay the interest on Federal debt that was taken out to pay for a war I don't agree with? Or to pay for the medical expenses of pensioners. Or former service personnel?

Are there no workhouses?

Ron: And go back to the wonderful effects of tax cuts for the rich and regulation roll backs for the financial sector that took us for a ride down the poverty express? Do you people not pay attention??

Compared to health insurance companies, Apple produces and sells a product that works and provides value and utility. Health care companies produce no value.

Dec 28, 09 - 10:23 pm Comment from: DogGone

@Josh
That's your opinion. Remember that others have their opinion and the majority voted Obama in. So until Congress reverts to the Republicans (which will probably happen in Jan 2011, the Democrats have a shot at healthcare reform.

One could argue that the recent "charity" to the financial system was inappropriate. However it did highlight how the wealthy have many ways to ensure they maintain their wealth and even after being exposed shamelessly try to revert to the bonus system that created all the problems in the first place. So I do question when the self-rightious complain about the gov't spending.

Healthcare like many things in the States have huge disparities between the privileged and the average person. Nobody likes paying taxes but it is a necessary evil of living in society. If you don't like it, go live in the wild and do everything yourself. Then you'll quickly learn how we rely on our society to support us.

I've just thought of something.

Josh is probably one of the few people who watches "It's A Wonderful Life" at this time of year and actually roots for Mr. Potter.

I would count Ron in as well, but he's a simple soul who's fixated on nominal levels of tax as being the sole indicator of a succesful country.

Dec 28, 09 - 10:34 pm Comment from: alansky

@Josh:

You are a rare breed: an asshole and a moron. Go do something constructive, like drop dead.

Two imbeciles. For peke's sake I came on to read about mac news. You two assholes must get a kick out of getting people riled up. I mean when you order a cheeseburger at McDonalds do you start up with the cashier on politics?!. Both of you should just f#$ die. Talk about putting a downer on everything. Let me guess, Obama blah, blah, blah this Obama blah that. Whatever.

Go do something constructive, like drop dead.

Hardly likely seeing as he can't see his reflection in a mirror, doesn't cast a shadow and can't go out in the day.

You could always run a stake through his heart, but I'm not even particularly hopeful about that as a strategy due to the size of the target.

Alas, I never advocated for ZERO federal taxes. Only that there be but one, modest, tax rate (same across the board percentage), and that the federal taxes be used solely for those items enumerated as a constitutionally granted power, and NOTHING ELSE. Healthcare is NOT one of those things. Not even close.

Secondly, some of you seem to think that the mere meaningless fact of you not liking me should somehow grant you the right to confiscate my hard-earned money and redistribute it to others who had nothing to do with earning it. My money would do far more working its way through the private sector than being sucked up by the black hole of an overweening bloated federal bureaucracy.

Seriously, it simply doesn't matter at all how much you don't like me. You're still not entitled to MY MONEY. The U.S. Constitution is a very clear thing, and the only powers our federal government has are those which are specifically enumerated in that great document. Anything NOT enumerated is BEYOND the jurisdiction.

These are true facts, and they are true REGARDLESS of how much you lustily hate my guts.

Geez, but some of you people are really, really, really thick.

Still waiting for you to reply specifically to MCCFR's points about how YOUR (precious bloody poor) education was paid for by SOMEONE ELSE'S (wasted) tax dollars...

Ah, well...

Dec 29, 09 - 02:48 am Comment from: ron

@Josh, I wonder if Josh was educated in the Catholic school system - where his parents paid for it, while being screwed out of tax money to pay for public schools. And you all know how great the public schools are.

Ah, I see, so I am now somehow obligated to answer every last question posed to me by anyone and everyone. Geez, but the presumptuousness you people have for tasking other people to do your bidding is pretty remarkable.

Nevertheless, I shall be glad to answer MCCFR's irrelevant question WITH a question.

What in the world does he know about my education? He appears to be assuming I received a public education. In fact, I did not. If I had, I would likely be as irretrievably ignorant on everything from the United States Constitution to world history to economics to government to every other important subject as every liberal on this board.

As for his out-of-left-field question about paying for fire departments, well, they are not funded at the federal level. They are funded at the municipal and country level, largely through sales taxes and property taxes.

Now then, quid pro quo, please make a Constitutional case for a government takeover of 17% of our economy. Please, which article or amendment entitles some people to the earnings of others. I handily dispensed with your question, now you address mine. Eh?

Liberals are gutless, clueless, cowards!

And by the way, the Democrats haven't the slightest interest in healthcare finance reform. This is a naked power grab - plain and simple. There isn't even the slightest whiff of tort reform in this bill. The law that currently causes health insurance competition across state lines is still intact. Our taxes will go up, the quality of our healthcare will plummet, the access to it will have to be rationed, and it will further break an already broken budget in a time of record unemployment and economic instability. And can any of you geniuses tell me when the costs of any past entitlements did not snowball beyond all previous estimates - only to find that the politicians responsible are now retired or dead?

Stop living in darkness. Government largess is killing us. We need only a modest - CONSTITUTIONAL - type of government.

Dec 29, 09 - 06:47 am Comment from: The DataDude

The sky is blue, water is wet, the sun sets in the west, and Ron hates Obama and the other Democrats.... <yawn>

Here's a New Year's Resolution (and prayer) that would improve our online lives immensely -- could we please keep politics (both left and right) out of these MDN discussions? ...

please?

Happy New Year everyone!

Poor Josh, unable to parse a simple hypothetical. Maybe I should have made it clearer by asking why any childless person or couple (especially GLBT people who are the subject of so much discrimination) should see their taxes - whether local or federal - go into the education system.

As for a constitutional case, look at Section 8 of Article 1: To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

"General Welfare" is almost a piece of legislative putty that - if you adhere to the Hamilton interpretation - can be made to mean pretty much anything that the current legislative body wants it to mean: however, if you're an adherent of the Madisonian interpretation, it means something else.

I would say that - if it were supposed to be an explicit restriction - it would have been written into Section 9 with all of the other limits and restrictions on Congress, but it wasn't.

I would also say that, even if you ignore education as being locally funded (like that makes a difference), why should people who aren't flying a plane pay for the FAA. It's not an enumerated power under the Constitution, but the FAA gets nearly $16 billion.

How about NASA? I don't see anything about space travel in the Constitution, but it gets $18.7 billion to go and do something called "science".

But the kicker argument is that, if the provision of healthcare is unconstitutional at any level then - by implication - it is unconstitutional at every level: Given your stance, I suggest that you go and start throwing someone else's Grandma/Grandpa/Mom/Pop (I don't want to offend you by assuming that you have either) out of their Medicaid-funded nursing homes - I'm sure no one else would mind.

But if you feel so strongly, why don't you go and get some hotshot lawyer that wants to make a name for themselves (like Orly Taitz) and start making your arguments through the legal system: if you're lucky, you could be in front of the Supreme Court in three or four years and you might just get a bunch of right-wing activist judges to side with you.

Holy crap Batman, Apple rewards a captain for doing a good job. How the hell did this turn into a governmental policy discussion? I think you should remember to insure you are in the correct FORUM before vomiting your beliefs.

I felt like I stopped by ESPN and accidentally was redirected to a PORN site. I guess it was fun to look at - but it wasn't the reason for my original journey.

And - for Tim Cook - well deserved my man - well deserved.

@HUH? WTF?…

You are of course correct and I apologize for my part in that - it's just way too easy to rattle my cage.

Tim Cook is an unsung hero who deserves every penny. I remember when Apple could design great products, but had no ability to ensure that they were appropriately manufactured and stocked. Without Cook, all of the other efforts would be wasted.

Dec 29, 09 - 09:41 am Comment from: theloniousMac

Sucks when people publish how much money you make.

Can't hide it from the wife.

Elephants and asses, screwing the masses...

Tim Cook, real hope and real change we can actually believe in...

I want to know why Steve Jobs received his normal salary?

He only worked 1/2 a year, he should refund 50 cents back to the company, and 1/2 of his bonus!

Prime example of a greedy CEO milking the stock holders

thelonius…

So long as he hasn't got the same (ex-)wife as Alan in Two and a Half Men.

God, she's a ball-breaker

No need to apologise for publishing your rational, researched, and reasonable views on the state of affairs in the US--your posts are the only ones here that make valid points.

Keep up the good fight! Goodness knows it's a frustrating one when you're beating your head against walls of ignorance.

Hey, guys, listen--I'm sorry, I've been way out of line here. The fact is, I've been going through a lot lately, and the only thing it felt like I could do is lash out at ideas and people that are strange to me. I guess I've just been feeling threatened lately, and so I really overreacted here. I don't _really_ believe most of what I've written--it's pretty childish of me to be so vehement about things that have to do with me, after all.

So--really sorry! Let's hope for a better New Year! I sure know I could use one.

Hello,
the Democrats haven't the slightest interest in healthcare finance reform. This is a naked power grab - plain and simple. There isn't even the slightest whiff of tort reform in this bill. The law that currently causes health insurance competition across state lines is still intact. Our taxes will go up, the quality of our healthcare will plummet, the access to it will have to be rationed,

r4i software

r4i,

I would normally detest such obvious spam; however, even though your link points to a page in a language I don't understand, it still makes more sense than most of Josh's outpourings of garbage.