<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_25_1949223</id>
	<title>Independent Programmers' No-Win Scenario</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1267085220000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.infoworld.com/" rel="nofollow">snydeq</a> writes <i>"Fatal Exception's Neil McAllister writes about the <a href="http://infoworld.com/d/developer-world/fixing-independent-programmers-no-win-scenario-764">no-win scenario facing today's independent programmers</a>: 'In a knowledge economy, programmers rank among our most valuable workers, yet the current legal and regulatory climate makes a career as an independent software developer virtually a dead-end prospect.' <a href="http://www.synergistech.com/1706.shtml">Section 1706 of the 1986 Tax Reform Act</a>, the hurdles and costs of obtaining health care for one's own family, a hostile legal climate in search of <a href="http://www.infoworld.com/t/software-licensing/watch-out-developers-here-come-lawyers-436">accountability for any defects in code</a> &mdash; these harsh realities make it 'easy to see why software developers would give up on entrepreneurship. For many, the risks simply don't match the potential rewards. Better to keep their heads down, not rock the boat, and <a href="http://developers.slashdot.org/story/10/02/17/1642213/Logans-Run-Syndrome-In-Programming?art\_pos=1">hope they can hang onto their jobs until retirement</a>.' Great news for big software vendors, which will be 'ensured an endless supply of programmers desperate for the safe haven of a steady paycheck, predictable taxation, health benefits, and a shield from civil prosecution when their code turns up buggy. But where will the next Microsoft come from? A field that discourages self-reliance sends the message that the status quo is the highest goal.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>snydeq writes " Fatal Exception 's Neil McAllister writes about the no-win scenario facing today 's independent programmers : 'In a knowledge economy , programmers rank among our most valuable workers , yet the current legal and regulatory climate makes a career as an independent software developer virtually a dead-end prospect .
' Section 1706 of the 1986 Tax Reform Act , the hurdles and costs of obtaining health care for one 's own family , a hostile legal climate in search of accountability for any defects in code    these harsh realities make it 'easy to see why software developers would give up on entrepreneurship .
For many , the risks simply do n't match the potential rewards .
Better to keep their heads down , not rock the boat , and hope they can hang onto their jobs until retirement .
' Great news for big software vendors , which will be 'ensured an endless supply of programmers desperate for the safe haven of a steady paycheck , predictable taxation , health benefits , and a shield from civil prosecution when their code turns up buggy .
But where will the next Microsoft come from ?
A field that discourages self-reliance sends the message that the status quo is the highest goal .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>snydeq writes "Fatal Exception's Neil McAllister writes about the no-win scenario facing today's independent programmers: 'In a knowledge economy, programmers rank among our most valuable workers, yet the current legal and regulatory climate makes a career as an independent software developer virtually a dead-end prospect.
' Section 1706 of the 1986 Tax Reform Act, the hurdles and costs of obtaining health care for one's own family, a hostile legal climate in search of accountability for any defects in code — these harsh realities make it 'easy to see why software developers would give up on entrepreneurship.
For many, the risks simply don't match the potential rewards.
Better to keep their heads down, not rock the boat, and hope they can hang onto their jobs until retirement.
' Great news for big software vendors, which will be 'ensured an endless supply of programmers desperate for the safe haven of a steady paycheck, predictable taxation, health benefits, and a shield from civil prosecution when their code turns up buggy.
But where will the next Microsoft come from?
A field that discourages self-reliance sends the message that the status quo is the highest goal.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31283492</id>
	<title>Re:yeah. its much better to be p0wned</title>
	<author>ultranova</author>
	<datestamp>1267188720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The definition of socialism is actually collective (via state in statist socialism, directly by community in anarcho-socialism) ownership of means of production. That's all there is to it. If a person can own factory or land for themselves, then it's not socialism - it's still capitalism (albeit possibly regulated).</p></div> </blockquote><p>More to the point, the idea of socialism/communism is that the workers, rather than owners, should get the fruits of their labour. If you work in a factory, you'll get a share of its profits; if you don't, you won't. Collectivist ownership is only a means towards this goal, necessary because a factory can't be run by a single person.</p><p>That's the truly ironic thing about socialism: taken to its logical conclusion, it's actually ultra-capitalism - everyone is an enterpreneur, working for themselves rather than a "boss".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The definition of socialism is actually collective ( via state in statist socialism , directly by community in anarcho-socialism ) ownership of means of production .
That 's all there is to it .
If a person can own factory or land for themselves , then it 's not socialism - it 's still capitalism ( albeit possibly regulated ) .
More to the point , the idea of socialism/communism is that the workers , rather than owners , should get the fruits of their labour .
If you work in a factory , you 'll get a share of its profits ; if you do n't , you wo n't .
Collectivist ownership is only a means towards this goal , necessary because a factory ca n't be run by a single person.That 's the truly ironic thing about socialism : taken to its logical conclusion , it 's actually ultra-capitalism - everyone is an enterpreneur , working for themselves rather than a " boss " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The definition of socialism is actually collective (via state in statist socialism, directly by community in anarcho-socialism) ownership of means of production.
That's all there is to it.
If a person can own factory or land for themselves, then it's not socialism - it's still capitalism (albeit possibly regulated).
More to the point, the idea of socialism/communism is that the workers, rather than owners, should get the fruits of their labour.
If you work in a factory, you'll get a share of its profits; if you don't, you won't.
Collectivist ownership is only a means towards this goal, necessary because a factory can't be run by a single person.That's the truly ironic thing about socialism: taken to its logical conclusion, it's actually ultra-capitalism - everyone is an enterpreneur, working for themselves rather than a "boss".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31282608</id>
	<title>Re:Most valuable my ass</title>
	<author>EdgeCreeper</author>
	<datestamp>1267176900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>MOD PARENT UP!</p><p>GP seems to be arguing on respectability of a profession, which really is quite arbitrary.  The person who digs stuff out of the ground, such as farmers and miners, are conspicuously absent from the GPs post, even though the people working in every profession he mentioned requires those things.  Trying to rank professions is really quite silly and elitist, a competant person will almost always be more useful to society than an incompetent person in whatever other profession anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MOD PARENT UP ! GP seems to be arguing on respectability of a profession , which really is quite arbitrary .
The person who digs stuff out of the ground , such as farmers and miners , are conspicuously absent from the GPs post , even though the people working in every profession he mentioned requires those things .
Trying to rank professions is really quite silly and elitist , a competant person will almost always be more useful to society than an incompetent person in whatever other profession anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MOD PARENT UP!GP seems to be arguing on respectability of a profession, which really is quite arbitrary.
The person who digs stuff out of the ground, such as farmers and miners, are conspicuously absent from the GPs post, even though the people working in every profession he mentioned requires those things.
Trying to rank professions is really quite silly and elitist, a competant person will almost always be more useful to society than an incompetent person in whatever other profession anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279316</id>
	<title>Re:Most valuable my ass</title>
	<author>BJ\_Covert\_Action</author>
	<datestamp>1267099740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think you forgot what is arguably the most valuable profession of all, in any society. The food producers. Whether it is a farmer, a hunter, or a saavy tradesmen that brings food into your society, that is the cornerstone of your civilization. If you don't have some sort of food producer, little else matters. It's possible that doctors are on equal footing with food producers, or, at least, a very close second.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you forgot what is arguably the most valuable profession of all , in any society .
The food producers .
Whether it is a farmer , a hunter , or a saavy tradesmen that brings food into your society , that is the cornerstone of your civilization .
If you do n't have some sort of food producer , little else matters .
It 's possible that doctors are on equal footing with food producers , or , at least , a very close second .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you forgot what is arguably the most valuable profession of all, in any society.
The food producers.
Whether it is a farmer, a hunter, or a saavy tradesmen that brings food into your society, that is the cornerstone of your civilization.
If you don't have some sort of food producer, little else matters.
It's possible that doctors are on equal footing with food producers, or, at least, a very close second.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277750</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281264</id>
	<title>Now get creative. Like to go to theme parks?</title>
	<author>jeko</author>
	<datestamp>1267116300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>*BA HA HA HA* *Gasp* Oh God, stop it you're killing me! *BA HA HA HA HA*</p><p>Have you actually tried this? Did you enjoy the audit? Do the words "back taxes and penalties" haunt your dreams?</p><p>You do understand the IRS considers this tax fraud and aggresively looks for it, right? You got this idea from your copy of "Rich Dad, Poor Dad" didn't you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>* BA HA HA HA * * Gasp * Oh God , stop it you 're killing me !
* BA HA HA HA HA * Have you actually tried this ?
Did you enjoy the audit ?
Do the words " back taxes and penalties " haunt your dreams ? You do understand the IRS considers this tax fraud and aggresively looks for it , right ?
You got this idea from your copy of " Rich Dad , Poor Dad " did n't you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*BA HA HA HA* *Gasp* Oh God, stop it you're killing me!
*BA HA HA HA HA*Have you actually tried this?
Did you enjoy the audit?
Do the words "back taxes and penalties" haunt your dreams?You do understand the IRS considers this tax fraud and aggresively looks for it, right?
You got this idea from your copy of "Rich Dad, Poor Dad" didn't you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281340</id>
	<title>Re:Why now?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267117140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agreed.  The law was created in part to address the fact that at the time, Microsoft was hiring so many "consultants" that nobody was paying any taxes.</p><p>Far from being onerous, I'm inclined to believe that Section 1706 is more of a good thing than a bad thing. How can someone NOT be an employee, when the entity they work for years on end sets their work hours, location, work products, and so on?  If a "consultant" finds themselves in a situation like that, the only "destiny" they're controlling is whether or not they are going to pay for taxes and insurance.  And history shows that when given a choice, people won't pay them.  Hence the mandatory withholding that is required of employers.</p><p>I've worked 1099 for a decade, as a software consultant, and have been audited for a few things but never for my employment situation.  There's no "trick" to making this possible, other than simply not looking like an employee: don't spend weeks at a time onsite, always be actively serving more than one client, have an identity outside of your role for the client, and so on.</p><p>That's all that Section 1706 is asking you to do: call yourself an employee when you really are one.</p><p>Joe Stack was a whiner, and his tantrums ultimately cost his own life plus the life of an innocent bystander.  Let's not lose sight of the fact after he set fire to HIS house, he crashed HIS airplane into the IRS building.  Yea, sounds like The Man was really keeping him down.  Move along, nothing more to see here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed .
The law was created in part to address the fact that at the time , Microsoft was hiring so many " consultants " that nobody was paying any taxes.Far from being onerous , I 'm inclined to believe that Section 1706 is more of a good thing than a bad thing .
How can someone NOT be an employee , when the entity they work for years on end sets their work hours , location , work products , and so on ?
If a " consultant " finds themselves in a situation like that , the only " destiny " they 're controlling is whether or not they are going to pay for taxes and insurance .
And history shows that when given a choice , people wo n't pay them .
Hence the mandatory withholding that is required of employers.I 've worked 1099 for a decade , as a software consultant , and have been audited for a few things but never for my employment situation .
There 's no " trick " to making this possible , other than simply not looking like an employee : do n't spend weeks at a time onsite , always be actively serving more than one client , have an identity outside of your role for the client , and so on.That 's all that Section 1706 is asking you to do : call yourself an employee when you really are one.Joe Stack was a whiner , and his tantrums ultimately cost his own life plus the life of an innocent bystander .
Let 's not lose sight of the fact after he set fire to HIS house , he crashed HIS airplane into the IRS building .
Yea , sounds like The Man was really keeping him down .
Move along , nothing more to see here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed.
The law was created in part to address the fact that at the time, Microsoft was hiring so many "consultants" that nobody was paying any taxes.Far from being onerous, I'm inclined to believe that Section 1706 is more of a good thing than a bad thing.
How can someone NOT be an employee, when the entity they work for years on end sets their work hours, location, work products, and so on?
If a "consultant" finds themselves in a situation like that, the only "destiny" they're controlling is whether or not they are going to pay for taxes and insurance.
And history shows that when given a choice, people won't pay them.
Hence the mandatory withholding that is required of employers.I've worked 1099 for a decade, as a software consultant, and have been audited for a few things but never for my employment situation.
There's no "trick" to making this possible, other than simply not looking like an employee: don't spend weeks at a time onsite, always be actively serving more than one client, have an identity outside of your role for the client, and so on.That's all that Section 1706 is asking you to do: call yourself an employee when you really are one.Joe Stack was a whiner, and his tantrums ultimately cost his own life plus the life of an innocent bystander.
Let's not lose sight of the fact after he set fire to HIS house, he crashed HIS airplane into the IRS building.
Yea, sounds like The Man was really keeping him down.
Move along, nothing more to see here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276892</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281024</id>
	<title>You're not winning. You're losing horribly.</title>
	<author>jeko</author>
	<datestamp>1267114020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"and most days are 12~16 hours long"</i></p><p>Do you have kids? Do you plan to? You work 12-16 hour days constantly and they will end up pregnant addicts. NOTHING screws up your kids faster than parents who don't have time for them.</p><p><i>on vacations I do have to keep one eye on my email and be willing to get up a few hours early to handle anything</i></p><p>That's not a vacation.</p><p><i>There are no sick days.</i></p><p>You are one car accident away from bankruptcy.</p><p><i>When a client makes unreasonable demands I just charge more.</i></p><p>No, no you really don't. Been there, done that. Over time, clients expect you to constantly get cheaper. In time, you'll find yourself competing against third-world labor.</p><p><i>don't let a client down even if it means pulling all-nighters until your not sure what day it is</i></p><p>I see you have your cardiac arrest penciled in for next year. What does your doctor think about this plan?</p><p><i>I've never been happier in my career.</i></p><p>Been there. Done that. Talk to me about how you feel after three years of this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" and most days are 12 ~ 16 hours long " Do you have kids ?
Do you plan to ?
You work 12-16 hour days constantly and they will end up pregnant addicts .
NOTHING screws up your kids faster than parents who do n't have time for them.on vacations I do have to keep one eye on my email and be willing to get up a few hours early to handle anythingThat 's not a vacation.There are no sick days.You are one car accident away from bankruptcy.When a client makes unreasonable demands I just charge more.No , no you really do n't .
Been there , done that .
Over time , clients expect you to constantly get cheaper .
In time , you 'll find yourself competing against third-world labor.do n't let a client down even if it means pulling all-nighters until your not sure what day it isI see you have your cardiac arrest penciled in for next year .
What does your doctor think about this plan ? I 've never been happier in my career.Been there .
Done that .
Talk to me about how you feel after three years of this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"and most days are 12~16 hours long"Do you have kids?
Do you plan to?
You work 12-16 hour days constantly and they will end up pregnant addicts.
NOTHING screws up your kids faster than parents who don't have time for them.on vacations I do have to keep one eye on my email and be willing to get up a few hours early to handle anythingThat's not a vacation.There are no sick days.You are one car accident away from bankruptcy.When a client makes unreasonable demands I just charge more.No, no you really don't.
Been there, done that.
Over time, clients expect you to constantly get cheaper.
In time, you'll find yourself competing against third-world labor.don't let a client down even if it means pulling all-nighters until your not sure what day it isI see you have your cardiac arrest penciled in for next year.
What does your doctor think about this plan?I've never been happier in my career.Been there.
Done that.
Talk to me about how you feel after three years of this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278392</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280408</id>
	<title>It's simple: Higher pay</title>
	<author>caywen</author>
	<datestamp>1267107660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Software is one of those industries that chews up and spits people out. What software engineers do is no less complex than what most other engineers do. We use the theory we studied, combine it with real world knowledge and experience, and produce product. The sucky engineers get weeded out as in any industry. Why, then, do so many competent engineers find it so hard to retire? $100k just doesn't go very far. We usually have no pension plan. Health care costs are already mentioned. And we face increasing (and unprovable) age discrimination as we hit our late 40's. Either you're a software engineering director by 55 or you're working at Best Buy.</p><p>Now, try living in the Bay Area or similar region where getting a decent house is $700k+. That makes your mortgage like $4,000/mo. You bring home like $10,000/mo. After state+federal+other takes 40+\% of that, forget saving enough for retirement. Better hope your company gets acquired by Google by the time you turn 45.</p><p>I bristle at anyone who thinks software engineers are rich yuppies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Software is one of those industries that chews up and spits people out .
What software engineers do is no less complex than what most other engineers do .
We use the theory we studied , combine it with real world knowledge and experience , and produce product .
The sucky engineers get weeded out as in any industry .
Why , then , do so many competent engineers find it so hard to retire ?
$ 100k just does n't go very far .
We usually have no pension plan .
Health care costs are already mentioned .
And we face increasing ( and unprovable ) age discrimination as we hit our late 40 's .
Either you 're a software engineering director by 55 or you 're working at Best Buy.Now , try living in the Bay Area or similar region where getting a decent house is $ 700k + .
That makes your mortgage like $ 4,000/mo .
You bring home like $ 10,000/mo .
After state + federal + other takes 40 + \ % of that , forget saving enough for retirement .
Better hope your company gets acquired by Google by the time you turn 45.I bristle at anyone who thinks software engineers are rich yuppies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Software is one of those industries that chews up and spits people out.
What software engineers do is no less complex than what most other engineers do.
We use the theory we studied, combine it with real world knowledge and experience, and produce product.
The sucky engineers get weeded out as in any industry.
Why, then, do so many competent engineers find it so hard to retire?
$100k just doesn't go very far.
We usually have no pension plan.
Health care costs are already mentioned.
And we face increasing (and unprovable) age discrimination as we hit our late 40's.
Either you're a software engineering director by 55 or you're working at Best Buy.Now, try living in the Bay Area or similar region where getting a decent house is $700k+.
That makes your mortgage like $4,000/mo.
You bring home like $10,000/mo.
After state+federal+other takes 40+\% of that, forget saving enough for retirement.
Better hope your company gets acquired by Google by the time you turn 45.I bristle at anyone who thinks software engineers are rich yuppies.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277316</id>
	<title>malpractice insurance</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267090920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't see the liability issue as being much of a problem once it's established.  Programmers will just end up buying some kind of insurance, similar to malpractice insurance.  This will raise their costs, sure, but also will end up priced in to their products &amp; services.  In the big picture, poor quality and insecure software costs a fortune &amp; is a huge financial drag, so I would bet that this would overall be good economics, even after the insurance companies siphon off a good share.</p><p>Because insurance will presumably cost more for careless developers and less for diligent ones, it gives an incentive for quality &amp; security, where currently the only incentive is to get things done as quickly &amp; cheaply as possible, and by extension to hire the cheapest and least skilled programmers you can get away with.  This makes skilled programmers time worth more by making their insurance costs &amp; their risks less.</p><p>I think it's a win for both programmers and software-users (which is everybody) and for the economy as a whole, and I think that the market will iron out all the details pretty quickly (and it's rare that I say something like that last bit.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see the liability issue as being much of a problem once it 's established .
Programmers will just end up buying some kind of insurance , similar to malpractice insurance .
This will raise their costs , sure , but also will end up priced in to their products &amp; services .
In the big picture , poor quality and insecure software costs a fortune &amp; is a huge financial drag , so I would bet that this would overall be good economics , even after the insurance companies siphon off a good share.Because insurance will presumably cost more for careless developers and less for diligent ones , it gives an incentive for quality &amp; security , where currently the only incentive is to get things done as quickly &amp; cheaply as possible , and by extension to hire the cheapest and least skilled programmers you can get away with .
This makes skilled programmers time worth more by making their insurance costs &amp; their risks less.I think it 's a win for both programmers and software-users ( which is everybody ) and for the economy as a whole , and I think that the market will iron out all the details pretty quickly ( and it 's rare that I say something like that last bit .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see the liability issue as being much of a problem once it's established.
Programmers will just end up buying some kind of insurance, similar to malpractice insurance.
This will raise their costs, sure, but also will end up priced in to their products &amp; services.
In the big picture, poor quality and insecure software costs a fortune &amp; is a huge financial drag, so I would bet that this would overall be good economics, even after the insurance companies siphon off a good share.Because insurance will presumably cost more for careless developers and less for diligent ones, it gives an incentive for quality &amp; security, where currently the only incentive is to get things done as quickly &amp; cheaply as possible, and by extension to hire the cheapest and least skilled programmers you can get away with.
This makes skilled programmers time worth more by making their insurance costs &amp; their risks less.I think it's a win for both programmers and software-users (which is everybody) and for the economy as a whole, and I think that the market will iron out all the details pretty quickly (and it's rare that I say something like that last bit.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277224</id>
	<title>Boy, talk about a slippery slope.</title>
	<author>CherniyVolk</author>
	<datestamp>1267090500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OK.  If a country who decided, stupidly and unconventionally, to have Windows (any version) installed anywhere within the chain of firecontrol for nuclear weapons, or massive bio/chem weapons, and one accidentally launched or worse, didn't launch when needed.  Microsoft needs to be held liable.</p><p>If a life support system, fails and it is found, beyond all doubt and as matter of fact, that the developer purposely put the bug in for shits and giggles.  Yes, I would agree he is liable.</p><p>OK, everyone understands these extremes... but what about these?</p><p>If a software developer puts a back door sequence into a casino game machine, and they get out... I think he should be held liable.</p><p>The problem with liability, and why I think I would rather wait for case by case scenarios, as horrible as that may sound... wait for a nuclear disaster... the problem is the legal system and it's inaccessibility by laymen.  The problem is, if you grant liability issues within the legal system for software development, how the hell are you to protect yourself from a lawyer who insists you knew of xyz bug that caused xyz damage?  After all, you coded it, saw every line... perhaps you are a professional coder?  It's the same things that plague reverse engineering, just because you saw the inside of a PS3, some lawyer in spite of all logic and rationale can make it sound like you have super human intelligence and vision like Superman to see into the chips and that the PS3 is such a simpleton device that merely viewing it once or twice somehow accounts for any and all success in reverse engineering a project like that.  Which, *we* all know is bullshit.</p><p>And where does the liability train end?  God forbid a lawyer actually understand any of this stuff, because it'll go from Microsoft, to the department, to the head engineer, to the underlying compiler, to the board of committee that governs the spec.  Maybe no software designer accepts the liability, perhaps pass on the ball to those pesky hardware guys... the bug isn't a problem with software the software was just doing what the hardware allowed... now, square one, in a totally different ball field.</p><p>So they try to qualify it by "knowingly", but I just outlined the problem with this.  These are ambiguous terms, nearly impossible to prove.  Such concepts can result in long drawn out court battles, which due to no legal protection from the state, poor people can't afford.  Which the whole thing will get abused by big business wishing to shut down an open source developer, or an upstart, or it's direct competition (we all remember Creative's use of legal battles to crush competition yes?).</p><p>Because of reliable prophecy of where this sort of stuff will result in, I'm willing to absolve any and all liability of even my worst enemy (Microsoft) should their software cause damage due to a bug.  Besides, I don't know anyone who can write bug free code.  I don't know anyone who can write a relatively useful, yet simple, program once and have no bugs, no gotchas without having to hit the backspace key at all.  There is a great deal of trial and error in computer programming, there's a great deal of revisionism, bug fixing, updating and modification.  Software development is as buggy as there are natural phenomena, it's as progressive and dynamic as nature itself.  Attempting to hold someone liable is sheer stupidity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OK. If a country who decided , stupidly and unconventionally , to have Windows ( any version ) installed anywhere within the chain of firecontrol for nuclear weapons , or massive bio/chem weapons , and one accidentally launched or worse , did n't launch when needed .
Microsoft needs to be held liable.If a life support system , fails and it is found , beyond all doubt and as matter of fact , that the developer purposely put the bug in for shits and giggles .
Yes , I would agree he is liable.OK , everyone understands these extremes... but what about these ? If a software developer puts a back door sequence into a casino game machine , and they get out... I think he should be held liable.The problem with liability , and why I think I would rather wait for case by case scenarios , as horrible as that may sound... wait for a nuclear disaster... the problem is the legal system and it 's inaccessibility by laymen .
The problem is , if you grant liability issues within the legal system for software development , how the hell are you to protect yourself from a lawyer who insists you knew of xyz bug that caused xyz damage ?
After all , you coded it , saw every line... perhaps you are a professional coder ?
It 's the same things that plague reverse engineering , just because you saw the inside of a PS3 , some lawyer in spite of all logic and rationale can make it sound like you have super human intelligence and vision like Superman to see into the chips and that the PS3 is such a simpleton device that merely viewing it once or twice somehow accounts for any and all success in reverse engineering a project like that .
Which , * we * all know is bullshit.And where does the liability train end ?
God forbid a lawyer actually understand any of this stuff , because it 'll go from Microsoft , to the department , to the head engineer , to the underlying compiler , to the board of committee that governs the spec .
Maybe no software designer accepts the liability , perhaps pass on the ball to those pesky hardware guys... the bug is n't a problem with software the software was just doing what the hardware allowed... now , square one , in a totally different ball field.So they try to qualify it by " knowingly " , but I just outlined the problem with this .
These are ambiguous terms , nearly impossible to prove .
Such concepts can result in long drawn out court battles , which due to no legal protection from the state , poor people ca n't afford .
Which the whole thing will get abused by big business wishing to shut down an open source developer , or an upstart , or it 's direct competition ( we all remember Creative 's use of legal battles to crush competition yes ?
) .Because of reliable prophecy of where this sort of stuff will result in , I 'm willing to absolve any and all liability of even my worst enemy ( Microsoft ) should their software cause damage due to a bug .
Besides , I do n't know anyone who can write bug free code .
I do n't know anyone who can write a relatively useful , yet simple , program once and have no bugs , no gotchas without having to hit the backspace key at all .
There is a great deal of trial and error in computer programming , there 's a great deal of revisionism , bug fixing , updating and modification .
Software development is as buggy as there are natural phenomena , it 's as progressive and dynamic as nature itself .
Attempting to hold someone liable is sheer stupidity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK.  If a country who decided, stupidly and unconventionally, to have Windows (any version) installed anywhere within the chain of firecontrol for nuclear weapons, or massive bio/chem weapons, and one accidentally launched or worse, didn't launch when needed.
Microsoft needs to be held liable.If a life support system, fails and it is found, beyond all doubt and as matter of fact, that the developer purposely put the bug in for shits and giggles.
Yes, I would agree he is liable.OK, everyone understands these extremes... but what about these?If a software developer puts a back door sequence into a casino game machine, and they get out... I think he should be held liable.The problem with liability, and why I think I would rather wait for case by case scenarios, as horrible as that may sound... wait for a nuclear disaster... the problem is the legal system and it's inaccessibility by laymen.
The problem is, if you grant liability issues within the legal system for software development, how the hell are you to protect yourself from a lawyer who insists you knew of xyz bug that caused xyz damage?
After all, you coded it, saw every line... perhaps you are a professional coder?
It's the same things that plague reverse engineering, just because you saw the inside of a PS3, some lawyer in spite of all logic and rationale can make it sound like you have super human intelligence and vision like Superman to see into the chips and that the PS3 is such a simpleton device that merely viewing it once or twice somehow accounts for any and all success in reverse engineering a project like that.
Which, *we* all know is bullshit.And where does the liability train end?
God forbid a lawyer actually understand any of this stuff, because it'll go from Microsoft, to the department, to the head engineer, to the underlying compiler, to the board of committee that governs the spec.
Maybe no software designer accepts the liability, perhaps pass on the ball to those pesky hardware guys... the bug isn't a problem with software the software was just doing what the hardware allowed... now, square one, in a totally different ball field.So they try to qualify it by "knowingly", but I just outlined the problem with this.
These are ambiguous terms, nearly impossible to prove.
Such concepts can result in long drawn out court battles, which due to no legal protection from the state, poor people can't afford.
Which the whole thing will get abused by big business wishing to shut down an open source developer, or an upstart, or it's direct competition (we all remember Creative's use of legal battles to crush competition yes?
).Because of reliable prophecy of where this sort of stuff will result in, I'm willing to absolve any and all liability of even my worst enemy (Microsoft) should their software cause damage due to a bug.
Besides, I don't know anyone who can write bug free code.
I don't know anyone who can write a relatively useful, yet simple, program once and have no bugs, no gotchas without having to hit the backspace key at all.
There is a great deal of trial and error in computer programming, there's a great deal of revisionism, bug fixing, updating and modification.
Software development is as buggy as there are natural phenomena, it's as progressive and dynamic as nature itself.
Attempting to hold someone liable is sheer stupidity.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277782</id>
	<title>Move to Rapture?</title>
	<author>jayveekay</author>
	<datestamp>1267093080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can escape the oppressive overland governments by moving to the city under the sea! Then you can be truly free.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can escape the oppressive overland governments by moving to the city under the sea !
Then you can be truly free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can escape the oppressive overland governments by moving to the city under the sea!
Then you can be truly free.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277066</id>
	<title>Yep, I've lost hope.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267089840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>When I started working as a programmer some 15 years ago I had an AA degree in computer science. I learned on my own and wrote some pretty fantastic code. My first job was to write a multithreading app and I did well. Now I'm out of work and I can't get a job doing stuff that I could do in my sleep because I don't have a BA and I'm 54 years of age. I can't get a job, in a month or two I'll be homeless. I have pneumonia and I can't even afford to go to the doctor, stinking california denied my medical aid because I didn't state whether i was PREGNANT or not!!! Recently I decided my only hope is to go into business myself and now i read about this situation. Not a day goes by that I don't think about suicide and can only manage to get to sleep by pretending I'm dying. How pathetic I know but that's the way it is. Its over for me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I started working as a programmer some 15 years ago I had an AA degree in computer science .
I learned on my own and wrote some pretty fantastic code .
My first job was to write a multithreading app and I did well .
Now I 'm out of work and I ca n't get a job doing stuff that I could do in my sleep because I do n't have a BA and I 'm 54 years of age .
I ca n't get a job , in a month or two I 'll be homeless .
I have pneumonia and I ca n't even afford to go to the doctor , stinking california denied my medical aid because I did n't state whether i was PREGNANT or not ! ! !
Recently I decided my only hope is to go into business myself and now i read about this situation .
Not a day goes by that I do n't think about suicide and can only manage to get to sleep by pretending I 'm dying .
How pathetic I know but that 's the way it is .
Its over for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I started working as a programmer some 15 years ago I had an AA degree in computer science.
I learned on my own and wrote some pretty fantastic code.
My first job was to write a multithreading app and I did well.
Now I'm out of work and I can't get a job doing stuff that I could do in my sleep because I don't have a BA and I'm 54 years of age.
I can't get a job, in a month or two I'll be homeless.
I have pneumonia and I can't even afford to go to the doctor, stinking california denied my medical aid because I didn't state whether i was PREGNANT or not!!!
Recently I decided my only hope is to go into business myself and now i read about this situation.
Not a day goes by that I don't think about suicide and can only manage to get to sleep by pretending I'm dying.
How pathetic I know but that's the way it is.
Its over for me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31302298</id>
	<title>Soooo...</title>
	<author>danwesnor</author>
	<datestamp>1267289520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...indie software developers are in the same boat as all the other small business owners?  Whooda thunk?</htmltext>
<tokenext>...indie software developers are in the same boat as all the other small business owners ?
Whooda thunk ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...indie software developers are in the same boat as all the other small business owners?
Whooda thunk?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278930</id>
	<title>Re:What a whiny load of crap.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267097580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't agree with your theme parks LLC but the rest of your list is relatively accurate.</p><p>The key to staying out of the IRS' spotlight is to make sure you report a profit every year, even if it is a small one. -- Pay your share of taxes.</p><p>Showing a loss as a sole-proprietor LLC is a really dumb thing to do.  Do it twice and you mind as well go the IRS and ask for an audit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't agree with your theme parks LLC but the rest of your list is relatively accurate.The key to staying out of the IRS ' spotlight is to make sure you report a profit every year , even if it is a small one .
-- Pay your share of taxes.Showing a loss as a sole-proprietor LLC is a really dumb thing to do .
Do it twice and you mind as well go the IRS and ask for an audit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't agree with your theme parks LLC but the rest of your list is relatively accurate.The key to staying out of the IRS' spotlight is to make sure you report a profit every year, even if it is a small one.
-- Pay your share of taxes.Showing a loss as a sole-proprietor LLC is a really dumb thing to do.
Do it twice and you mind as well go the IRS and ask for an audit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281590</id>
	<title>All over the map</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267120200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, this article is all over the map.<br>First of all, what kind of people are we talking about - what is an "independent programmer"?  I can think of two kinds:<br>1. Independent contractors working for a company.<br>2. Programmers writing code on their own, for themselves, with an intent to sell it.<br>Most of the article seems to talk about #1, but then they ask "Where will the next Microsoft come from?", which hints at #2.  Unless the author has some information we don't, companies like Microsoft and Google didn't hire a lot of independent contractors when they were small.  The arrangements were probably mostly informal, as with most businesses in start-up mode.</p><p>At any rate, the author mentions a bunch of US specific regulations first, while mentioning in the second half of the article that these problems primarily affect Americans.  That should be part of the title then.  Many people like myself can read English, but  don't live in the US or love everything to be US-centric, especially without disclosure.  (I live in Japan).</p><p>It is mentioned that because of US laws, nobody will hire independent contractors?  That is absolutely not true, I myself have worked as an independent contractor in the US (in around 2000, way after the law was passed), and I know plenty of other people who also do.  If that's a problem, then you just self-incorporate - as many of the independent contractors I know do.  It's not that big of a deal.</p><p>As for the legal code requirements... think about it "There are no bugs to my knowledge", etc.  That's an easy thing to promise, since it's only "to the best of my knowledge".  Very few organizations even request those sort of agreements, because it will be obvious to anyone who wants to keep their job they they need to deliver professional quality.</p><p>The poor health-care system of the US is mentioned - that is a big problem in the US, but one that isn't even remotely only related to IT.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , this article is all over the map.First of all , what kind of people are we talking about - what is an " independent programmer " ?
I can think of two kinds : 1 .
Independent contractors working for a company.2 .
Programmers writing code on their own , for themselves , with an intent to sell it.Most of the article seems to talk about # 1 , but then they ask " Where will the next Microsoft come from ?
" , which hints at # 2 .
Unless the author has some information we do n't , companies like Microsoft and Google did n't hire a lot of independent contractors when they were small .
The arrangements were probably mostly informal , as with most businesses in start-up mode.At any rate , the author mentions a bunch of US specific regulations first , while mentioning in the second half of the article that these problems primarily affect Americans .
That should be part of the title then .
Many people like myself can read English , but do n't live in the US or love everything to be US-centric , especially without disclosure .
( I live in Japan ) .It is mentioned that because of US laws , nobody will hire independent contractors ?
That is absolutely not true , I myself have worked as an independent contractor in the US ( in around 2000 , way after the law was passed ) , and I know plenty of other people who also do .
If that 's a problem , then you just self-incorporate - as many of the independent contractors I know do .
It 's not that big of a deal.As for the legal code requirements... think about it " There are no bugs to my knowledge " , etc .
That 's an easy thing to promise , since it 's only " to the best of my knowledge " .
Very few organizations even request those sort of agreements , because it will be obvious to anyone who wants to keep their job they they need to deliver professional quality.The poor health-care system of the US is mentioned - that is a big problem in the US , but one that is n't even remotely only related to IT .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, this article is all over the map.First of all, what kind of people are we talking about - what is an "independent programmer"?
I can think of two kinds:1.
Independent contractors working for a company.2.
Programmers writing code on their own, for themselves, with an intent to sell it.Most of the article seems to talk about #1, but then they ask "Where will the next Microsoft come from?
", which hints at #2.
Unless the author has some information we don't, companies like Microsoft and Google didn't hire a lot of independent contractors when they were small.
The arrangements were probably mostly informal, as with most businesses in start-up mode.At any rate, the author mentions a bunch of US specific regulations first, while mentioning in the second half of the article that these problems primarily affect Americans.
That should be part of the title then.
Many people like myself can read English, but  don't live in the US or love everything to be US-centric, especially without disclosure.
(I live in Japan).It is mentioned that because of US laws, nobody will hire independent contractors?
That is absolutely not true, I myself have worked as an independent contractor in the US (in around 2000, way after the law was passed), and I know plenty of other people who also do.
If that's a problem, then you just self-incorporate - as many of the independent contractors I know do.
It's not that big of a deal.As for the legal code requirements... think about it "There are no bugs to my knowledge", etc.
That's an easy thing to promise, since it's only "to the best of my knowledge".
Very few organizations even request those sort of agreements, because it will be obvious to anyone who wants to keep their job they they need to deliver professional quality.The poor health-care system of the US is mentioned - that is a big problem in the US, but one that isn't even remotely only related to IT.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280642</id>
	<title>Re:Just SOP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267109820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Corporations should have their free speech rights taken away (lobbyists/bribes).<br>They have no more rights than a Tree or a rock.<br>They are not THINGS not people.</p></div><p>Sure.</p><p>Of course, unions, non-profit groups, religious organizations, etc., will also have their right to free speech taken away, right? I mean, they're all different types of people associations, just like a corporation...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Corporations should have their free speech rights taken away ( lobbyists/bribes ) .They have no more rights than a Tree or a rock.They are not THINGS not people.Sure.Of course , unions , non-profit groups , religious organizations , etc. , will also have their right to free speech taken away , right ?
I mean , they 're all different types of people associations , just like a corporation.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Corporations should have their free speech rights taken away (lobbyists/bribes).They have no more rights than a Tree or a rock.They are not THINGS not people.Sure.Of course, unions, non-profit groups, religious organizations, etc., will also have their right to free speech taken away, right?
I mean, they're all different types of people associations, just like a corporation...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278884</id>
	<title>Re:More news at 11</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267097340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why is it IT people in general feel that they are somehow different than everyone else in the world? Are they really so ignorant and socially dysfunctional to not realize that they are no different than any other part of society in any way? Is this ignorance or a form a geek elitism, thinking that we geeks can't possibly be expected to suffer under the same working conditions of the rest of the pathetic planet of idiots?</p></div><p>Translation: I'm doing okay, so fuck the rest of you because you plainly suck.</p><p>There's at least one of these in every thread on employment issues. Why they get marked Insightful is a mystery to me.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is it IT people in general feel that they are somehow different than everyone else in the world ?
Are they really so ignorant and socially dysfunctional to not realize that they are no different than any other part of society in any way ?
Is this ignorance or a form a geek elitism , thinking that we geeks ca n't possibly be expected to suffer under the same working conditions of the rest of the pathetic planet of idiots ? Translation : I 'm doing okay , so fuck the rest of you because you plainly suck.There 's at least one of these in every thread on employment issues .
Why they get marked Insightful is a mystery to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is it IT people in general feel that they are somehow different than everyone else in the world?
Are they really so ignorant and socially dysfunctional to not realize that they are no different than any other part of society in any way?
Is this ignorance or a form a geek elitism, thinking that we geeks can't possibly be expected to suffer under the same working conditions of the rest of the pathetic planet of idiots?Translation: I'm doing okay, so fuck the rest of you because you plainly suck.There's at least one of these in every thread on employment issues.
Why they get marked Insightful is a mystery to me.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280518</id>
	<title>ah a hobby programmer was Re:Most valuable my ass</title>
	<author>mjwalshe</author>
	<datestamp>1267108620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>well you might find that a mech, civil or ee wont do much with out using some computers - I once reverse engineered some code to help prove that the contractors my then employers (4th largest consulting engineers in the world) employed had fucked up and caused subsidence when building a bridge. Thats actually worth quite a bit. as it would have damaged our ability to bid for mega construction projects<p>

And out in the middle east there some rather beautiful motorway bridges whose curves where to complex to draw by hand so I wrote a program to  draw the required sections (and corrected the engineers math as well) </p><p>

And what about the 750,000 I recovered for my employer by fixing the rubbish Accounts Receivable program the FD had brought
</p><p>
Have you ever developed professionally ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>well you might find that a mech , civil or ee wont do much with out using some computers - I once reverse engineered some code to help prove that the contractors my then employers ( 4th largest consulting engineers in the world ) employed had fucked up and caused subsidence when building a bridge .
Thats actually worth quite a bit .
as it would have damaged our ability to bid for mega construction projects And out in the middle east there some rather beautiful motorway bridges whose curves where to complex to draw by hand so I wrote a program to draw the required sections ( and corrected the engineers math as well ) And what about the 750,000 I recovered for my employer by fixing the rubbish Accounts Receivable program the FD had brought Have you ever developed professionally ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>well you might find that a mech, civil or ee wont do much with out using some computers - I once reverse engineered some code to help prove that the contractors my then employers (4th largest consulting engineers in the world) employed had fucked up and caused subsidence when building a bridge.
Thats actually worth quite a bit.
as it would have damaged our ability to bid for mega construction projects

And out in the middle east there some rather beautiful motorway bridges whose curves where to complex to draw by hand so I wrote a program to  draw the required sections (and corrected the engineers math as well) 

And what about the 750,000 I recovered for my employer by fixing the rubbish Accounts Receivable program the FD had brought

Have you ever developed professionally ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277750</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278530</id>
	<title>Yup. Even an Austrian Economist might agree.</title>
	<author>weston</author>
	<datestamp>1267095840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's *generally* in favor of the status quo, not just small business, but even large-investment startups.</p><p>A socialized insurance system covered by taxes falls generally more heavily (like any non-regressive tax) on economic winners. You'll probably pay as much or more on the back end once you're profitable. Plus, as you pointed out, you lose a barrier to market entry: your potential competitors don't have to come up with the funding to cover health care costs before they're profitable.</p><p>Innovators/Disruptors and other startups, on the other hand... even if your expected payoff on success is big, you're carrying a moderate to big risk of failure. Now, if you're an investor in such an enterprise, and you have a chance to essentially defray a significant payroll cost up front in return for more taxes taken out if you succeed... well, that's generally a favorable deal.</p><p>Socialized insurance favors entrepreneurship.</p><p>Which might be why even <a href="http://generalissimo.wordpress.com/2009/09/11/you-know-that-the-word-has-become-meaningless-when/" title="wordpress.com">an Austrian School economist like Hayek would support the basic idea</a> [wordpress.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's * generally * in favor of the status quo , not just small business , but even large-investment startups.A socialized insurance system covered by taxes falls generally more heavily ( like any non-regressive tax ) on economic winners .
You 'll probably pay as much or more on the back end once you 're profitable .
Plus , as you pointed out , you lose a barrier to market entry : your potential competitors do n't have to come up with the funding to cover health care costs before they 're profitable.Innovators/Disruptors and other startups , on the other hand... even if your expected payoff on success is big , you 're carrying a moderate to big risk of failure .
Now , if you 're an investor in such an enterprise , and you have a chance to essentially defray a significant payroll cost up front in return for more taxes taken out if you succeed... well , that 's generally a favorable deal.Socialized insurance favors entrepreneurship.Which might be why even an Austrian School economist like Hayek would support the basic idea [ wordpress.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's *generally* in favor of the status quo, not just small business, but even large-investment startups.A socialized insurance system covered by taxes falls generally more heavily (like any non-regressive tax) on economic winners.
You'll probably pay as much or more on the back end once you're profitable.
Plus, as you pointed out, you lose a barrier to market entry: your potential competitors don't have to come up with the funding to cover health care costs before they're profitable.Innovators/Disruptors and other startups, on the other hand... even if your expected payoff on success is big, you're carrying a moderate to big risk of failure.
Now, if you're an investor in such an enterprise, and you have a chance to essentially defray a significant payroll cost up front in return for more taxes taken out if you succeed... well, that's generally a favorable deal.Socialized insurance favors entrepreneurship.Which might be why even an Austrian School economist like Hayek would support the basic idea [wordpress.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278070</id>
	<title>MOD PARENT UP</title>
	<author>BenEnglishAtHome</author>
	<datestamp>1267094220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p><i>Why is it IT people in general feel that they are somehow different than everyone else in the world?</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>Good question.
</p><p>Prior to 1706, some software folks abused the crap out of their status as "independent contractors."
</p><p>They liked to say they were ICs.  They liked having their own little sham corporation through which they could write off all sorts of expenses that mere "employees" (Make sure you snort derisively when you spit out that foul word) couldn't.  They even signed contracts with big companies that called them ICs and repeatedly pointed to those contracts to say "See!?  I'm an IC!  Both me and the only people I work for agree!"
</p><p>Of course, that was all crap.  They were employees.  They worked for just one entity for long periods, didn't seek other revenue streams, changed the focus of their work for that entity whenever that entity needed them to, etc.  Some of them even wore the corporate polo shirt.  They were employees.  Period.
</p><p>The law was changed to put pressure on the employers to bring those people on board officially.  The whole point was to make it more difficult for a single person to claim to be a corp when they're actually an employee.
</p><p>The whining over this thing has been going on for a couple of decades, now.  Well, if so many people hadn't abused their status, no, make that *lied about* their status for so long, it wouldn't have happened.
</p><p>Normal people don't freely redefine the terms "independent contractor" and "employee" to whatever they want, whenever they want, whenever it profits them.  Why so many people who spend their days writing code feel they should be free to get away with it is beyond me.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is it IT people in general feel that they are somehow different than everyone else in the world ?
Good question .
Prior to 1706 , some software folks abused the crap out of their status as " independent contractors .
" They liked to say they were ICs .
They liked having their own little sham corporation through which they could write off all sorts of expenses that mere " employees " ( Make sure you snort derisively when you spit out that foul word ) could n't .
They even signed contracts with big companies that called them ICs and repeatedly pointed to those contracts to say " See ! ?
I 'm an IC !
Both me and the only people I work for agree !
" Of course , that was all crap .
They were employees .
They worked for just one entity for long periods , did n't seek other revenue streams , changed the focus of their work for that entity whenever that entity needed them to , etc .
Some of them even wore the corporate polo shirt .
They were employees .
Period . The law was changed to put pressure on the employers to bring those people on board officially .
The whole point was to make it more difficult for a single person to claim to be a corp when they 're actually an employee .
The whining over this thing has been going on for a couple of decades , now .
Well , if so many people had n't abused their status , no , make that * lied about * their status for so long , it would n't have happened .
Normal people do n't freely redefine the terms " independent contractor " and " employee " to whatever they want , whenever they want , whenever it profits them .
Why so many people who spend their days writing code feel they should be free to get away with it is beyond me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is it IT people in general feel that they are somehow different than everyone else in the world?
Good question.
Prior to 1706, some software folks abused the crap out of their status as "independent contractors.
"
They liked to say they were ICs.
They liked having their own little sham corporation through which they could write off all sorts of expenses that mere "employees" (Make sure you snort derisively when you spit out that foul word) couldn't.
They even signed contracts with big companies that called them ICs and repeatedly pointed to those contracts to say "See!?
I'm an IC!
Both me and the only people I work for agree!
"
Of course, that was all crap.
They were employees.
They worked for just one entity for long periods, didn't seek other revenue streams, changed the focus of their work for that entity whenever that entity needed them to, etc.
Some of them even wore the corporate polo shirt.
They were employees.
Period.
The law was changed to put pressure on the employers to bring those people on board officially.
The whole point was to make it more difficult for a single person to claim to be a corp when they're actually an employee.
The whining over this thing has been going on for a couple of decades, now.
Well, if so many people hadn't abused their status, no, make that *lied about* their status for so long, it wouldn't have happened.
Normal people don't freely redefine the terms "independent contractor" and "employee" to whatever they want, whenever they want, whenever it profits them.
Why so many people who spend their days writing code feel they should be free to get away with it is beyond me.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277412</id>
	<title>Re:Yep, I've lost hope.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267091280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I know exactly what you're going through because it is the same for me. California turned me down for help basically because I'm not an illegal nor pregnant. However some advice for you on the medical issues. I saw my doctor today and explained I faced job hiring discrimination, could not get any work, had no health insurance and limited money and was sleeping on a friend's couch. He told me that I could apply to Palo Alto Medical Foundation and request "I need to apply for financial hardship" to cover doctor visits and some lab work. If you have pneumonia, first try going to an ER for it, they cannot refuse to treat you. If that is not viable, try the above approach either with PAMF if you're near them or another health care organization accessible to you.

We need to fight against incompetent and corrupt legislators who are doing us harm, and we need to stop excessive use of foreign labor over hiring of Americans. It has to stop before we all are homeless. Oh, and I wish Joe had flown a plane into the Indian agencies in Silicon Valley who refuse to accept Americans applying for contract jobs. Discriminatory bastards, I have so many stories about their fraud to bring in H1-Bs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know exactly what you 're going through because it is the same for me .
California turned me down for help basically because I 'm not an illegal nor pregnant .
However some advice for you on the medical issues .
I saw my doctor today and explained I faced job hiring discrimination , could not get any work , had no health insurance and limited money and was sleeping on a friend 's couch .
He told me that I could apply to Palo Alto Medical Foundation and request " I need to apply for financial hardship " to cover doctor visits and some lab work .
If you have pneumonia , first try going to an ER for it , they can not refuse to treat you .
If that is not viable , try the above approach either with PAMF if you 're near them or another health care organization accessible to you .
We need to fight against incompetent and corrupt legislators who are doing us harm , and we need to stop excessive use of foreign labor over hiring of Americans .
It has to stop before we all are homeless .
Oh , and I wish Joe had flown a plane into the Indian agencies in Silicon Valley who refuse to accept Americans applying for contract jobs .
Discriminatory bastards , I have so many stories about their fraud to bring in H1-Bs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know exactly what you're going through because it is the same for me.
California turned me down for help basically because I'm not an illegal nor pregnant.
However some advice for you on the medical issues.
I saw my doctor today and explained I faced job hiring discrimination, could not get any work, had no health insurance and limited money and was sleeping on a friend's couch.
He told me that I could apply to Palo Alto Medical Foundation and request "I need to apply for financial hardship" to cover doctor visits and some lab work.
If you have pneumonia, first try going to an ER for it, they cannot refuse to treat you.
If that is not viable, try the above approach either with PAMF if you're near them or another health care organization accessible to you.
We need to fight against incompetent and corrupt legislators who are doing us harm, and we need to stop excessive use of foreign labor over hiring of Americans.
It has to stop before we all are homeless.
Oh, and I wish Joe had flown a plane into the Indian agencies in Silicon Valley who refuse to accept Americans applying for contract jobs.
Discriminatory bastards, I have so many stories about their fraud to bring in H1-Bs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277154</id>
	<title>the status quo</title>
	<author>Univac\_1004</author>
	<datestamp>1267090260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"...sends the message that the status quo is the highest goal."<p>What a non-surprise.

</p><p>It's the guys who own the status quo that are sending the message.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...sends the message that the status quo is the highest goal .
" What a non-surprise .
It 's the guys who own the status quo that are sending the message .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...sends the message that the status quo is the highest goal.
"What a non-surprise.
It's the guys who own the status quo that are sending the message.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278488</id>
	<title>Re:Another reason to escape the USA</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1267095720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If I was starting a company tomorrow, I'd incorporate offshore, hire offshore and only make my software available via download or as a web app.</p> </div><p>You are going to incur a lot of extra overheads running your business from a ship, and it won't be a very pleasant work environment. Also, how many decent programmers are you going to find on the high seas? I think most of them will be living on land.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I was starting a company tomorrow , I 'd incorporate offshore , hire offshore and only make my software available via download or as a web app .
You are going to incur a lot of extra overheads running your business from a ship , and it wo n't be a very pleasant work environment .
Also , how many decent programmers are you going to find on the high seas ?
I think most of them will be living on land .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I was starting a company tomorrow, I'd incorporate offshore, hire offshore and only make my software available via download or as a web app.
You are going to incur a lot of extra overheads running your business from a ship, and it won't be a very pleasant work environment.
Also, how many decent programmers are you going to find on the high seas?
I think most of them will be living on land.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31283948</id>
	<title>Re:Another reason to escape the USA</title>
	<author>Dominic</author>
	<datestamp>1267193760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And what are the benefits of US citizenship compared to, say, gaining UK citizenship? You could then live and work anywhere in the EU, or hey, start a company in the EU country with the lowest taxes and contract in the US, paying your income into your EU account. Getting work permits for the US is easy as a UK national. As an additional benefit, you wouldn't have to pay for healthcare either.</p><p>Not saying that it's easy to change citizenship, but I know enough Americans that have. Just get a half-decent job here for a few years. Somone told me that you can't get joint US citizenship. That's a bit mad and it limits your options, but still...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And what are the benefits of US citizenship compared to , say , gaining UK citizenship ?
You could then live and work anywhere in the EU , or hey , start a company in the EU country with the lowest taxes and contract in the US , paying your income into your EU account .
Getting work permits for the US is easy as a UK national .
As an additional benefit , you would n't have to pay for healthcare either.Not saying that it 's easy to change citizenship , but I know enough Americans that have .
Just get a half-decent job here for a few years .
Somone told me that you ca n't get joint US citizenship .
That 's a bit mad and it limits your options , but still.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And what are the benefits of US citizenship compared to, say, gaining UK citizenship?
You could then live and work anywhere in the EU, or hey, start a company in the EU country with the lowest taxes and contract in the US, paying your income into your EU account.
Getting work permits for the US is easy as a UK national.
As an additional benefit, you wouldn't have to pay for healthcare either.Not saying that it's easy to change citizenship, but I know enough Americans that have.
Just get a half-decent job here for a few years.
Somone told me that you can't get joint US citizenship.
That's a bit mad and it limits your options, but still...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277070</id>
	<title>The sky is falling? *looks up*</title>
	<author>TiggertheMad</author>
	<datestamp>1267089840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't know that things are that grim, several very large or prominent companies in the market today began as small start ups. Sure, there is some risk there, and not everyone will grow to the size of Google, but The arguments that are mentioned (liability, volatility) apply to any sort of independent venture. I don't see developers as having a particularly hard time. In fact, considering the nature of their product, the cheapness of the tools and software for writing code, and the relative ease of finding willing investors compared to starting up a conventional goods manafacturing business, and I would have to say that being a indy dev is pretty darned easy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know that things are that grim , several very large or prominent companies in the market today began as small start ups .
Sure , there is some risk there , and not everyone will grow to the size of Google , but The arguments that are mentioned ( liability , volatility ) apply to any sort of independent venture .
I do n't see developers as having a particularly hard time .
In fact , considering the nature of their product , the cheapness of the tools and software for writing code , and the relative ease of finding willing investors compared to starting up a conventional goods manafacturing business , and I would have to say that being a indy dev is pretty darned easy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know that things are that grim, several very large or prominent companies in the market today began as small start ups.
Sure, there is some risk there, and not everyone will grow to the size of Google, but The arguments that are mentioned (liability, volatility) apply to any sort of independent venture.
I don't see developers as having a particularly hard time.
In fact, considering the nature of their product, the cheapness of the tools and software for writing code, and the relative ease of finding willing investors compared to starting up a conventional goods manafacturing business, and I would have to say that being a indy dev is pretty darned easy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278204</id>
	<title>Re:yeah. its much better to be p0wned</title>
	<author>Lunix Nutcase</author>
	<datestamp>1267094640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The best thing America could do later this year in the election is to vote out EVERY incumbent</p> </div><p>And what is that really going to achieve?  They themselves will just end up becoming incumbents and will end up as dirty and corrupted as the current lot.  Or do you think they are magically going to be immune to being corrupted unlike every other politician in the history of human politics?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The best thing America could do later this year in the election is to vote out EVERY incumbent And what is that really going to achieve ?
They themselves will just end up becoming incumbents and will end up as dirty and corrupted as the current lot .
Or do you think they are magically going to be immune to being corrupted unlike every other politician in the history of human politics ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The best thing America could do later this year in the election is to vote out EVERY incumbent And what is that really going to achieve?
They themselves will just end up becoming incumbents and will end up as dirty and corrupted as the current lot.
Or do you think they are magically going to be immune to being corrupted unlike every other politician in the history of human politics?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280618</id>
	<title>Re:yeah. its much better to be p0wned</title>
	<author>uncqual</author>
	<datestamp>1267109640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I suspect the (I believe unfounded) accusations of libertarians being racist/homophobic are that libertarians don't think a government should have any say in who one associates with, hires, promotes, or fires -- even if the only reason for these decisions is the other individual's race, religion, gender, sexual preferences, weight, height, eye color, or shirt color. This can be confusing for those that don't understand the difference between supporting the <i>right</i> of an individual to make a decisions vs. supporting all such <i>decisions</i> an individual might make.
<br> <br>
For example, a libertarian would support the right to smoke dope -- even if they don't choose to do so themselves or even choose to refuse to associate with those who do so. This doesn't make the libertarian "pro drug".
<br> <br>
I've never figured out why this is so hard for some liberals and conservatives to understand about libertarians.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I suspect the ( I believe unfounded ) accusations of libertarians being racist/homophobic are that libertarians do n't think a government should have any say in who one associates with , hires , promotes , or fires -- even if the only reason for these decisions is the other individual 's race , religion , gender , sexual preferences , weight , height , eye color , or shirt color .
This can be confusing for those that do n't understand the difference between supporting the right of an individual to make a decisions vs. supporting all such decisions an individual might make .
For example , a libertarian would support the right to smoke dope -- even if they do n't choose to do so themselves or even choose to refuse to associate with those who do so .
This does n't make the libertarian " pro drug " .
I 've never figured out why this is so hard for some liberals and conservatives to understand about libertarians .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suspect the (I believe unfounded) accusations of libertarians being racist/homophobic are that libertarians don't think a government should have any say in who one associates with, hires, promotes, or fires -- even if the only reason for these decisions is the other individual's race, religion, gender, sexual preferences, weight, height, eye color, or shirt color.
This can be confusing for those that don't understand the difference between supporting the right of an individual to make a decisions vs. supporting all such decisions an individual might make.
For example, a libertarian would support the right to smoke dope -- even if they don't choose to do so themselves or even choose to refuse to associate with those who do so.
This doesn't make the libertarian "pro drug".
I've never figured out why this is so hard for some liberals and conservatives to understand about libertarians.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277958</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278272</id>
	<title>Please</title>
	<author>Alkonaut</author>
	<datestamp>1267094940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let me i18n the summary for you<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)<p><div class="quote"><p> <i>
"Fatal Exception's Neil McAllister writes about the no-win scenario facing today's independent programmers <b>IN THE U.S.</b>: 'In a knowledge economy, programmers rank among our most valuable workers, yet <b>IN THE U.S.</b> the current legal and regulatory climate makes a career as an independent software developer virtually a dead-end prospect.' Section 1706 of the <b>U.S.</b> 1986 Tax Reform Act, the hurdles and costs of obtaining health care for one's own family, a hostile <b>U.S. legal climate</b> in search of accountability for any defects in code -- these harsh realities make it 'easy to see why software developers would give up on entrepreneurship <b>IN THE U.S.</b> For many <b>IN THE U.S.</b>, the risks simply don't match the potential rewards. Better to keep their heads down, not rock the boat, and hope they can hang onto their jobs until retirement.' Great news for big software vendors, which will be 'ensured an endless supply of programmers desperate for the safe haven of a steady paycheck, predictable taxation, health benefits, and a shield from civil prosecution when their code turns up buggy. But where will the next Microsoft come from? A field that discourages self-reliance sends the message that the status quo is the highest goal.'"</i></p> </div><p>If you find yourself in a country where you face "malpractice settlements" as a software developer, or where the insurance of your <i>family</i> depends on <i>your</i> ability to write and sell software, I recommend that you don't.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let me i18n the summary for you : ) " Fatal Exception 's Neil McAllister writes about the no-win scenario facing today 's independent programmers IN THE U.S. : 'In a knowledge economy , programmers rank among our most valuable workers , yet IN THE U.S. the current legal and regulatory climate makes a career as an independent software developer virtually a dead-end prospect .
' Section 1706 of the U.S. 1986 Tax Reform Act , the hurdles and costs of obtaining health care for one 's own family , a hostile U.S. legal climate in search of accountability for any defects in code -- these harsh realities make it 'easy to see why software developers would give up on entrepreneurship IN THE U.S. For many IN THE U.S. , the risks simply do n't match the potential rewards .
Better to keep their heads down , not rock the boat , and hope they can hang onto their jobs until retirement .
' Great news for big software vendors , which will be 'ensured an endless supply of programmers desperate for the safe haven of a steady paycheck , predictable taxation , health benefits , and a shield from civil prosecution when their code turns up buggy .
But where will the next Microsoft come from ?
A field that discourages self-reliance sends the message that the status quo is the highest goal .
' " If you find yourself in a country where you face " malpractice settlements " as a software developer , or where the insurance of your family depends on your ability to write and sell software , I recommend that you do n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let me i18n the summary for you :) 
"Fatal Exception's Neil McAllister writes about the no-win scenario facing today's independent programmers IN THE U.S.: 'In a knowledge economy, programmers rank among our most valuable workers, yet IN THE U.S. the current legal and regulatory climate makes a career as an independent software developer virtually a dead-end prospect.
' Section 1706 of the U.S. 1986 Tax Reform Act, the hurdles and costs of obtaining health care for one's own family, a hostile U.S. legal climate in search of accountability for any defects in code -- these harsh realities make it 'easy to see why software developers would give up on entrepreneurship IN THE U.S. For many IN THE U.S., the risks simply don't match the potential rewards.
Better to keep their heads down, not rock the boat, and hope they can hang onto their jobs until retirement.
' Great news for big software vendors, which will be 'ensured an endless supply of programmers desperate for the safe haven of a steady paycheck, predictable taxation, health benefits, and a shield from civil prosecution when their code turns up buggy.
But where will the next Microsoft come from?
A field that discourages self-reliance sends the message that the status quo is the highest goal.
'" If you find yourself in a country where you face "malpractice settlements" as a software developer, or where the insurance of your family depends on your ability to write and sell software, I recommend that you don't.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278034</id>
	<title>Re:Yep, I've lost hope.</title>
	<author>RobDude</author>
	<datestamp>1267094100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Find a small to mid-sized company and just lie on your resume about your degrees.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Find a small to mid-sized company and just lie on your resume about your degrees .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Find a small to mid-sized company and just lie on your resume about your degrees.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277330</id>
	<title>Re:Just SOP</title>
	<author>JoeMerchant</author>
	<datestamp>1267090980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>
The problem is organization - corporations have it, independents don't.  If the independents could organize and lobby, their numbers and voting / contribution power would swamp the corporate interests, even today.  Alas, independents are independent - and who has time and money to waste on a (presently) losing game?  Even most corporations don't, but enough of them do to slant things in their direction.<br> <br>

The rancher / farmer's lobby is a good example of people with time on their hands to bend the ears of their legislators - when's the last time a big land holder paid big property taxes?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is organization - corporations have it , independents do n't .
If the independents could organize and lobby , their numbers and voting / contribution power would swamp the corporate interests , even today .
Alas , independents are independent - and who has time and money to waste on a ( presently ) losing game ?
Even most corporations do n't , but enough of them do to slant things in their direction .
The rancher / farmer 's lobby is a good example of people with time on their hands to bend the ears of their legislators - when 's the last time a big land holder paid big property taxes ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
The problem is organization - corporations have it, independents don't.
If the independents could organize and lobby, their numbers and voting / contribution power would swamp the corporate interests, even today.
Alas, independents are independent - and who has time and money to waste on a (presently) losing game?
Even most corporations don't, but enough of them do to slant things in their direction.
The rancher / farmer's lobby is a good example of people with time on their hands to bend the ears of their legislators - when's the last time a big land holder paid big property taxes?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277250</id>
	<title>Profession vs trade</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267090620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lawyers. Legal protection.<br>Doctors. Legal protection.<br>Accountant. Legal protection.</p><p>What makes a typical profession a profession, is legal protection by the state. You can't just practice as a doctor on a whim, it is illegal to do so. It creates scarcity in the field, and therefore high prices.</p><p>Ironically, things normally thought of as trades; electricians, plumbers etc are in many countries increasingly being required to pass certifications and gain legal protection by the state, and are therefore becoming more professional and prices are going up.</p><p>Programming. Pretty much nothing required. Anyone can become a programmer on a whim and a "Learning Java" book. People contracting individual jobs like any other trade. It's pretty clear programming is a trade rather than a profession. Sorry, but these features of programming are going to continue to push prices down, not up, as the supply of programmers increases domestically or abroad.</p><p>If you want to reverse the trend you're going to have to create or join a professional body and lobby the state to make programming without a license, illegal. (using whatever criteria you think will sway the argument; dangerous, national security etc)<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lawyers .
Legal protection.Doctors .
Legal protection.Accountant .
Legal protection.What makes a typical profession a profession , is legal protection by the state .
You ca n't just practice as a doctor on a whim , it is illegal to do so .
It creates scarcity in the field , and therefore high prices.Ironically , things normally thought of as trades ; electricians , plumbers etc are in many countries increasingly being required to pass certifications and gain legal protection by the state , and are therefore becoming more professional and prices are going up.Programming .
Pretty much nothing required .
Anyone can become a programmer on a whim and a " Learning Java " book .
People contracting individual jobs like any other trade .
It 's pretty clear programming is a trade rather than a profession .
Sorry , but these features of programming are going to continue to push prices down , not up , as the supply of programmers increases domestically or abroad.If you want to reverse the trend you 're going to have to create or join a professional body and lobby the state to make programming without a license , illegal .
( using whatever criteria you think will sway the argument ; dangerous , national security etc )  </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lawyers.
Legal protection.Doctors.
Legal protection.Accountant.
Legal protection.What makes a typical profession a profession, is legal protection by the state.
You can't just practice as a doctor on a whim, it is illegal to do so.
It creates scarcity in the field, and therefore high prices.Ironically, things normally thought of as trades; electricians, plumbers etc are in many countries increasingly being required to pass certifications and gain legal protection by the state, and are therefore becoming more professional and prices are going up.Programming.
Pretty much nothing required.
Anyone can become a programmer on a whim and a "Learning Java" book.
People contracting individual jobs like any other trade.
It's pretty clear programming is a trade rather than a profession.
Sorry, but these features of programming are going to continue to push prices down, not up, as the supply of programmers increases domestically or abroad.If you want to reverse the trend you're going to have to create or join a professional body and lobby the state to make programming without a license, illegal.
(using whatever criteria you think will sway the argument; dangerous, national security etc)
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276946</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194</id>
	<title>What a whiny load of crap.</title>
	<author>Low Ranked Craig</author>
	<datestamp>1267090380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Step 1. Form an LLC.  It's not hard, you can do it yourself for under $100 in most cases</p><p>Step 2. Get an EIN number from the feds.  Free and easy</p><p>Step 3. Open a checking account for your new LLC.  might require a credit check.</p><p>Step 4. Get a decent accounting package.</p><p>Step 5. Keep track of EVERY business expense.  Keep milage logs in your car.  Keep receipts. What percentage of your utilities, etc are business related?  Track it.</p><p>Step 6. If you think you need the additional coverage get E&amp;O Insurance.  It can be pricey, true.  On the other hand if you LLC doesn't have a lot of hard assets, why worry?</p><p>Step 7. Get health coverage.  We found insurance through a local trade group for $600 a month for my wife and I.  Pay it out of the company, it's a write off.</p><p>Step 8. Work your ass off and enjoy the benefits of being able to write-off things you probably would have purchased anyway.</p><p>This should have been step 6 - get a good tax guy (or girl) to help you figure shit out.</p><p>Now get creative.  Like to go to theme parks?  Set up another LLC and create a website dedicated to reviewing them, talking about which ones have what etc.  Now you get to write off trips to Six Flags and Cedar point as legitimate business research.</p><p>Life is far more enjoyable when you do what you want, when you want, for whom you want.  All the accounting is a pain in the ass, yes, but not as big of a pain in the ass as working for Bill Lumberg the rest of your life.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Step 1 .
Form an LLC .
It 's not hard , you can do it yourself for under $ 100 in most casesStep 2 .
Get an EIN number from the feds .
Free and easyStep 3 .
Open a checking account for your new LLC .
might require a credit check.Step 4 .
Get a decent accounting package.Step 5 .
Keep track of EVERY business expense .
Keep milage logs in your car .
Keep receipts .
What percentage of your utilities , etc are business related ?
Track it.Step 6 .
If you think you need the additional coverage get E&amp;O Insurance .
It can be pricey , true .
On the other hand if you LLC does n't have a lot of hard assets , why worry ? Step 7 .
Get health coverage .
We found insurance through a local trade group for $ 600 a month for my wife and I. Pay it out of the company , it 's a write off.Step 8 .
Work your ass off and enjoy the benefits of being able to write-off things you probably would have purchased anyway.This should have been step 6 - get a good tax guy ( or girl ) to help you figure shit out.Now get creative .
Like to go to theme parks ?
Set up another LLC and create a website dedicated to reviewing them , talking about which ones have what etc .
Now you get to write off trips to Six Flags and Cedar point as legitimate business research.Life is far more enjoyable when you do what you want , when you want , for whom you want .
All the accounting is a pain in the ass , yes , but not as big of a pain in the ass as working for Bill Lumberg the rest of your life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Step 1.
Form an LLC.
It's not hard, you can do it yourself for under $100 in most casesStep 2.
Get an EIN number from the feds.
Free and easyStep 3.
Open a checking account for your new LLC.
might require a credit check.Step 4.
Get a decent accounting package.Step 5.
Keep track of EVERY business expense.
Keep milage logs in your car.
Keep receipts.
What percentage of your utilities, etc are business related?
Track it.Step 6.
If you think you need the additional coverage get E&amp;O Insurance.
It can be pricey, true.
On the other hand if you LLC doesn't have a lot of hard assets, why worry?Step 7.
Get health coverage.
We found insurance through a local trade group for $600 a month for my wife and I.  Pay it out of the company, it's a write off.Step 8.
Work your ass off and enjoy the benefits of being able to write-off things you probably would have purchased anyway.This should have been step 6 - get a good tax guy (or girl) to help you figure shit out.Now get creative.
Like to go to theme parks?
Set up another LLC and create a website dedicated to reviewing them, talking about which ones have what etc.
Now you get to write off trips to Six Flags and Cedar point as legitimate business research.Life is far more enjoyable when you do what you want, when you want, for whom you want.
All the accounting is a pain in the ass, yes, but not as big of a pain in the ass as working for Bill Lumberg the rest of your life.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280990</id>
	<title>In other words, enterpreneurs take risks. DUH!</title>
	<author>alexmin</author>
	<datestamp>1267113600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It amazes me sometimes how salaried employees underestimate risk of losing their job. Many mistake word 'full-time' to mean 'permanent'. Business changes, so are needs for 'full-time employees'. Doing my second decade in software business, I've seen many times when full-time employees are let go but contractors stay. At least as a contractor I knew when I'm due to look for another gig and can plan accordingly, whereas full-time people are duped by management to the last possible moment to keep their morale up. Stop pretending that being a full-time cog in a corporate machine somehow guaranties life-time employment - it never did and never will.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It amazes me sometimes how salaried employees underestimate risk of losing their job .
Many mistake word 'full-time ' to mean 'permanent' .
Business changes , so are needs for 'full-time employees' .
Doing my second decade in software business , I 've seen many times when full-time employees are let go but contractors stay .
At least as a contractor I knew when I 'm due to look for another gig and can plan accordingly , whereas full-time people are duped by management to the last possible moment to keep their morale up .
Stop pretending that being a full-time cog in a corporate machine somehow guaranties life-time employment - it never did and never will .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It amazes me sometimes how salaried employees underestimate risk of losing their job.
Many mistake word 'full-time' to mean 'permanent'.
Business changes, so are needs for 'full-time employees'.
Doing my second decade in software business, I've seen many times when full-time employees are let go but contractors stay.
At least as a contractor I knew when I'm due to look for another gig and can plan accordingly, whereas full-time people are duped by management to the last possible moment to keep their morale up.
Stop pretending that being a full-time cog in a corporate machine somehow guaranties life-time employment - it never did and never will.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278570</id>
	<title>Re:What a whiny load of crap.</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1267096080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>IANAL, but as I understand it one has 5 years in the US to show a profit or the IRS will deem the business to have been "declared in bad faith" (i.e. as a tax dodge) and you will owe back taxes and penalties for any write offs or other tax benefits derived from the illegitimate "business". This can happen even if you honestly were trying but just couldn't get the business off the ground. This sometimes happens to people who try to turn a hobby into a business for tax purposes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>IANAL , but as I understand it one has 5 years in the US to show a profit or the IRS will deem the business to have been " declared in bad faith " ( i.e .
as a tax dodge ) and you will owe back taxes and penalties for any write offs or other tax benefits derived from the illegitimate " business " .
This can happen even if you honestly were trying but just could n't get the business off the ground .
This sometimes happens to people who try to turn a hobby into a business for tax purposes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IANAL, but as I understand it one has 5 years in the US to show a profit or the IRS will deem the business to have been "declared in bad faith" (i.e.
as a tax dodge) and you will owe back taxes and penalties for any write offs or other tax benefits derived from the illegitimate "business".
This can happen even if you honestly were trying but just couldn't get the business off the ground.
This sometimes happens to people who try to turn a hobby into a business for tax purposes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276890</id>
	<title>Deploy offshore</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267089240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can sell software to US, no problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can sell software to US , no problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can sell software to US, no problem.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278418</id>
	<title>Re:Boy, talk about a slippery slope.</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1267095480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>OK. If a country who decided, stupidly and unconventionally, to have Windows (any version) installed anywhere within the chain of firecontrol for nuclear weapons, or massive bio/chem weapons, and one accidentally launched or worse, didn't launch when needed. Microsoft needs to be held liable.</p></div><p>Don't they specifically disclaim liability for such usage scenarios, saying that the software is not to be used in nuclear facilities, weapons control systems, etc? It's pretty standard to see that disclaimer in software licenses.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>OK. If a country who decided , stupidly and unconventionally , to have Windows ( any version ) installed anywhere within the chain of firecontrol for nuclear weapons , or massive bio/chem weapons , and one accidentally launched or worse , did n't launch when needed .
Microsoft needs to be held liable.Do n't they specifically disclaim liability for such usage scenarios , saying that the software is not to be used in nuclear facilities , weapons control systems , etc ?
It 's pretty standard to see that disclaimer in software licenses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK. If a country who decided, stupidly and unconventionally, to have Windows (any version) installed anywhere within the chain of firecontrol for nuclear weapons, or massive bio/chem weapons, and one accidentally launched or worse, didn't launch when needed.
Microsoft needs to be held liable.Don't they specifically disclaim liability for such usage scenarios, saying that the software is not to be used in nuclear facilities, weapons control systems, etc?
It's pretty standard to see that disclaimer in software licenses.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31282204</id>
	<title>Best solution:</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1267127880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Move to another country.</p><p>There must be one with better conditions out there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Move to another country.There must be one with better conditions out there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Move to another country.There must be one with better conditions out there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278392</id>
	<title>no one told me I shouldn't be winning</title>
	<author>mt1955</author>
	<datestamp>1267095420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>About this time last year I was working as the IT manager for a multinational manufacturer. The IT group was targeted for yet another round of cost-cutting; they gave me an hour to decide who would get a buy-out package and a shove out the door. I talked them into letting it be me, put the buy-out money in a rainy day account and started my own software company. I told my wife that if we weren't cash positive within 6 months I would give it up and start looking for a real job.  Over the last 12 months we've made more than they were paying me in the "real job"  and we've never actually had to fall back on the rainy-day account, in fact we've almost doubled it.</p><p>Starting my own company was not easy. I have to sell, communicate well, be easily accessible 7/24 and give my clients plenty of sound business reasons to keep coming back in between turning in top quality work on time. I'd have to work my a** off and most days are 12~16 hours long. I have still managed to take two vacation weeks since I started and we have a third week schedule for May...  on vacations I do have to keep one eye on my email and be willing to get up a few hours early to handle anything that can't wait until we get back.</p><p>There are no sick days or personal days. Working for yourself means you both have all the time in the world and no time. Before when a stupid boss would make unreasonable demands or mistakes I just had to deal with it. When a client makes unreasonable demands I just charge more. They can be as unreasonable as they want $$$</p><p>To start your own company, software or otherwise;</p><p>- be prepared for long hours, don't let a client down even if it means pulling all-nighters until your not sure what day it is<br>- force yourself to learn the new things consistently, figure out where your clients need to be 6 months from now and learn or do whatever it takes to be there waiting for them<br>- find an accountant you trust to handle the tax laws<br>- find an attorney you trust to handle the legalese</p><p>I've never been happier in my career.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>About this time last year I was working as the IT manager for a multinational manufacturer .
The IT group was targeted for yet another round of cost-cutting ; they gave me an hour to decide who would get a buy-out package and a shove out the door .
I talked them into letting it be me , put the buy-out money in a rainy day account and started my own software company .
I told my wife that if we were n't cash positive within 6 months I would give it up and start looking for a real job .
Over the last 12 months we 've made more than they were paying me in the " real job " and we 've never actually had to fall back on the rainy-day account , in fact we 've almost doubled it.Starting my own company was not easy .
I have to sell , communicate well , be easily accessible 7/24 and give my clients plenty of sound business reasons to keep coming back in between turning in top quality work on time .
I 'd have to work my a * * off and most days are 12 ~ 16 hours long .
I have still managed to take two vacation weeks since I started and we have a third week schedule for May... on vacations I do have to keep one eye on my email and be willing to get up a few hours early to handle anything that ca n't wait until we get back.There are no sick days or personal days .
Working for yourself means you both have all the time in the world and no time .
Before when a stupid boss would make unreasonable demands or mistakes I just had to deal with it .
When a client makes unreasonable demands I just charge more .
They can be as unreasonable as they want $ $ $ To start your own company , software or otherwise ; - be prepared for long hours , do n't let a client down even if it means pulling all-nighters until your not sure what day it is- force yourself to learn the new things consistently , figure out where your clients need to be 6 months from now and learn or do whatever it takes to be there waiting for them- find an accountant you trust to handle the tax laws- find an attorney you trust to handle the legaleseI 've never been happier in my career .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>About this time last year I was working as the IT manager for a multinational manufacturer.
The IT group was targeted for yet another round of cost-cutting; they gave me an hour to decide who would get a buy-out package and a shove out the door.
I talked them into letting it be me, put the buy-out money in a rainy day account and started my own software company.
I told my wife that if we weren't cash positive within 6 months I would give it up and start looking for a real job.
Over the last 12 months we've made more than they were paying me in the "real job"  and we've never actually had to fall back on the rainy-day account, in fact we've almost doubled it.Starting my own company was not easy.
I have to sell, communicate well, be easily accessible 7/24 and give my clients plenty of sound business reasons to keep coming back in between turning in top quality work on time.
I'd have to work my a** off and most days are 12~16 hours long.
I have still managed to take two vacation weeks since I started and we have a third week schedule for May...  on vacations I do have to keep one eye on my email and be willing to get up a few hours early to handle anything that can't wait until we get back.There are no sick days or personal days.
Working for yourself means you both have all the time in the world and no time.
Before when a stupid boss would make unreasonable demands or mistakes I just had to deal with it.
When a client makes unreasonable demands I just charge more.
They can be as unreasonable as they want $$$To start your own company, software or otherwise;- be prepared for long hours, don't let a client down even if it means pulling all-nighters until your not sure what day it is- force yourself to learn the new things consistently, figure out where your clients need to be 6 months from now and learn or do whatever it takes to be there waiting for them- find an accountant you trust to handle the tax laws- find an attorney you trust to handle the legaleseI've never been happier in my career.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277136</id>
	<title>socialized medicine...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267090200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's funny how all the big-business fat cats claim that "socialized healthcare" is bad for SMALL business, when yeah... lack of affordable self insurance is the PRIMARY reason many dreamers never give their nagging small business idea a go...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's funny how all the big-business fat cats claim that " socialized healthcare " is bad for SMALL business , when yeah... lack of affordable self insurance is the PRIMARY reason many dreamers never give their nagging small business idea a go.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's funny how all the big-business fat cats claim that "socialized healthcare" is bad for SMALL business, when yeah... lack of affordable self insurance is the PRIMARY reason many dreamers never give their nagging small business idea a go...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277044</id>
	<title>Um, sorry, no, you're an idiot.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267089720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As an independent tech worker today who runs his own company developing my own software products.  I have health insurance, and I'm not worried about this clause of the tax law which *strictly* governs consulting with third parties and has nothing to do with your typical tech startup.  Your premise that entrepreneurship is in any way damaged by this clause is utterly and totally *wrong*.  There MAY be a small minority of independent contractors who, because they work an *extensive* amount of hours for *one* customer the tax law is saying "Sorry, no, you're an employee not a contractor."  But the VAST majority of entrepreneurial-minded independent PROGRAMMERS are NOT impacted by this law, and I wish you folks would stop spreading FUD about it.</p><p>And no, Joe Stack was not some kind of anti-IRS hero... he was a tax cheat who blamed everyone else for his problems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As an independent tech worker today who runs his own company developing my own software products .
I have health insurance , and I 'm not worried about this clause of the tax law which * strictly * governs consulting with third parties and has nothing to do with your typical tech startup .
Your premise that entrepreneurship is in any way damaged by this clause is utterly and totally * wrong * .
There MAY be a small minority of independent contractors who , because they work an * extensive * amount of hours for * one * customer the tax law is saying " Sorry , no , you 're an employee not a contractor .
" But the VAST majority of entrepreneurial-minded independent PROGRAMMERS are NOT impacted by this law , and I wish you folks would stop spreading FUD about it.And no , Joe Stack was not some kind of anti-IRS hero... he was a tax cheat who blamed everyone else for his problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As an independent tech worker today who runs his own company developing my own software products.
I have health insurance, and I'm not worried about this clause of the tax law which *strictly* governs consulting with third parties and has nothing to do with your typical tech startup.
Your premise that entrepreneurship is in any way damaged by this clause is utterly and totally *wrong*.
There MAY be a small minority of independent contractors who, because they work an *extensive* amount of hours for *one* customer the tax law is saying "Sorry, no, you're an employee not a contractor.
"  But the VAST majority of entrepreneurial-minded independent PROGRAMMERS are NOT impacted by this law, and I wish you folks would stop spreading FUD about it.And no, Joe Stack was not some kind of anti-IRS hero... he was a tax cheat who blamed everyone else for his problems.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279280</id>
	<title>Re:yeah. its much better to be p0wned</title>
	<author>pydev</author>
	<datestamp>1267099380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"but it's all complete lies. They're really little different from the Democrats."</p><p>Republicans are quite different from Democrats: Democrats at least pay for big government through tax increases, Republicans just spend and leave it up to the next democratic president to figure out how to bring some fiscal responsibility back to government.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" but it 's all complete lies .
They 're really little different from the Democrats .
" Republicans are quite different from Democrats : Democrats at least pay for big government through tax increases , Republicans just spend and leave it up to the next democratic president to figure out how to bring some fiscal responsibility back to government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"but it's all complete lies.
They're really little different from the Democrats.
"Republicans are quite different from Democrats: Democrats at least pay for big government through tax increases, Republicans just spend and leave it up to the next democratic president to figure out how to bring some fiscal responsibility back to government.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278232</id>
	<title>It Is Not Correctly Stated</title>
	<author>b4upoo</author>
	<datestamp>1267094760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>         A person who wishes to write a program and sell it is still in pretty good shape. It is only those that wish to contract to write portions of a program for others that are being unfairly treated.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; As a matter of fact a person might well be on unemployment or even welfare while laboring at the next really big game or other piece of software that they intend to sell on their own. All they have to do is to be available or claim to be available and go to required interviews or make themselves available for a job if it should open up.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; I am not saying that people who wish to consult or write code for others are not being unfairly treated. That is another issue. But do keep in mind that most often independent contractor status is used to cheat workers, not to help them. Lack of basic benefits, lack of overtime pay, even lack of Workmans' Compensation coverage applies to independents. Worse yet most people who have agreed to work as independent contractors are not in fact independents and that can even be turned upon an employer. All acts of supervision must be absent. Providing a desk or a phone or a work place can be enough to give them employee status. That can mean that if there is an on the job injury that the employer will have to pay out of pocker for all medical and lost wages and tax issues may also revert to the employer.<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A person who wishes to write a program and sell it is still in pretty good shape .
It is only those that wish to contract to write portions of a program for others that are being unfairly treated .
                  As a matter of fact a person might well be on unemployment or even welfare while laboring at the next really big game or other piece of software that they intend to sell on their own .
All they have to do is to be available or claim to be available and go to required interviews or make themselves available for a job if it should open up .
                I am not saying that people who wish to consult or write code for others are not being unfairly treated .
That is another issue .
But do keep in mind that most often independent contractor status is used to cheat workers , not to help them .
Lack of basic benefits , lack of overtime pay , even lack of Workmans ' Compensation coverage applies to independents .
Worse yet most people who have agreed to work as independent contractors are not in fact independents and that can even be turned upon an employer .
All acts of supervision must be absent .
Providing a desk or a phone or a work place can be enough to give them employee status .
That can mean that if there is an on the job injury that the employer will have to pay out of pocker for all medical and lost wages and tax issues may also revert to the employer .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>         A person who wishes to write a program and sell it is still in pretty good shape.
It is only those that wish to contract to write portions of a program for others that are being unfairly treated.
                  As a matter of fact a person might well be on unemployment or even welfare while laboring at the next really big game or other piece of software that they intend to sell on their own.
All they have to do is to be available or claim to be available and go to required interviews or make themselves available for a job if it should open up.
                I am not saying that people who wish to consult or write code for others are not being unfairly treated.
That is another issue.
But do keep in mind that most often independent contractor status is used to cheat workers, not to help them.
Lack of basic benefits, lack of overtime pay, even lack of Workmans' Compensation coverage applies to independents.
Worse yet most people who have agreed to work as independent contractors are not in fact independents and that can even be turned upon an employer.
All acts of supervision must be absent.
Providing a desk or a phone or a work place can be enough to give them employee status.
That can mean that if there is an on the job injury that the employer will have to pay out of pocker for all medical and lost wages and tax issues may also revert to the employer.
 </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279464</id>
	<title>Re:More news at 11</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267100700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where I live the vast majority of plumbers are independant small companies of one or two employees. What advantage do plumbers gain from working in large companies. Workign on their own can also allow them to be working, at least part of the time, in a cash economy... which may or may not be declared to the appropriate authorities.</p><p>Then you go on to talk about requrint licensing... that would be fine by me if it was a. pratical b. did anythign useful... how many unlicensed plumbers are there? Im not from the US but I suspect there are no specific tax laws targeted at plumbers... and if you think plumbers(and electricians) don't have a sense of entitlement I suspect you don't know many.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where I live the vast majority of plumbers are independant small companies of one or two employees .
What advantage do plumbers gain from working in large companies .
Workign on their own can also allow them to be working , at least part of the time , in a cash economy... which may or may not be declared to the appropriate authorities.Then you go on to talk about requrint licensing... that would be fine by me if it was a. pratical b. did anythign useful... how many unlicensed plumbers are there ?
Im not from the US but I suspect there are no specific tax laws targeted at plumbers... and if you think plumbers ( and electricians ) do n't have a sense of entitlement I suspect you do n't know many .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where I live the vast majority of plumbers are independant small companies of one or two employees.
What advantage do plumbers gain from working in large companies.
Workign on their own can also allow them to be working, at least part of the time, in a cash economy... which may or may not be declared to the appropriate authorities.Then you go on to talk about requrint licensing... that would be fine by me if it was a. pratical b. did anythign useful... how many unlicensed plumbers are there?
Im not from the US but I suspect there are no specific tax laws targeted at plumbers... and if you think plumbers(and electricians) don't have a sense of entitlement I suspect you don't know many.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31283896</id>
	<title>Re:socialized medicine...</title>
	<author>Dominic</author>
	<datestamp>1267193340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As someone outside the US, I constantly find it amazing that this isn't stated more often by people campaigning for universal healthcare. All of the arguments from the right can be used right back at them! As almost every other country in the world proves, universal healthcare is cheaper (from a GDP perspective, and usually a personal one). Couple this with the fact that it encourages small businesses and the 'American dream' and you'd have thought that any half-decent politician couldn't fail to convince people.</p><p>The way this works is sort of obvious when you view the market. The US system favours large corporates, while something like we have in Europe favours startups and individuals. Just look at how many UK startups get bought by large US corporates. Even our larger companies aren't safe (like Cadbury getting bought by Kraft), simply because large US companies are so powerful thanks to very loose requirements in the US. It could be argued that having large, rich corporations is a good thing. However, I think I prefer to live somewhere where I can strike-out on my own with very little risk (certainly with no healthcare costs or worries) and perhaps, maybe, get rich when some big US giant buys me out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone outside the US , I constantly find it amazing that this is n't stated more often by people campaigning for universal healthcare .
All of the arguments from the right can be used right back at them !
As almost every other country in the world proves , universal healthcare is cheaper ( from a GDP perspective , and usually a personal one ) .
Couple this with the fact that it encourages small businesses and the 'American dream ' and you 'd have thought that any half-decent politician could n't fail to convince people.The way this works is sort of obvious when you view the market .
The US system favours large corporates , while something like we have in Europe favours startups and individuals .
Just look at how many UK startups get bought by large US corporates .
Even our larger companies are n't safe ( like Cadbury getting bought by Kraft ) , simply because large US companies are so powerful thanks to very loose requirements in the US .
It could be argued that having large , rich corporations is a good thing .
However , I think I prefer to live somewhere where I can strike-out on my own with very little risk ( certainly with no healthcare costs or worries ) and perhaps , maybe , get rich when some big US giant buys me out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone outside the US, I constantly find it amazing that this isn't stated more often by people campaigning for universal healthcare.
All of the arguments from the right can be used right back at them!
As almost every other country in the world proves, universal healthcare is cheaper (from a GDP perspective, and usually a personal one).
Couple this with the fact that it encourages small businesses and the 'American dream' and you'd have thought that any half-decent politician couldn't fail to convince people.The way this works is sort of obvious when you view the market.
The US system favours large corporates, while something like we have in Europe favours startups and individuals.
Just look at how many UK startups get bought by large US corporates.
Even our larger companies aren't safe (like Cadbury getting bought by Kraft), simply because large US companies are so powerful thanks to very loose requirements in the US.
It could be argued that having large, rich corporations is a good thing.
However, I think I prefer to live somewhere where I can strike-out on my own with very little risk (certainly with no healthcare costs or worries) and perhaps, maybe, get rich when some big US giant buys me out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279312</id>
	<title>Re:socialized medicine...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267099680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the solution isn't socialized medicine though, the solution is to fix the system we have.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the solution is n't socialized medicine though , the solution is to fix the system we have .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the solution isn't socialized medicine though, the solution is to fix the system we have.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277246</id>
	<title>OK.</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1267090620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't believe in the no win scenario.</p><p>Or to paraphrase:<br>The kobayashi maru is my bitch.</p><p>Worry less about winning, and more about doing.</p><p>As a side note, I know a lot of small business owners that can not grow there business because the cost of health care is too high.</p><p>Think about that next time someone talks about health care hurting business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't believe in the no win scenario.Or to paraphrase : The kobayashi maru is my bitch.Worry less about winning , and more about doing.As a side note , I know a lot of small business owners that can not grow there business because the cost of health care is too high.Think about that next time someone talks about health care hurting business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't believe in the no win scenario.Or to paraphrase:The kobayashi maru is my bitch.Worry less about winning, and more about doing.As a side note, I know a lot of small business owners that can not grow there business because the cost of health care is too high.Think about that next time someone talks about health care hurting business.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279004</id>
	<title>the health insurance system is bad for ALL works!!</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1267097880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the health insurance system is bad for ALL works!!</p><p>People have been lay offed as health costs are to high and places like to work people 39 hours a week just to get out having to pay for them. And other places like wallmart have carp care that does not cover much. Also people with job based group care have had the pre existing conditions thing on them do get out paying for any thing by saying stuff like acme and rape are pre existing conditions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the health insurance system is bad for ALL works !
! People have been lay offed as health costs are to high and places like to work people 39 hours a week just to get out having to pay for them .
And other places like wallmart have carp care that does not cover much .
Also people with job based group care have had the pre existing conditions thing on them do get out paying for any thing by saying stuff like acme and rape are pre existing conditions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the health insurance system is bad for ALL works!
!People have been lay offed as health costs are to high and places like to work people 39 hours a week just to get out having to pay for them.
And other places like wallmart have carp care that does not cover much.
Also people with job based group care have had the pre existing conditions thing on them do get out paying for any thing by saying stuff like acme and rape are pre existing conditions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280768</id>
	<title>Re:Just SOP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267111080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Corporations also pay taxes, and that puts the whole "no taxation without representation" thing in play.  That's also why churches don't pay taxes&mdash;because they aren't supposed to have representation in the political sphere.</p><p>If we did manage to take away the right of corporations to engage in the political sphere and to exercise rights of free speech, should we also continue to demand taxes of them?  Not that most corporations with any grasp of tax law don't already manage to squirrel away assets into tax dodges and even incentives&mdash;there's plenty of iniquity in the ways in which many corporations (to commit the sin of vague generalization) have historically failed to render their responsibility to the public while continuing to exert considerable influence over the public, and dodging taxes is certainly only one of them.  That's a point that ought to be conceded, and I gladly do in the full confidence that the corporate system has allowed and even encourages egregious abuses of the reciprocal relationship of private entities to the public commonwealth.  It doesn't follow, however, that the public, in reining in this iniquity, should fail to consider equity and justice in reestablishing the balance of that relationship.  If we continue to expect corporations to pay taxes to support the public, they should also have some sort of voice; the challenge is to find a way of reducing that voice to a reasonable level, not to silence it utterly.</p><p>A corporation is not a human being; that too I concede.  They are, however, powerful forces within society that can bring and have brought a great deal of material and intellectual advancement that makes the life of all citizens better; the computer by which you are reading this is but one example of a product of an economic system that was built on the idea of the corporation.  Corporations are theoretically not the only possible organizational structures that can bring together enough human beings to develop and produce advancements, but in practice they have proven invaluable in building a better world, even while they also have done many evils; in both respects, however, they have an impact on the community just as does a human being.  Pretending that we can ignore corporations and their desires, that we cna silence their voices while still feeling their impact, because they aren't human beings, doesn't bring us to a system of government that is in harmony with the facts of the world.  Instead, we need to find a way of allowing them to have a voice but also allowing human citizens to have an equal voice as well, and of restraining the power of the corporate voice so that it cannot override the consensus of the people.</p><p>Of the two forms of influence you've cited, lobbyists and bribes, the latter is recognized as morally repugnant by the institutions of our government and is already declared a crime.  Better enforcement is needed; the government must be more closely watched, both from within and from without.  Lobbyists can be more tightly regulated too, and should be; penalties should be imposed on those who defraud the public with lies and distortions.  It doesn't take a revolution to make these things better; it takes a citizenry willing to stand up for equity and ready to refuse to put up with corruption.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Corporations also pay taxes , and that puts the whole " no taxation without representation " thing in play .
That 's also why churches do n't pay taxes    because they are n't supposed to have representation in the political sphere.If we did manage to take away the right of corporations to engage in the political sphere and to exercise rights of free speech , should we also continue to demand taxes of them ?
Not that most corporations with any grasp of tax law do n't already manage to squirrel away assets into tax dodges and even incentives    there 's plenty of iniquity in the ways in which many corporations ( to commit the sin of vague generalization ) have historically failed to render their responsibility to the public while continuing to exert considerable influence over the public , and dodging taxes is certainly only one of them .
That 's a point that ought to be conceded , and I gladly do in the full confidence that the corporate system has allowed and even encourages egregious abuses of the reciprocal relationship of private entities to the public commonwealth .
It does n't follow , however , that the public , in reining in this iniquity , should fail to consider equity and justice in reestablishing the balance of that relationship .
If we continue to expect corporations to pay taxes to support the public , they should also have some sort of voice ; the challenge is to find a way of reducing that voice to a reasonable level , not to silence it utterly.A corporation is not a human being ; that too I concede .
They are , however , powerful forces within society that can bring and have brought a great deal of material and intellectual advancement that makes the life of all citizens better ; the computer by which you are reading this is but one example of a product of an economic system that was built on the idea of the corporation .
Corporations are theoretically not the only possible organizational structures that can bring together enough human beings to develop and produce advancements , but in practice they have proven invaluable in building a better world , even while they also have done many evils ; in both respects , however , they have an impact on the community just as does a human being .
Pretending that we can ignore corporations and their desires , that we cna silence their voices while still feeling their impact , because they are n't human beings , does n't bring us to a system of government that is in harmony with the facts of the world .
Instead , we need to find a way of allowing them to have a voice but also allowing human citizens to have an equal voice as well , and of restraining the power of the corporate voice so that it can not override the consensus of the people.Of the two forms of influence you 've cited , lobbyists and bribes , the latter is recognized as morally repugnant by the institutions of our government and is already declared a crime .
Better enforcement is needed ; the government must be more closely watched , both from within and from without .
Lobbyists can be more tightly regulated too , and should be ; penalties should be imposed on those who defraud the public with lies and distortions .
It does n't take a revolution to make these things better ; it takes a citizenry willing to stand up for equity and ready to refuse to put up with corruption .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Corporations also pay taxes, and that puts the whole "no taxation without representation" thing in play.
That's also why churches don't pay taxes—because they aren't supposed to have representation in the political sphere.If we did manage to take away the right of corporations to engage in the political sphere and to exercise rights of free speech, should we also continue to demand taxes of them?
Not that most corporations with any grasp of tax law don't already manage to squirrel away assets into tax dodges and even incentives—there's plenty of iniquity in the ways in which many corporations (to commit the sin of vague generalization) have historically failed to render their responsibility to the public while continuing to exert considerable influence over the public, and dodging taxes is certainly only one of them.
That's a point that ought to be conceded, and I gladly do in the full confidence that the corporate system has allowed and even encourages egregious abuses of the reciprocal relationship of private entities to the public commonwealth.
It doesn't follow, however, that the public, in reining in this iniquity, should fail to consider equity and justice in reestablishing the balance of that relationship.
If we continue to expect corporations to pay taxes to support the public, they should also have some sort of voice; the challenge is to find a way of reducing that voice to a reasonable level, not to silence it utterly.A corporation is not a human being; that too I concede.
They are, however, powerful forces within society that can bring and have brought a great deal of material and intellectual advancement that makes the life of all citizens better; the computer by which you are reading this is but one example of a product of an economic system that was built on the idea of the corporation.
Corporations are theoretically not the only possible organizational structures that can bring together enough human beings to develop and produce advancements, but in practice they have proven invaluable in building a better world, even while they also have done many evils; in both respects, however, they have an impact on the community just as does a human being.
Pretending that we can ignore corporations and their desires, that we cna silence their voices while still feeling their impact, because they aren't human beings, doesn't bring us to a system of government that is in harmony with the facts of the world.
Instead, we need to find a way of allowing them to have a voice but also allowing human citizens to have an equal voice as well, and of restraining the power of the corporate voice so that it cannot override the consensus of the people.Of the two forms of influence you've cited, lobbyists and bribes, the latter is recognized as morally repugnant by the institutions of our government and is already declared a crime.
Better enforcement is needed; the government must be more closely watched, both from within and from without.
Lobbyists can be more tightly regulated too, and should be; penalties should be imposed on those who defraud the public with lies and distortions.
It doesn't take a revolution to make these things better; it takes a citizenry willing to stand up for equity and ready to refuse to put up with corruption.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277552</id>
	<title>Work for hire versus licensing</title>
	<author>Dan East</author>
	<datestamp>1267091940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This story specifically addresses work for hire and consulting scenarios.  It totally neglects other methods of income, such as direct software sales and licensing.  An individual developer can build up a portfolio of half a dozen apps for a specific platform (Windows, OSX, Windows Mobile, iPhone, Blackberry, etc) and do well financially.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This story specifically addresses work for hire and consulting scenarios .
It totally neglects other methods of income , such as direct software sales and licensing .
An individual developer can build up a portfolio of half a dozen apps for a specific platform ( Windows , OSX , Windows Mobile , iPhone , Blackberry , etc ) and do well financially .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This story specifically addresses work for hire and consulting scenarios.
It totally neglects other methods of income, such as direct software sales and licensing.
An individual developer can build up a portfolio of half a dozen apps for a specific platform (Windows, OSX, Windows Mobile, iPhone, Blackberry, etc) and do well financially.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276946</id>
	<title>Why just programmers?</title>
	<author>Hijacked Public</author>
	<datestamp>1267089360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apart from "News for Nerds", the long ago abandonded mission statement, why limit this to programmers? Most all other occupations face the same challenges and pitfalls.</p><p>You can be grdauated from mechanic's school and either go to work for someone else's garage and enjoy the benefits of that position, or start your own and accept the attendant risks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apart from " News for Nerds " , the long ago abandonded mission statement , why limit this to programmers ?
Most all other occupations face the same challenges and pitfalls.You can be grdauated from mechanic 's school and either go to work for someone else 's garage and enjoy the benefits of that position , or start your own and accept the attendant risks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apart from "News for Nerds", the long ago abandonded mission statement, why limit this to programmers?
Most all other occupations face the same challenges and pitfalls.You can be grdauated from mechanic's school and either go to work for someone else's garage and enjoy the benefits of that position, or start your own and accept the attendant risks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277576</id>
	<title>Re:What a whiny load of crap.</title>
	<author>yumyum</author>
	<datestamp>1267092060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Like to go to theme parks?  Set up another LLC and create a website dedicated to reviewing them, talking about which ones have what etc.  Now you get to write off trips to Six Flags and Cedar point as legitimate business research.</p></div><p>That only works to a point right? According to the IRS you have to show some income at some point, not just a ton of expenses.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Like to go to theme parks ?
Set up another LLC and create a website dedicated to reviewing them , talking about which ones have what etc .
Now you get to write off trips to Six Flags and Cedar point as legitimate business research.That only works to a point right ?
According to the IRS you have to show some income at some point , not just a ton of expenses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like to go to theme parks?
Set up another LLC and create a website dedicated to reviewing them, talking about which ones have what etc.
Now you get to write off trips to Six Flags and Cedar point as legitimate business research.That only works to a point right?
According to the IRS you have to show some income at some point, not just a ton of expenses.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277562</id>
	<title>Another reason to escape the USA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267092000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Panama, the Bahamas, Canada. Citizenship can be had elsewhere. If I was starting a company tomorrow, I'd incorporate offshore, hire offshore and only make my software available via download or as a web app. The USA/IRS might try and tax me for domestic downloads. Good luck with that guys.</p><p>If the USA wants to make it difficult for independent software developers or other independent entrepreneurs to do business in the United States, I'm sure that those independents will be happy to oblige them - by taking their money, talents and ambition elsewhere.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Panama , the Bahamas , Canada .
Citizenship can be had elsewhere .
If I was starting a company tomorrow , I 'd incorporate offshore , hire offshore and only make my software available via download or as a web app .
The USA/IRS might try and tax me for domestic downloads .
Good luck with that guys.If the USA wants to make it difficult for independent software developers or other independent entrepreneurs to do business in the United States , I 'm sure that those independents will be happy to oblige them - by taking their money , talents and ambition elsewhere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Panama, the Bahamas, Canada.
Citizenship can be had elsewhere.
If I was starting a company tomorrow, I'd incorporate offshore, hire offshore and only make my software available via download or as a web app.
The USA/IRS might try and tax me for domestic downloads.
Good luck with that guys.If the USA wants to make it difficult for independent software developers or other independent entrepreneurs to do business in the United States, I'm sure that those independents will be happy to oblige them - by taking their money, talents and ambition elsewhere.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31283844</id>
	<title>Re:Yep, I've lost hope.</title>
	<author>Dominic</author>
	<datestamp>1267192920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And your fellow countrymen are fighting the 'evil' universal healthcare that would cover you at no cost. I bet that makes you happy. This sort of thing is another example of why the system in the US is broken.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And your fellow countrymen are fighting the 'evil ' universal healthcare that would cover you at no cost .
I bet that makes you happy .
This sort of thing is another example of why the system in the US is broken .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And your fellow countrymen are fighting the 'evil' universal healthcare that would cover you at no cost.
I bet that makes you happy.
This sort of thing is another example of why the system in the US is broken.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278498</id>
	<title>Lets start a union. I will join</title>
	<author>cellurl</author>
	<datestamp>1267095720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>So lets start a union. I am finally ready to join a software union. If you don't want to join, thats ok too.<br>
If you are a union organizer, tell me what to do.  gpscruiseNOSPAM@gmail.com<br>
We need to get off our asses gentlemen.<br> <br>

53-year-old Andrew Joseph Stack III, we don't honor you, but we owe you.<br> <br>

Rgds,<br>
jim pruett</htmltext>
<tokenext>So lets start a union .
I am finally ready to join a software union .
If you do n't want to join , thats ok too .
If you are a union organizer , tell me what to do .
gpscruiseNOSPAM @ gmail.com We need to get off our asses gentlemen .
53-year-old Andrew Joseph Stack III , we do n't honor you , but we owe you .
Rgds , jim pruett</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So lets start a union.
I am finally ready to join a software union.
If you don't want to join, thats ok too.
If you are a union organizer, tell me what to do.
gpscruiseNOSPAM@gmail.com
We need to get off our asses gentlemen.
53-year-old Andrew Joseph Stack III, we don't honor you, but we owe you.
Rgds,
jim pruett</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278484</id>
	<title>Re:yeah. its much better to be p0wned</title>
	<author>Cajun Hell</author>
	<datestamp>1267095720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>As far as I can tell that party is made up of nutbags</p></div></blockquote><p>
I agree, but those nutbags may be the sanest of the bunch.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As far as I can tell that party is made up of nutbags I agree , but those nutbags may be the sanest of the bunch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As far as I can tell that party is made up of nutbags
I agree, but those nutbags may be the sanest of the bunch.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277516</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278550</id>
	<title>Re:yeah. its much better to be p0wned</title>
	<author>sucitivel83</author>
	<datestamp>1267095960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>oh jesus bloody christ... seriously? socialist? are you completely mad? if socialism worked, then we'd still have a U.S.S.R. -- and if we would stop implementing fundamentally idiotic socialist reforms to our capitalist society, that would be a start in the right god damned direction.

i don't understand how so many people out there, hate the direction our government is going, and then blame capitalism, and pray for more government sponsored programs and interventions (that is the definition of socialism my friends)... are you completely stuck in the clouds?  we may as well have called the past 2 or 3 decades in the United States the "Socialist Era" (for that matter you can go back even further to the late 19th / early 20th centuries)

Oh, btw. libertarians would not likely be "nutbags, racist nutbags and homophobic racist nutbags" -- and they aren't a party (lo siento) -- its a term for a view that is socially liberal and fiscally conservative.</htmltext>
<tokenext>oh jesus bloody christ... seriously ? socialist ?
are you completely mad ?
if socialism worked , then we 'd still have a U.S.S.R. -- and if we would stop implementing fundamentally idiotic socialist reforms to our capitalist society , that would be a start in the right god damned direction .
i do n't understand how so many people out there , hate the direction our government is going , and then blame capitalism , and pray for more government sponsored programs and interventions ( that is the definition of socialism my friends ) ... are you completely stuck in the clouds ?
we may as well have called the past 2 or 3 decades in the United States the " Socialist Era " ( for that matter you can go back even further to the late 19th / early 20th centuries ) Oh , btw .
libertarians would not likely be " nutbags , racist nutbags and homophobic racist nutbags " -- and they are n't a party ( lo siento ) -- its a term for a view that is socially liberal and fiscally conservative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>oh jesus bloody christ... seriously? socialist?
are you completely mad?
if socialism worked, then we'd still have a U.S.S.R. -- and if we would stop implementing fundamentally idiotic socialist reforms to our capitalist society, that would be a start in the right god damned direction.
i don't understand how so many people out there, hate the direction our government is going, and then blame capitalism, and pray for more government sponsored programs and interventions (that is the definition of socialism my friends)... are you completely stuck in the clouds?
we may as well have called the past 2 or 3 decades in the United States the "Socialist Era" (for that matter you can go back even further to the late 19th / early 20th centuries)

Oh, btw.
libertarians would not likely be "nutbags, racist nutbags and homophobic racist nutbags" -- and they aren't a party (lo siento) -- its a term for a view that is socially liberal and fiscally conservative.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277516</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277516</id>
	<title>Re:yeah. its much better to be p0wned</title>
	<author>h4rr4r</author>
	<datestamp>1267091760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would rather vote for an actual socialist before a so called libertarian. As far as I can tell that party is made up of nutbags and racist nutbags and homophobic racist nutbags.</p><p>We need a actual centrist party, that has not sold out to corporate interests.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would rather vote for an actual socialist before a so called libertarian .
As far as I can tell that party is made up of nutbags and racist nutbags and homophobic racist nutbags.We need a actual centrist party , that has not sold out to corporate interests .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would rather vote for an actual socialist before a so called libertarian.
As far as I can tell that party is made up of nutbags and racist nutbags and homophobic racist nutbags.We need a actual centrist party, that has not sold out to corporate interests.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278906</id>
	<title>Re:What a whiny load of crap.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267097460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm confused.  You can write these expenses off, but if you are not making any money (as in your example of the theme park) then it's pointless.  OR do you mean you can write it off on your personal income taxes (from your real job) since the LLC income is tacked onto your main income?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm confused .
You can write these expenses off , but if you are not making any money ( as in your example of the theme park ) then it 's pointless .
OR do you mean you can write it off on your personal income taxes ( from your real job ) since the LLC income is tacked onto your main income ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm confused.
You can write these expenses off, but if you are not making any money (as in your example of the theme park) then it's pointless.
OR do you mean you can write it off on your personal income taxes (from your real job) since the LLC income is tacked onto your main income?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277502</id>
	<title>I can only conclude...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267091700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Code produced by independent programmers must be more reliable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Code produced by independent programmers must be more reliable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Code produced by independent programmers must be more reliable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278306</id>
	<title>Don't forget the FOSSies</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267095060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and let's not forget about the entire FOSS movement, which makes the entire software industry hostile toward small-project entrepreneurs.  If you DO manage to come up with a good idea, some fat kid sitting in his mom's basement will simply steal all your good ideas and make a knock-off version just to "stick it to the man", aka an independent programmer trying to make a living.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and let 's not forget about the entire FOSS movement , which makes the entire software industry hostile toward small-project entrepreneurs .
If you DO manage to come up with a good idea , some fat kid sitting in his mom 's basement will simply steal all your good ideas and make a knock-off version just to " stick it to the man " , aka an independent programmer trying to make a living .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and let's not forget about the entire FOSS movement, which makes the entire software industry hostile toward small-project entrepreneurs.
If you DO manage to come up with a good idea, some fat kid sitting in his mom's basement will simply steal all your good ideas and make a knock-off version just to "stick it to the man", aka an independent programmer trying to make a living.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278200</id>
	<title>Re:What a whiny load of crap.</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1267094640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Now get creative. Like to go to theme parks? Set up another LLC and create a website dedicated to reviewing them, talking about which ones have what etc. Now you get to write off trips to Six Flags and Cedar point as legitimate business research.</p></div></blockquote><p>Best idea ever posted to slashdot.  Ever.</p><p>I've been itching to ride the Millennium again, no better review than the first for such an awesome ride<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... summer is coming<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... freaking awesome<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... when does Cedar Point open on weekdays this year/when is the last week of school in Sandusky?!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now get creative .
Like to go to theme parks ?
Set up another LLC and create a website dedicated to reviewing them , talking about which ones have what etc .
Now you get to write off trips to Six Flags and Cedar point as legitimate business research.Best idea ever posted to slashdot .
Ever.I 've been itching to ride the Millennium again , no better review than the first for such an awesome ride ... summer is coming ... freaking awesome ... when does Cedar Point open on weekdays this year/when is the last week of school in Sandusky ? !
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now get creative.
Like to go to theme parks?
Set up another LLC and create a website dedicated to reviewing them, talking about which ones have what etc.
Now you get to write off trips to Six Flags and Cedar point as legitimate business research.Best idea ever posted to slashdot.
Ever.I've been itching to ride the Millennium again, no better review than the first for such an awesome ride ... summer is coming ... freaking awesome ... when does Cedar Point open on weekdays this year/when is the last week of school in Sandusky?!
:)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279180</id>
	<title>Had to say</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1267098840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> But where will the next Microsoft come from?</p></div> </blockquote><p>India?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But where will the next Microsoft come from ?
India ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> But where will the next Microsoft come from?
India?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281242</id>
	<title>Dissidents are better people</title>
	<author>Pennidren</author>
	<datestamp>1267116120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, we should censor people that disagree with the idea that state of things is terrible. We would not want balanced discourse, would we?
People content with the state of things are already not as loud as the gripers; now you are suggesting that they be silenced altogether?
If so, you truly have found your place on slanted-dot. Actually with your low ID I guess you helped mold the place in your image.
<br> <br>
And let's not start the whole "you are sheeple" argument; just because some have found their place in the world does not mean they are not as enlightened as you. Maybe you are just a malcontent.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , we should censor people that disagree with the idea that state of things is terrible .
We would not want balanced discourse , would we ?
People content with the state of things are already not as loud as the gripers ; now you are suggesting that they be silenced altogether ?
If so , you truly have found your place on slanted-dot .
Actually with your low ID I guess you helped mold the place in your image .
And let 's not start the whole " you are sheeple " argument ; just because some have found their place in the world does not mean they are not as enlightened as you .
Maybe you are just a malcontent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, we should censor people that disagree with the idea that state of things is terrible.
We would not want balanced discourse, would we?
People content with the state of things are already not as loud as the gripers; now you are suggesting that they be silenced altogether?
If so, you truly have found your place on slanted-dot.
Actually with your low ID I guess you helped mold the place in your image.
And let's not start the whole "you are sheeple" argument; just because some have found their place in the world does not mean they are not as enlightened as you.
Maybe you are just a malcontent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277750</id>
	<title>Most valuable my ass</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267092900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>In a knowledge economy, programmers rank among our most valuable workers</p></div></blockquote><p> Got a complex or what? Given the audience I'm probably gonna burn some Karma here but, There are a dozens of professions I would put before programmers, maybe even hundreds, as the most important professions in civilization, regardless of development level (Nomadic, Agrarian, Industrial, Information). Lets start with Doctors. I'd value my health far higher than a program to balance my checkbook. Next Nurses, as I value my health to have doctors, Nurses are a critical component to make that happen much more than a web browser. Next, Civil Engineers, as I value having a roof over my head (rather than living in cave), clean potable water in my pipes, sewage lines and treatment plants, roads to move myself and goods on and bridges to cross bodies of water and ravines much more than a value software for digital pictures. Next Mechanical Engineers, I'd value cars, planes, boats and machinery to make things, machines to move goods and people, machines to build things and simply to provide an industrial economy much more than a software of any kind. Next, pretty much the rest of the traditional engineering professions. Next Any military career, as I value the defenders that prevent others from taking my life, loved ones or lively hood much higher than software to play games.</p><p>I could go on, but I'd put software programmers near the bottom of the list as the most important professions in civilization. Anyone putting software developers near the top of most important professions frankly has a mental disease involving some sort of superiority complex. Personally I'd rank software developers right up there with Telephone Sanitizers, Hair dressers, salesmen, middle managers and Executives on the most important to civilization.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In a knowledge economy , programmers rank among our most valuable workers Got a complex or what ?
Given the audience I 'm probably gon na burn some Karma here but , There are a dozens of professions I would put before programmers , maybe even hundreds , as the most important professions in civilization , regardless of development level ( Nomadic , Agrarian , Industrial , Information ) .
Lets start with Doctors .
I 'd value my health far higher than a program to balance my checkbook .
Next Nurses , as I value my health to have doctors , Nurses are a critical component to make that happen much more than a web browser .
Next , Civil Engineers , as I value having a roof over my head ( rather than living in cave ) , clean potable water in my pipes , sewage lines and treatment plants , roads to move myself and goods on and bridges to cross bodies of water and ravines much more than a value software for digital pictures .
Next Mechanical Engineers , I 'd value cars , planes , boats and machinery to make things , machines to move goods and people , machines to build things and simply to provide an industrial economy much more than a software of any kind .
Next , pretty much the rest of the traditional engineering professions .
Next Any military career , as I value the defenders that prevent others from taking my life , loved ones or lively hood much higher than software to play games.I could go on , but I 'd put software programmers near the bottom of the list as the most important professions in civilization .
Anyone putting software developers near the top of most important professions frankly has a mental disease involving some sort of superiority complex .
Personally I 'd rank software developers right up there with Telephone Sanitizers , Hair dressers , salesmen , middle managers and Executives on the most important to civilization .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a knowledge economy, programmers rank among our most valuable workers Got a complex or what?
Given the audience I'm probably gonna burn some Karma here but, There are a dozens of professions I would put before programmers, maybe even hundreds, as the most important professions in civilization, regardless of development level (Nomadic, Agrarian, Industrial, Information).
Lets start with Doctors.
I'd value my health far higher than a program to balance my checkbook.
Next Nurses, as I value my health to have doctors, Nurses are a critical component to make that happen much more than a web browser.
Next, Civil Engineers, as I value having a roof over my head (rather than living in cave), clean potable water in my pipes, sewage lines and treatment plants, roads to move myself and goods on and bridges to cross bodies of water and ravines much more than a value software for digital pictures.
Next Mechanical Engineers, I'd value cars, planes, boats and machinery to make things, machines to move goods and people, machines to build things and simply to provide an industrial economy much more than a software of any kind.
Next, pretty much the rest of the traditional engineering professions.
Next Any military career, as I value the defenders that prevent others from taking my life, loved ones or lively hood much higher than software to play games.I could go on, but I'd put software programmers near the bottom of the list as the most important professions in civilization.
Anyone putting software developers near the top of most important professions frankly has a mental disease involving some sort of superiority complex.
Personally I'd rank software developers right up there with Telephone Sanitizers, Hair dressers, salesmen, middle managers and Executives on the most important to civilization.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31292008</id>
	<title>It does kind of suck</title>
	<author>richtaur</author>
	<datestamp>1267186560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I did some freelance work for about $4k last Xmas and it ended up costing me $1,500 in taxes. That's higher than the tax on my salary. Plus getting insurance without the help from a corporation and its shared discount is unbelievably expensive.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I did some freelance work for about $ 4k last Xmas and it ended up costing me $ 1,500 in taxes .
That 's higher than the tax on my salary .
Plus getting insurance without the help from a corporation and its shared discount is unbelievably expensive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I did some freelance work for about $4k last Xmas and it ended up costing me $1,500 in taxes.
That's higher than the tax on my salary.
Plus getting insurance without the help from a corporation and its shared discount is unbelievably expensive.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278706</id>
	<title>Re:Another reason to escape the USA</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1267096560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You do realize that it is basically impossible for US Citizens to escape the IRS right? Even if you live overseas, you still owe taxes. The only way to become completely free of the IRS is to renounce citizenship at an overseas embassy which cannot be done without proof of alternative foreign citizenship because you cannot became a "stateless" person in this way. The benefits of American citizenship heavily outweigh the costs in taxes for most of us, besides the fact that many of us were born in United States (i.e. it's our home country), so this is basically a non-starter.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You do realize that it is basically impossible for US Citizens to escape the IRS right ?
Even if you live overseas , you still owe taxes .
The only way to become completely free of the IRS is to renounce citizenship at an overseas embassy which can not be done without proof of alternative foreign citizenship because you can not became a " stateless " person in this way .
The benefits of American citizenship heavily outweigh the costs in taxes for most of us , besides the fact that many of us were born in United States ( i.e .
it 's our home country ) , so this is basically a non-starter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You do realize that it is basically impossible for US Citizens to escape the IRS right?
Even if you live overseas, you still owe taxes.
The only way to become completely free of the IRS is to renounce citizenship at an overseas embassy which cannot be done without proof of alternative foreign citizenship because you cannot became a "stateless" person in this way.
The benefits of American citizenship heavily outweigh the costs in taxes for most of us, besides the fact that many of us were born in United States (i.e.
it's our home country), so this is basically a non-starter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277318</id>
	<title>Re:Just SOP</title>
	<author>DJ Jones</author>
	<datestamp>1267090920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>People make this argument about corporations vs. people all the time and it makes no sense.  Where did this originate? Fox News? If you disallowed "corporate" campaign funding do you really think that would stop corporations from buying politicians? The CEO of a major corporation could just as easily donate funds under his own name with a little post-it note asking for laws that help his corporation. How does that solve anything?
<br> <br>
Public campaign funding is the underlying issue, not corporations acting as persons.</htmltext>
<tokenext>People make this argument about corporations vs. people all the time and it makes no sense .
Where did this originate ?
Fox News ?
If you disallowed " corporate " campaign funding do you really think that would stop corporations from buying politicians ?
The CEO of a major corporation could just as easily donate funds under his own name with a little post-it note asking for laws that help his corporation .
How does that solve anything ?
Public campaign funding is the underlying issue , not corporations acting as persons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People make this argument about corporations vs. people all the time and it makes no sense.
Where did this originate?
Fox News?
If you disallowed "corporate" campaign funding do you really think that would stop corporations from buying politicians?
The CEO of a major corporation could just as easily donate funds under his own name with a little post-it note asking for laws that help his corporation.
How does that solve anything?
Public campaign funding is the underlying issue, not corporations acting as persons.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276914</id>
	<title>Ask Joe Stack</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267089300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just ask Joe Stack about being an <a href="http://www.infowars.com/joe-stacks-intriguing-connections-with-defense-contractors-intelligence-agencies/" title="infowars.com">independent programmer.</a> [infowars.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just ask Joe Stack about being an independent programmer .
[ infowars.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just ask Joe Stack about being an independent programmer.
[infowars.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278522</id>
	<title>Re:This is why I recommend against entering the fi</title>
	<author>mdm-adph</author>
	<datestamp>1267095840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>$4k a year on interest for college debts?  Jesus, it's called consolidation, use it.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:p</p><p>Yeah, you'll be paying off the loans for the rest of your life, but seriously, at least I'm not eating just beans and rice every day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 4k a year on interest for college debts ?
Jesus , it 's called consolidation , use it .
: pYeah , you 'll be paying off the loans for the rest of your life , but seriously , at least I 'm not eating just beans and rice every day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$4k a year on interest for college debts?
Jesus, it's called consolidation, use it.
:pYeah, you'll be paying off the loans for the rest of your life, but seriously, at least I'm not eating just beans and rice every day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277960</id>
	<title>Where's my plane?</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1267093740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Gosh darn it, I'm just going for a little trip!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Gosh darn it , I 'm just going for a little trip !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gosh darn it, I'm just going for a little trip!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281774</id>
	<title>Re:Boy, talk about a slippery slope.</title>
	<author>moro\_666</author>
	<datestamp>1267122420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a software developer myself, professionally for about 10 years, a little more.<br>But when it comes down to a discussion of "bug free" programs, i totally disagree with the herd it seems.</p><p>You don't expect your doctor to make a bug while fixing you up. If they do, they are pretty screwed.<br>You don't expect your car maker to give you a buggy car (Toyota anyone ?). If they sell you a really bad car, they are really screwed.<br>You don't expect your mobile operator to give you a buggy phone.<br>You don't expect a cola bottle that has the drink but doesn't open properly, you don't want a cigarette lighter that burns your house down.<br>This list could pretty much continue forever...</p><p>Why do developers think that they are all sacred cows and not responsible for not planning &amp; producing their product properly. There are about 10 more than bazillion good developers out there today. There's nothing holy about you if you optimize the code down to be 5\% faster, but there is great holiness if you can provide algorithms that are way more bulletproof.</p><p>Why should anyone pay money for software that doesn't really do what it should ? I know that it's freaking expensive to write nearly perfect code, but as the expression goes "you get what you pay for". If you look at your "main enemy Microsoft", their windows is a burrito in the software world, it's a cheap deal, don't expect it to be a full blown lunch at a mighty restaurant.</p><p>If there are 3rd party items that make your product unstable, make sure the client understands it before he buys it (just like you tell people not to put their cat into the microwave<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... , or not to use the microwave with the wrong electricity voltage line).</p><p>And as far as "independent developer" jam follows, do what the rest of the industry does.<br>1) work for someone else, until you have enough budget and a good idea<br>2) fork away your own company, and roll it.</p><p>Nobody really starts a car factory from zero and nobody builds a McJimmy's burger place into downtown from zero investment or out of the fun of an experiment. If you want to make money - it's a business, get on the train.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a software developer myself , professionally for about 10 years , a little more.But when it comes down to a discussion of " bug free " programs , i totally disagree with the herd it seems.You do n't expect your doctor to make a bug while fixing you up .
If they do , they are pretty screwed.You do n't expect your car maker to give you a buggy car ( Toyota anyone ? ) .
If they sell you a really bad car , they are really screwed.You do n't expect your mobile operator to give you a buggy phone.You do n't expect a cola bottle that has the drink but does n't open properly , you do n't want a cigarette lighter that burns your house down.This list could pretty much continue forever...Why do developers think that they are all sacred cows and not responsible for not planning &amp; producing their product properly .
There are about 10 more than bazillion good developers out there today .
There 's nothing holy about you if you optimize the code down to be 5 \ % faster , but there is great holiness if you can provide algorithms that are way more bulletproof.Why should anyone pay money for software that does n't really do what it should ?
I know that it 's freaking expensive to write nearly perfect code , but as the expression goes " you get what you pay for " .
If you look at your " main enemy Microsoft " , their windows is a burrito in the software world , it 's a cheap deal , do n't expect it to be a full blown lunch at a mighty restaurant.If there are 3rd party items that make your product unstable , make sure the client understands it before he buys it ( just like you tell people not to put their cat into the microwave ... , or not to use the microwave with the wrong electricity voltage line ) .And as far as " independent developer " jam follows , do what the rest of the industry does.1 ) work for someone else , until you have enough budget and a good idea2 ) fork away your own company , and roll it.Nobody really starts a car factory from zero and nobody builds a McJimmy 's burger place into downtown from zero investment or out of the fun of an experiment .
If you want to make money - it 's a business , get on the train .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a software developer myself, professionally for about 10 years, a little more.But when it comes down to a discussion of "bug free" programs, i totally disagree with the herd it seems.You don't expect your doctor to make a bug while fixing you up.
If they do, they are pretty screwed.You don't expect your car maker to give you a buggy car (Toyota anyone ?).
If they sell you a really bad car, they are really screwed.You don't expect your mobile operator to give you a buggy phone.You don't expect a cola bottle that has the drink but doesn't open properly, you don't want a cigarette lighter that burns your house down.This list could pretty much continue forever...Why do developers think that they are all sacred cows and not responsible for not planning &amp; producing their product properly.
There are about 10 more than bazillion good developers out there today.
There's nothing holy about you if you optimize the code down to be 5\% faster, but there is great holiness if you can provide algorithms that are way more bulletproof.Why should anyone pay money for software that doesn't really do what it should ?
I know that it's freaking expensive to write nearly perfect code, but as the expression goes "you get what you pay for".
If you look at your "main enemy Microsoft", their windows is a burrito in the software world, it's a cheap deal, don't expect it to be a full blown lunch at a mighty restaurant.If there are 3rd party items that make your product unstable, make sure the client understands it before he buys it (just like you tell people not to put their cat into the microwave ... , or not to use the microwave with the wrong electricity voltage line).And as far as "independent developer" jam follows, do what the rest of the industry does.1) work for someone else, until you have enough budget and a good idea2) fork away your own company, and roll it.Nobody really starts a car factory from zero and nobody builds a McJimmy's burger place into downtown from zero investment or out of the fun of an experiment.
If you want to make money - it's a business, get on the train.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278886</id>
	<title>i disagree</title>
	<author>Dthief</author>
	<datestamp>1267097340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think the recent legal climate (see past few weeks of slashdot) towards open-source, freeware, etc. has made it so anyone who come up with a clever program/idea is more likely to do well than would be expected.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the recent legal climate ( see past few weeks of slashdot ) towards open-source , freeware , etc .
has made it so anyone who come up with a clever program/idea is more likely to do well than would be expected .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the recent legal climate (see past few weeks of slashdot) towards open-source, freeware, etc.
has made it so anyone who come up with a clever program/idea is more likely to do well than would be expected.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277870</id>
	<title>I did that and still failed.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267093440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I did that only with an S-Corp.</p><p>Here's what killed me: most corps <i>only</i> do business with a select group of firms (read as  large consulting firms) and will not do business with a small company, especially a single guy corp. IBM is like that and so is just about every corp on the Fortune 1000. Which means you have to sub out to the large firms which they did less and less of the point where there was nothing. And when they did it, they took their 40\% of the bill and gave you the crumbs. Yes, I knew folks who were able to beat the system but they were Electrical Engineers who did very very specialized <i>hardware</i> work.</p><p>Now, there's going to be folks who are going to say, well, don't go to the Fortune 1000 corporations, dumb-ass!!</p><p>The trouble, outside of that market, there is much less work and it's saturated with people like me. Take a gander at RentACoder, Guru.com, or any of those other web sites. Work that I used to be able to charge $2,000 for is now going for less than $100. Really. I'm not exaggerating. </p><p>This is the year that I completely give up on IT.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did that only with an S-Corp.Here 's what killed me : most corps only do business with a select group of firms ( read as large consulting firms ) and will not do business with a small company , especially a single guy corp. IBM is like that and so is just about every corp on the Fortune 1000 .
Which means you have to sub out to the large firms which they did less and less of the point where there was nothing .
And when they did it , they took their 40 \ % of the bill and gave you the crumbs .
Yes , I knew folks who were able to beat the system but they were Electrical Engineers who did very very specialized hardware work.Now , there 's going to be folks who are going to say , well , do n't go to the Fortune 1000 corporations , dumb-ass !
! The trouble , outside of that market , there is much less work and it 's saturated with people like me .
Take a gander at RentACoder , Guru.com , or any of those other web sites .
Work that I used to be able to charge $ 2,000 for is now going for less than $ 100 .
Really. I 'm not exaggerating .
This is the year that I completely give up on IT .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I did that only with an S-Corp.Here's what killed me: most corps only do business with a select group of firms (read as  large consulting firms) and will not do business with a small company, especially a single guy corp. IBM is like that and so is just about every corp on the Fortune 1000.
Which means you have to sub out to the large firms which they did less and less of the point where there was nothing.
And when they did it, they took their 40\% of the bill and gave you the crumbs.
Yes, I knew folks who were able to beat the system but they were Electrical Engineers who did very very specialized hardware work.Now, there's going to be folks who are going to say, well, don't go to the Fortune 1000 corporations, dumb-ass!
!The trouble, outside of that market, there is much less work and it's saturated with people like me.
Take a gander at RentACoder, Guru.com, or any of those other web sites.
Work that I used to be able to charge $2,000 for is now going for less than $100.
Really. I'm not exaggerating.
This is the year that I completely give up on IT.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277008</id>
	<title>Other than healthcare</title>
	<author>FlyingBishop</author>
	<datestamp>1267089600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Health care is the only problem. Fix that and you're good. The BS about contracting is just that, BS. If you're making any kind of money as a programming contractor, you can afford to hire someone to handle your taxes (or you're intelligent enough to handle them yourself, and freelancing means you ought to have the free time.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Health care is the only problem .
Fix that and you 're good .
The BS about contracting is just that , BS .
If you 're making any kind of money as a programming contractor , you can afford to hire someone to handle your taxes ( or you 're intelligent enough to handle them yourself , and freelancing means you ought to have the free time .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Health care is the only problem.
Fix that and you're good.
The BS about contracting is just that, BS.
If you're making any kind of money as a programming contractor, you can afford to hire someone to handle your taxes (or you're intelligent enough to handle them yourself, and freelancing means you ought to have the free time.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278320</id>
	<title>Re:More news at 11</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1267095120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why is it IT people in general feel that they are somehow different than everyone else in the world?</p></div><p>Because they are precious snowflakes who melt easily. Of course, they are also Howard Roark style rugged individualists who oppose conformity and government intervention, unless that government intervention helps them - then they are back to being precious snowflakes again.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is it IT people in general feel that they are somehow different than everyone else in the world ? Because they are precious snowflakes who melt easily .
Of course , they are also Howard Roark style rugged individualists who oppose conformity and government intervention , unless that government intervention helps them - then they are back to being precious snowflakes again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is it IT people in general feel that they are somehow different than everyone else in the world?Because they are precious snowflakes who melt easily.
Of course, they are also Howard Roark style rugged individualists who oppose conformity and government intervention, unless that government intervention helps them - then they are back to being precious snowflakes again.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277894</id>
	<title>Re:yeah. its much better to be p0wned</title>
	<author>Aeros</author>
	<datestamp>1267093560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>but but..Rush Limbaugh has always said it's the Democrats who are ruining our country and smashing our dreams and that Obama is leading us down a path of destruction in which we have very little hope of recovering.
What a piece of dung that idiot is.</htmltext>
<tokenext>but but..Rush Limbaugh has always said it 's the Democrats who are ruining our country and smashing our dreams and that Obama is leading us down a path of destruction in which we have very little hope of recovering .
What a piece of dung that idiot is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but but..Rush Limbaugh has always said it's the Democrats who are ruining our country and smashing our dreams and that Obama is leading us down a path of destruction in which we have very little hope of recovering.
What a piece of dung that idiot is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280562</id>
	<title>Re:yeah. its much better to be p0wned</title>
	<author>ScrewMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1267109100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>No we need an "American party".  This partisan crap is getting as bad as all the nut-bag religions.</p></div><p>Not exactly. Like Lewis Black said, "The only thing <b>stupider</b> than a Republican, or a Democrat, is when these little pricks <i>work together</i>." That's why bipartisanship is good for the country. See, we already have more bad law than we could ever possibly <i>use</i>, so I prefer it when they waste time and energy arguing over some stupid bill rather than actually <i>passing</i> it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No we need an " American party " .
This partisan crap is getting as bad as all the nut-bag religions.Not exactly .
Like Lewis Black said , " The only thing stupider than a Republican , or a Democrat , is when these little pricks work together .
" That 's why bipartisanship is good for the country .
See , we already have more bad law than we could ever possibly use , so I prefer it when they waste time and energy arguing over some stupid bill rather than actually passing it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No we need an "American party".
This partisan crap is getting as bad as all the nut-bag religions.Not exactly.
Like Lewis Black said, "The only thing stupider than a Republican, or a Democrat, is when these little pricks work together.
" That's why bipartisanship is good for the country.
See, we already have more bad law than we could ever possibly use, so I prefer it when they waste time and energy arguing over some stupid bill rather than actually passing it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31287264</id>
	<title>Work to live....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267208520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, well<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,well.</p><p>So your work 12-16 hours a day and your account has doubled? H-e-l-l-o-o-o-o-o.</p><p>And if you worked 24 hours a day it may triple, but at what cost?</p><p>Whenever somebody shows pride in this kind of self destructive behaviour it is worth remembering we only live once.</p><p>As for the way you work, I simply don't get it, it sounds you are simply lousy at costing your work and at setting realisting expectations.</p><p>I started working independently and work only 40 hours a week (not a single minute more).</p><p>You can negotiate how you are going to work and walk away from unrealistic projects, you don't have to put up or shut up anymore, if you do you are doing something wrong.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , well ,well.So your work 12-16 hours a day and your account has doubled ?
H-e-l-l-o-o-o-o-o.And if you worked 24 hours a day it may triple , but at what cost ? Whenever somebody shows pride in this kind of self destructive behaviour it is worth remembering we only live once.As for the way you work , I simply do n't get it , it sounds you are simply lousy at costing your work and at setting realisting expectations.I started working independently and work only 40 hours a week ( not a single minute more ) .You can negotiate how you are going to work and walk away from unrealistic projects , you do n't have to put up or shut up anymore , if you do you are doing something wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, well ,well.So your work 12-16 hours a day and your account has doubled?
H-e-l-l-o-o-o-o-o.And if you worked 24 hours a day it may triple, but at what cost?Whenever somebody shows pride in this kind of self destructive behaviour it is worth remembering we only live once.As for the way you work, I simply don't get it, it sounds you are simply lousy at costing your work and at setting realisting expectations.I started working independently and work only 40 hours a week (not a single minute more).You can negotiate how you are going to work and walk away from unrealistic projects, you don't have to put up or shut up anymore, if you do you are doing something wrong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278392</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277640</id>
	<title>Re:Ask Joe Stack</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267092420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He was a fucking tax cheat not an independent programmer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He was a fucking tax cheat not an independent programmer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He was a fucking tax cheat not an independent programmer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276914</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278286</id>
	<title>hate to tell you but the blue dog democrats</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267094940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>are close to being the worst of the bunch.  They like the RIAA/MPAA *and* the oil/defense/pharma/insurance companies.</p><p>Did you look at the Sunlight Foundation video of the health care summit?  Every time a senator or congressperson was on, they had an on-screen scroll of the person's biggest donors, and you could tell exactly what anyone was going to say by who their donors were.  And guess what, blue dogs like Evan Bayh and Joe Lieberman are completely up the butts of the insurance industry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>are close to being the worst of the bunch .
They like the RIAA/MPAA * and * the oil/defense/pharma/insurance companies.Did you look at the Sunlight Foundation video of the health care summit ?
Every time a senator or congressperson was on , they had an on-screen scroll of the person 's biggest donors , and you could tell exactly what anyone was going to say by who their donors were .
And guess what , blue dogs like Evan Bayh and Joe Lieberman are completely up the butts of the insurance industry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>are close to being the worst of the bunch.
They like the RIAA/MPAA *and* the oil/defense/pharma/insurance companies.Did you look at the Sunlight Foundation video of the health care summit?
Every time a senator or congressperson was on, they had an on-screen scroll of the person's biggest donors, and you could tell exactly what anyone was going to say by who their donors were.
And guess what, blue dogs like Evan Bayh and Joe Lieberman are completely up the butts of the insurance industry.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278368</id>
	<title>Centrist Party</title>
	<author>gd2shoe</author>
	<datestamp>1267095240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know about your other accusations (sounds like trolling), but they do take some nutty positions.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>We need a actual centrist party, that has not sold out to corporate interests.</p></div><p>Good luck with that.  I agree with the sentiment, but there are a number of barriers.  First, funding.  Any third party is going to be beholden to some corporate interest (or unions, which shouldn't be just as socially harmful, but they typically are).  Second, we really need two central parties, one slightly to the left and one slightly to the right.  There will <em>always</em> be two major parties with plurality elections (and more so with the electoral college).  If one of our parties was replaced with a centrist party,  that would result in "compromise" being moved further to the left or to the right.  The only people who want that are the extremest who are always wishing the other party would come closer to their ideologies.</p><p>My opinion, we need election reform before we can truly begin to address this very real problem.  I'd be happy (happier, anyways) with just about anything else: IRV, Condorcet, or even Approval Voting.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know about your other accusations ( sounds like trolling ) , but they do take some nutty positions.We need a actual centrist party , that has not sold out to corporate interests.Good luck with that .
I agree with the sentiment , but there are a number of barriers .
First , funding .
Any third party is going to be beholden to some corporate interest ( or unions , which should n't be just as socially harmful , but they typically are ) .
Second , we really need two central parties , one slightly to the left and one slightly to the right .
There will always be two major parties with plurality elections ( and more so with the electoral college ) .
If one of our parties was replaced with a centrist party , that would result in " compromise " being moved further to the left or to the right .
The only people who want that are the extremest who are always wishing the other party would come closer to their ideologies.My opinion , we need election reform before we can truly begin to address this very real problem .
I 'd be happy ( happier , anyways ) with just about anything else : IRV , Condorcet , or even Approval Voting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know about your other accusations (sounds like trolling), but they do take some nutty positions.We need a actual centrist party, that has not sold out to corporate interests.Good luck with that.
I agree with the sentiment, but there are a number of barriers.
First, funding.
Any third party is going to be beholden to some corporate interest (or unions, which shouldn't be just as socially harmful, but they typically are).
Second, we really need two central parties, one slightly to the left and one slightly to the right.
There will always be two major parties with plurality elections (and more so with the electoral college).
If one of our parties was replaced with a centrist party,  that would result in "compromise" being moved further to the left or to the right.
The only people who want that are the extremest who are always wishing the other party would come closer to their ideologies.My opinion, we need election reform before we can truly begin to address this very real problem.
I'd be happy (happier, anyways) with just about anything else: IRV, Condorcet, or even Approval Voting.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277516</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280394</id>
	<title>Re:Why now?</title>
	<author>mjwalshe</author>
	<datestamp>1267107600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>yes this is similar to the IR35 clamp down in the uk which rather unfairly went after IT  contractors but left other self employed professionals and trades men untouched.</htmltext>
<tokenext>yes this is similar to the IR35 clamp down in the uk which rather unfairly went after IT contractors but left other self employed professionals and trades men untouched .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yes this is similar to the IR35 clamp down in the uk which rather unfairly went after IT  contractors but left other self employed professionals and trades men untouched.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276892</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280424</id>
	<title>Re:Just SOP</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1267107780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The corporations use bribes to buy politicians. The politicians write the laws the corporations wants. And the laws the corporations want are protective laws which discourage independent businesses (programmers or otherwise). It doesn't matter whether we're talling about RIAA, Hollywood, Comcast, or Microsoft. It's all the same operating procedure. Corporations should have their free speech rights taken away (lobbyists/bribes). They have no more rights than a Tree or a rock. They are not THINGS not people.</i> </p><p>Limited liability meant that you did not have to go to the king or pope or landed aristocrat for funding. The royal "We" who could not be sued or the man so rich and powerful that no mere commercial failure could ever break him.</p><p>Such men had free speech.</p><p>They were the government - and they could be bribed.</p><p>The modern business corporation represents the interests and efforts of a great many people. In union there is strength - and voice.</p><p>Microsoft employs 40,000 people in the Puget Sound region.</p><p>It owns or leases 15 million square feet of office space - and it helped drive the median family income in Redmond to $97,000 a year - and the median value of a single family residence in Redmond to $496,000.</p><p>This is what the lobbyist takes to a politician - and it is more effective than any bribe. [FWIW the number of Congressmen tried for bribery since 1905 is no more than 12 or so. <a href="http://www.constitution.org/uslaw/corrupt.txt" title="constitution.org">List of Public Corruption Cases</a> [constitution.org] </p><p>The FSF is also a corporation. It lobbies - it campaigns.</p><p>With an adolescent ineptness, to be sure. Think "Windows 7 Sins"</p><p>Without free speech rights, it would be even more confined and helpless.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The corporations use bribes to buy politicians .
The politicians write the laws the corporations wants .
And the laws the corporations want are protective laws which discourage independent businesses ( programmers or otherwise ) .
It does n't matter whether we 're talling about RIAA , Hollywood , Comcast , or Microsoft .
It 's all the same operating procedure .
Corporations should have their free speech rights taken away ( lobbyists/bribes ) .
They have no more rights than a Tree or a rock .
They are not THINGS not people .
Limited liability meant that you did not have to go to the king or pope or landed aristocrat for funding .
The royal " We " who could not be sued or the man so rich and powerful that no mere commercial failure could ever break him.Such men had free speech.They were the government - and they could be bribed.The modern business corporation represents the interests and efforts of a great many people .
In union there is strength - and voice.Microsoft employs 40,000 people in the Puget Sound region.It owns or leases 15 million square feet of office space - and it helped drive the median family income in Redmond to $ 97,000 a year - and the median value of a single family residence in Redmond to $ 496,000.This is what the lobbyist takes to a politician - and it is more effective than any bribe .
[ FWIW the number of Congressmen tried for bribery since 1905 is no more than 12 or so .
List of Public Corruption Cases [ constitution.org ] The FSF is also a corporation .
It lobbies - it campaigns.With an adolescent ineptness , to be sure .
Think " Windows 7 Sins " Without free speech rights , it would be even more confined and helpless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The corporations use bribes to buy politicians.
The politicians write the laws the corporations wants.
And the laws the corporations want are protective laws which discourage independent businesses (programmers or otherwise).
It doesn't matter whether we're talling about RIAA, Hollywood, Comcast, or Microsoft.
It's all the same operating procedure.
Corporations should have their free speech rights taken away (lobbyists/bribes).
They have no more rights than a Tree or a rock.
They are not THINGS not people.
Limited liability meant that you did not have to go to the king or pope or landed aristocrat for funding.
The royal "We" who could not be sued or the man so rich and powerful that no mere commercial failure could ever break him.Such men had free speech.They were the government - and they could be bribed.The modern business corporation represents the interests and efforts of a great many people.
In union there is strength - and voice.Microsoft employs 40,000 people in the Puget Sound region.It owns or leases 15 million square feet of office space - and it helped drive the median family income in Redmond to $97,000 a year - and the median value of a single family residence in Redmond to $496,000.This is what the lobbyist takes to a politician - and it is more effective than any bribe.
[FWIW the number of Congressmen tried for bribery since 1905 is no more than 12 or so.
List of Public Corruption Cases [constitution.org] The FSF is also a corporation.
It lobbies - it campaigns.With an adolescent ineptness, to be sure.
Think "Windows 7 Sins"Without free speech rights, it would be even more confined and helpless.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279198</id>
	<title>Re:Just SOP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267098960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry cowboy, the law exists to protect programmers from corporations.  Of course the corporations would love to have more independent contractors and fewer employees.  No health insurance.  No bennies.  No payroll taxes.  Just programmers who are working as individuals for a single client, who have to report to cubicles at 9 AM, who type away at company-provided workstations, elbow-to-elbow with company employees.  For the company, that's ideal.  For the programmer, that's not independence -- that's an illusion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry cowboy , the law exists to protect programmers from corporations .
Of course the corporations would love to have more independent contractors and fewer employees .
No health insurance .
No bennies .
No payroll taxes .
Just programmers who are working as individuals for a single client , who have to report to cubicles at 9 AM , who type away at company-provided workstations , elbow-to-elbow with company employees .
For the company , that 's ideal .
For the programmer , that 's not independence -- that 's an illusion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry cowboy, the law exists to protect programmers from corporations.
Of course the corporations would love to have more independent contractors and fewer employees.
No health insurance.
No bennies.
No payroll taxes.
Just programmers who are working as individuals for a single client, who have to report to cubicles at 9 AM, who type away at company-provided workstations, elbow-to-elbow with company employees.
For the company, that's ideal.
For the programmer, that's not independence -- that's an illusion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278100</id>
	<title>Re:What a whiny load of crap.</title>
	<author>Rob the Bold</author>
	<datestamp>1267094340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Step 7. Get health coverage.  We found insurance through a local trade group for $600 a month for my wife and I.  Pay it out of the company, it's a write off.</p></div><p>These are all good suggestions, and many people could benefit from them.  But Step 7 can be the real stumbling block.  Obviously not for you and your wife at $600 a month, but there are plenty of people who, through no fault of their own except perhaps original sin, just can't get affordable private insurance.  Usually because one partner has a "serious" pre-existing health condition.  It doesn't have to be life-threatening or crippling or even detectable by the average person looking at you.  Just "expensive", as in maybe $100 of Rx/drugs per month or something like that.  In that case, you may not be able to buy insurance on the open market for any price.  This puts you in the unfortunate position of having to buy from your state's "high-risk" pool -- if your state has one.  These can cost twice as much as the average private insurance plan, and there may be a waiting period or a wait-list to get in.</p><p>If we truly value the idea of more small business in the US, we'd try to reduce or eliminate this hurdle and mitigate the hassles of steps 5 and 6 as well.  I'm not saying that a person can't work their way around this (like you have), I'm just saying that the fewer obstacles we put up, the more folks would take a chance on quitting Initech and hanging out their shingle.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Step 7 .
Get health coverage .
We found insurance through a local trade group for $ 600 a month for my wife and I. Pay it out of the company , it 's a write off.These are all good suggestions , and many people could benefit from them .
But Step 7 can be the real stumbling block .
Obviously not for you and your wife at $ 600 a month , but there are plenty of people who , through no fault of their own except perhaps original sin , just ca n't get affordable private insurance .
Usually because one partner has a " serious " pre-existing health condition .
It does n't have to be life-threatening or crippling or even detectable by the average person looking at you .
Just " expensive " , as in maybe $ 100 of Rx/drugs per month or something like that .
In that case , you may not be able to buy insurance on the open market for any price .
This puts you in the unfortunate position of having to buy from your state 's " high-risk " pool -- if your state has one .
These can cost twice as much as the average private insurance plan , and there may be a waiting period or a wait-list to get in.If we truly value the idea of more small business in the US , we 'd try to reduce or eliminate this hurdle and mitigate the hassles of steps 5 and 6 as well .
I 'm not saying that a person ca n't work their way around this ( like you have ) , I 'm just saying that the fewer obstacles we put up , the more folks would take a chance on quitting Initech and hanging out their shingle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Step 7.
Get health coverage.
We found insurance through a local trade group for $600 a month for my wife and I.  Pay it out of the company, it's a write off.These are all good suggestions, and many people could benefit from them.
But Step 7 can be the real stumbling block.
Obviously not for you and your wife at $600 a month, but there are plenty of people who, through no fault of their own except perhaps original sin, just can't get affordable private insurance.
Usually because one partner has a "serious" pre-existing health condition.
It doesn't have to be life-threatening or crippling or even detectable by the average person looking at you.
Just "expensive", as in maybe $100 of Rx/drugs per month or something like that.
In that case, you may not be able to buy insurance on the open market for any price.
This puts you in the unfortunate position of having to buy from your state's "high-risk" pool -- if your state has one.
These can cost twice as much as the average private insurance plan, and there may be a waiting period or a wait-list to get in.If we truly value the idea of more small business in the US, we'd try to reduce or eliminate this hurdle and mitigate the hassles of steps 5 and 6 as well.
I'm not saying that a person can't work their way around this (like you have), I'm just saying that the fewer obstacles we put up, the more folks would take a chance on quitting Initech and hanging out their shingle.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278890</id>
	<title>Re:What a whiny load of crap.</title>
	<author>jollyreaper</author>
	<datestamp>1267097400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Now get creative. Like to go to theme parks? Set up another LLC and create a website dedicated to reviewing them, talking about which ones have what etc. Now you get to write off trips to Six Flags and Cedar point as legitimate business research.</p></div><p>Which step is "Watching it all come tumbling down when the IRS takes a dim light to your creativity?"</p><p>I worked for a small business guy who played tricks like this. His wife's trips to the lingerie store were called a business expense, clothing. They worked in construction services so unless she was giving lap dances to roofers, I don't think so.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now get creative .
Like to go to theme parks ?
Set up another LLC and create a website dedicated to reviewing them , talking about which ones have what etc .
Now you get to write off trips to Six Flags and Cedar point as legitimate business research.Which step is " Watching it all come tumbling down when the IRS takes a dim light to your creativity ?
" I worked for a small business guy who played tricks like this .
His wife 's trips to the lingerie store were called a business expense , clothing .
They worked in construction services so unless she was giving lap dances to roofers , I do n't think so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now get creative.
Like to go to theme parks?
Set up another LLC and create a website dedicated to reviewing them, talking about which ones have what etc.
Now you get to write off trips to Six Flags and Cedar point as legitimate business research.Which step is "Watching it all come tumbling down when the IRS takes a dim light to your creativity?
"I worked for a small business guy who played tricks like this.
His wife's trips to the lingerie store were called a business expense, clothing.
They worked in construction services so unless she was giving lap dances to roofers, I don't think so.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280992</id>
	<title>Re:Just SOP</title>
	<author>the\_humeister</author>
	<datestamp>1267113600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know about that. Corporations are not just things, they are collections of people. A corporation is nothing without people. Look at the first amendment to the USA constitution:</p><blockquote><div><p>Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the <b>right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.</b></p></div> </blockquote><p>Since a corporation is an assembly of people, does it not follow that they are allowed to petition the government?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know about that .
Corporations are not just things , they are collections of people .
A corporation is nothing without people .
Look at the first amendment to the USA constitution : Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion , or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ; or abridging the freedom of speech , or of the press ; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble , and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances .
Since a corporation is an assembly of people , does it not follow that they are allowed to petition the government ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know about that.
Corporations are not just things, they are collections of people.
A corporation is nothing without people.
Look at the first amendment to the USA constitution:Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Since a corporation is an assembly of people, does it not follow that they are allowed to petition the government?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280060</id>
	<title>Michael Moore's "Sicko"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267104840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This story reminds me of that Michael Moore film "Sicko".  He makes the point in that film that the American system seems to set people up for this sort of thing.  Really expensive education means huge loans to repay, really expensive health care means you have to find a job with health benefits and that basically you better not rock the boat because if you lose your job your screwed.  How do you guys put up with it?  It seems like it's set up to totally favour the employer over there.  I'm Australian, so partially socialized education when I got my degree, I had a debt when I finished but it was only about 20k.  The liberals (~republicans) here are trying to bring about an american style system here so education costs are going up, recent grads are paying 30-40k loans .  Partially socialized health system so I don't have to have a job to get medical care.  Don't get me wrong, we still complain (who doesn't), but not after we compare it to what you Americans get.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This story reminds me of that Michael Moore film " Sicko " .
He makes the point in that film that the American system seems to set people up for this sort of thing .
Really expensive education means huge loans to repay , really expensive health care means you have to find a job with health benefits and that basically you better not rock the boat because if you lose your job your screwed .
How do you guys put up with it ?
It seems like it 's set up to totally favour the employer over there .
I 'm Australian , so partially socialized education when I got my degree , I had a debt when I finished but it was only about 20k .
The liberals ( ~ republicans ) here are trying to bring about an american style system here so education costs are going up , recent grads are paying 30-40k loans .
Partially socialized health system so I do n't have to have a job to get medical care .
Do n't get me wrong , we still complain ( who does n't ) , but not after we compare it to what you Americans get .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This story reminds me of that Michael Moore film "Sicko".
He makes the point in that film that the American system seems to set people up for this sort of thing.
Really expensive education means huge loans to repay, really expensive health care means you have to find a job with health benefits and that basically you better not rock the boat because if you lose your job your screwed.
How do you guys put up with it?
It seems like it's set up to totally favour the employer over there.
I'm Australian, so partially socialized education when I got my degree, I had a debt when I finished but it was only about 20k.
The liberals (~republicans) here are trying to bring about an american style system here so education costs are going up, recent grads are paying 30-40k loans .
Partially socialized health system so I don't have to have a job to get medical care.
Don't get me wrong, we still complain (who doesn't), but not after we compare it to what you Americans get.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31313956</id>
	<title>Re:Yep, I've lost hope.</title>
	<author>Donkey Kong Cluster</author>
	<datestamp>1267446300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you have enough money to come to Brazil, you can come here and get a good job on TI. It is far from a US wage, but you can have your life with your wife, kids and everything (surely not an american life standard either).  About your health, here we have a public health system that can take care of you. It is not good comparing to UK, but your salary would pay up for a private one anyone if don't like it.</p><p>I can't understand why someone would pay US$7500,00 for a broken arm if they can pay US$2000,00 to go to Brazil, get medical treatment (with that value, either public or private) and come back on time for your work. Oh, you could have long time vacations here with such amount of money also.</p><p>I have a friend in america that came to my city once. He got an infection in his foot and had medical attention for free just showing his passport. His fathers is a doctor in US.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you have enough money to come to Brazil , you can come here and get a good job on TI .
It is far from a US wage , but you can have your life with your wife , kids and everything ( surely not an american life standard either ) .
About your health , here we have a public health system that can take care of you .
It is not good comparing to UK , but your salary would pay up for a private one anyone if do n't like it.I ca n't understand why someone would pay US $ 7500,00 for a broken arm if they can pay US $ 2000,00 to go to Brazil , get medical treatment ( with that value , either public or private ) and come back on time for your work .
Oh , you could have long time vacations here with such amount of money also.I have a friend in america that came to my city once .
He got an infection in his foot and had medical attention for free just showing his passport .
His fathers is a doctor in US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you have enough money to come to Brazil, you can come here and get a good job on TI.
It is far from a US wage, but you can have your life with your wife, kids and everything (surely not an american life standard either).
About your health, here we have a public health system that can take care of you.
It is not good comparing to UK, but your salary would pay up for a private one anyone if don't like it.I can't understand why someone would pay US$7500,00 for a broken arm if they can pay US$2000,00 to go to Brazil, get medical treatment (with that value, either public or private) and come back on time for your work.
Oh, you could have long time vacations here with such amount of money also.I have a friend in america that came to my city once.
He got an infection in his foot and had medical attention for free just showing his passport.
His fathers is a doctor in US.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277596</id>
	<title>Re:What a whiny load of crap.</title>
	<author>Chris Mattern</author>
	<datestamp>1267092240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh, Lord.  A tax attorney would laugh himself into a seizure over this. Write off going to theme parks because reviewing them is your business?  Not unless you can show the taxman you made a profit at it in the recent past or have a reasonable expectation of doing so in the future.  Incorporate yourself to allow you to calculate taxes on that basis?  Yep, and be sued by the IRS for maintaining a phony corporation as a tax dodge, particularly if you have only one client, in which case they will claim you are an employee and must be taxed like one (they've done it before).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , Lord .
A tax attorney would laugh himself into a seizure over this .
Write off going to theme parks because reviewing them is your business ?
Not unless you can show the taxman you made a profit at it in the recent past or have a reasonable expectation of doing so in the future .
Incorporate yourself to allow you to calculate taxes on that basis ?
Yep , and be sued by the IRS for maintaining a phony corporation as a tax dodge , particularly if you have only one client , in which case they will claim you are an employee and must be taxed like one ( they 've done it before ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, Lord.
A tax attorney would laugh himself into a seizure over this.
Write off going to theme parks because reviewing them is your business?
Not unless you can show the taxman you made a profit at it in the recent past or have a reasonable expectation of doing so in the future.
Incorporate yourself to allow you to calculate taxes on that basis?
Yep, and be sued by the IRS for maintaining a phony corporation as a tax dodge, particularly if you have only one client, in which case they will claim you are an employee and must be taxed like one (they've done it before).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31304024</id>
	<title>Re:More news at 11</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267350960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why is it IT people in general feel that they are somehow different than everyone else in the world? Are they really so ignorant and socially dysfunctional to not realize that they are no different than any other part of society in any way? Is this ignorance or a form a geek elitism, thinking that we geeks can't possibly be expected to suffer under the same working conditions of the rest of the pathetic planet of idiots?</p></div><p>So what if we were not 'entitled' then. Could doctors and car mechanics just go and take over our jobs easily?</p><p>We feel entitled because we are running at the front of a wave as important as the 1600's Enlightenment, making sure that giant networks running phone communications, television networks, INFORMATION itself that is necessary for the world to continue to run down its post-industrial tracks.</p><p>We feel entitled because it is a fair exchange for torment from endless overtime without proper compensation (which lawyers, writers, secretaries and most other workers would laugh at when we explain the choice to work long hours is ruining our social live). Because the long hours of phone support on problems that a sane person would not treat over the phone demands some kind of 'virtual' compensation. Because the sense of accomplishment when you've solved a hard or little explored problem is just like any scientist's.</p><p>Because many IT jobs requires that we are available 24/7/365, like emergency room doctors... and I'm sure you could argue that their level of entitlement would be just as 'justified' because of long work hours. The only difference is we don't waste a whole decade to earn the medical degree and government certification.</p><p>The day that our jobs become more more commonplace (pretty near, actually) or that the bar of all other trades is raised so high that EVERYONE is treated like us, then you could say that the entitlement would be equal, and thus not unique to our kind. I am talking about giving everyone our 'responsibility' / ill treatment burden. This need to start by creating a world where management is sharing their on-call /  Blackberry assignment duty to all non-IT employees down to the doorman and front desk secretary at megacorp. Give them access cards so they can be made to work from home if some manager's ass itches when we are on vacation. And also add to this that we can't retire at age 40, but the industry informally erases us if we're just 'OK.' Even sport stars get by a bit more easily.</p><p>We can start there. Until then, since the world is unfair, and only IT workers can do IT workers jobs... a sense of entitlement is our way of saying 'thank us for our hard, long unrewarded work'</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is it IT people in general feel that they are somehow different than everyone else in the world ?
Are they really so ignorant and socially dysfunctional to not realize that they are no different than any other part of society in any way ?
Is this ignorance or a form a geek elitism , thinking that we geeks ca n't possibly be expected to suffer under the same working conditions of the rest of the pathetic planet of idiots ? So what if we were not 'entitled ' then .
Could doctors and car mechanics just go and take over our jobs easily ? We feel entitled because we are running at the front of a wave as important as the 1600 's Enlightenment , making sure that giant networks running phone communications , television networks , INFORMATION itself that is necessary for the world to continue to run down its post-industrial tracks.We feel entitled because it is a fair exchange for torment from endless overtime without proper compensation ( which lawyers , writers , secretaries and most other workers would laugh at when we explain the choice to work long hours is ruining our social live ) .
Because the long hours of phone support on problems that a sane person would not treat over the phone demands some kind of 'virtual ' compensation .
Because the sense of accomplishment when you 've solved a hard or little explored problem is just like any scientist 's.Because many IT jobs requires that we are available 24/7/365 , like emergency room doctors... and I 'm sure you could argue that their level of entitlement would be just as 'justified ' because of long work hours .
The only difference is we do n't waste a whole decade to earn the medical degree and government certification.The day that our jobs become more more commonplace ( pretty near , actually ) or that the bar of all other trades is raised so high that EVERYONE is treated like us , then you could say that the entitlement would be equal , and thus not unique to our kind .
I am talking about giving everyone our 'responsibility ' / ill treatment burden .
This need to start by creating a world where management is sharing their on-call / Blackberry assignment duty to all non-IT employees down to the doorman and front desk secretary at megacorp .
Give them access cards so they can be made to work from home if some manager 's ass itches when we are on vacation .
And also add to this that we ca n't retire at age 40 , but the industry informally erases us if we 're just 'OK .
' Even sport stars get by a bit more easily.We can start there .
Until then , since the world is unfair , and only IT workers can do IT workers jobs... a sense of entitlement is our way of saying 'thank us for our hard , long unrewarded work '</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is it IT people in general feel that they are somehow different than everyone else in the world?
Are they really so ignorant and socially dysfunctional to not realize that they are no different than any other part of society in any way?
Is this ignorance or a form a geek elitism, thinking that we geeks can't possibly be expected to suffer under the same working conditions of the rest of the pathetic planet of idiots?So what if we were not 'entitled' then.
Could doctors and car mechanics just go and take over our jobs easily?We feel entitled because we are running at the front of a wave as important as the 1600's Enlightenment, making sure that giant networks running phone communications, television networks, INFORMATION itself that is necessary for the world to continue to run down its post-industrial tracks.We feel entitled because it is a fair exchange for torment from endless overtime without proper compensation (which lawyers, writers, secretaries and most other workers would laugh at when we explain the choice to work long hours is ruining our social live).
Because the long hours of phone support on problems that a sane person would not treat over the phone demands some kind of 'virtual' compensation.
Because the sense of accomplishment when you've solved a hard or little explored problem is just like any scientist's.Because many IT jobs requires that we are available 24/7/365, like emergency room doctors... and I'm sure you could argue that their level of entitlement would be just as 'justified' because of long work hours.
The only difference is we don't waste a whole decade to earn the medical degree and government certification.The day that our jobs become more more commonplace (pretty near, actually) or that the bar of all other trades is raised so high that EVERYONE is treated like us, then you could say that the entitlement would be equal, and thus not unique to our kind.
I am talking about giving everyone our 'responsibility' / ill treatment burden.
This need to start by creating a world where management is sharing their on-call /  Blackberry assignment duty to all non-IT employees down to the doorman and front desk secretary at megacorp.
Give them access cards so they can be made to work from home if some manager's ass itches when we are on vacation.
And also add to this that we can't retire at age 40, but the industry informally erases us if we're just 'OK.
' Even sport stars get by a bit more easily.We can start there.
Until then, since the world is unfair, and only IT workers can do IT workers jobs... a sense of entitlement is our way of saying 'thank us for our hard, long unrewarded work'
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276892</id>
	<title>Why now?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267089240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This article is more than 10 years late... is this just because the dude crashed his plane into the IRS building?</p><p>Most programmers/IT people have long gotten around this by having multiple contracts and/or multiple employees. It's not really all that hard, and if your independent company only has one contract and one employee you're basically already working for them.</p><p>This does not in *any way* discourage the next Microsoft. Or the next Google or Facebook, BTW... obviously, since both came up after this law<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This article is more than 10 years late... is this just because the dude crashed his plane into the IRS building ? Most programmers/IT people have long gotten around this by having multiple contracts and/or multiple employees .
It 's not really all that hard , and if your independent company only has one contract and one employee you 're basically already working for them.This does not in * any way * discourage the next Microsoft .
Or the next Google or Facebook , BTW... obviously , since both came up after this law ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This article is more than 10 years late... is this just because the dude crashed his plane into the IRS building?Most programmers/IT people have long gotten around this by having multiple contracts and/or multiple employees.
It's not really all that hard, and if your independent company only has one contract and one employee you're basically already working for them.This does not in *any way* discourage the next Microsoft.
Or the next Google or Facebook, BTW... obviously, since both came up after this law ;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279984</id>
	<title>Re:What a whiny load of crap.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267104240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you sir, deserve a medal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you sir , deserve a medal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you sir, deserve a medal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277270</id>
	<title>Re:Just SOP</title>
	<author>Jeng</author>
	<datestamp>1267090680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another aspect to this.</p><p>When congress does projections to see how much money they will have available to spend they take into account how different taxes will provide revenue.</p><p>So some bill out there got funded by this stupid tax which will make it that much harder to remove.</p><p>It's not like we're talking about tax breaks for the rich, after all giving them tax breaks somehow provides more tax money.</p><p>It's pretty apparent that Congress failed math, either that or they hired the Enron accountants.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another aspect to this.When congress does projections to see how much money they will have available to spend they take into account how different taxes will provide revenue.So some bill out there got funded by this stupid tax which will make it that much harder to remove.It 's not like we 're talking about tax breaks for the rich , after all giving them tax breaks somehow provides more tax money.It 's pretty apparent that Congress failed math , either that or they hired the Enron accountants .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another aspect to this.When congress does projections to see how much money they will have available to spend they take into account how different taxes will provide revenue.So some bill out there got funded by this stupid tax which will make it that much harder to remove.It's not like we're talking about tax breaks for the rich, after all giving them tax breaks somehow provides more tax money.It's pretty apparent that Congress failed math, either that or they hired the Enron accountants.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279680</id>
	<title>The next Microsoft</title>
	<author>sictransitgloriacfa</author>
	<datestamp>1267102380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>But where will the next Microsoft come from?</i>
<br> <br>
If you mean the next big abusive computer monopoly: Mountain View, California.
<br> <br>
If you mean the next big game changer and innovator: somewhere outside the Benighted States of America, obviously.</htmltext>
<tokenext>But where will the next Microsoft come from ?
If you mean the next big abusive computer monopoly : Mountain View , California .
If you mean the next big game changer and innovator : somewhere outside the Benighted States of America , obviously .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But where will the next Microsoft come from?
If you mean the next big abusive computer monopoly: Mountain View, California.
If you mean the next big game changer and innovator: somewhere outside the Benighted States of America, obviously.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31288760</id>
	<title>Re:yeah. its much better to be p0wned</title>
	<author>sucitivel83</author>
	<datestamp>1267213620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I appreciate your explanation, my definitions might be half-baked in some ways, but "capitalism" and "regulation" in the same sentence is a paradox-- the whole point of capitalism is that a deregulated market can find its own way (invisible hand).  I dunno if there is a truly "socialist" country in the world today (even china has rudimentary free markets in some sense), at the same rate there isn't a truly "capitalist" country either.
<br> <br>
Socialism doesn't work for the same reasons regulation of the free market has never yielded beneficial change in the long run... there simply isn't a person, or group of people, a committee if you will that can accurately predict economic causes.  When left to its own devices, a free market is self-regulating.
<br> <br>
In all, I wouldn't call any country on this planet "successful" socialist or not... we're in a global crisis right now with very few if any indications of positive change happening soon... caused in my opinion by decades of socialist leaning around the world. The true capitalist countries have faltered recently only because of their adoption of socialist principles, which has in a sense put them on the level with other truly socialized countries.  Otherwise all the capitalist countries would by pwning the fuck out of socialist countries right now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I appreciate your explanation , my definitions might be half-baked in some ways , but " capitalism " and " regulation " in the same sentence is a paradox-- the whole point of capitalism is that a deregulated market can find its own way ( invisible hand ) .
I dunno if there is a truly " socialist " country in the world today ( even china has rudimentary free markets in some sense ) , at the same rate there is n't a truly " capitalist " country either .
Socialism does n't work for the same reasons regulation of the free market has never yielded beneficial change in the long run... there simply is n't a person , or group of people , a committee if you will that can accurately predict economic causes .
When left to its own devices , a free market is self-regulating .
In all , I would n't call any country on this planet " successful " socialist or not... we 're in a global crisis right now with very few if any indications of positive change happening soon... caused in my opinion by decades of socialist leaning around the world .
The true capitalist countries have faltered recently only because of their adoption of socialist principles , which has in a sense put them on the level with other truly socialized countries .
Otherwise all the capitalist countries would by pwning the fuck out of socialist countries right now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I appreciate your explanation, my definitions might be half-baked in some ways, but "capitalism" and "regulation" in the same sentence is a paradox-- the whole point of capitalism is that a deregulated market can find its own way (invisible hand).
I dunno if there is a truly "socialist" country in the world today (even china has rudimentary free markets in some sense), at the same rate there isn't a truly "capitalist" country either.
Socialism doesn't work for the same reasons regulation of the free market has never yielded beneficial change in the long run... there simply isn't a person, or group of people, a committee if you will that can accurately predict economic causes.
When left to its own devices, a free market is self-regulating.
In all, I wouldn't call any country on this planet "successful" socialist or not... we're in a global crisis right now with very few if any indications of positive change happening soon... caused in my opinion by decades of socialist leaning around the world.
The true capitalist countries have faltered recently only because of their adoption of socialist principles, which has in a sense put them on the level with other truly socialized countries.
Otherwise all the capitalist countries would by pwning the fuck out of socialist countries right now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277818</id>
	<title>But where will the next Microsoft come from?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267093200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Somewhere other than the United States, I'm thinking.</p><p>Remember in the 1990's when ITAR (now EAR) made domestic crypto development and export such a pain in the backside?  Meanwhile, there was a ton of good symmetric and public key cryptography implementations of the very same algorithms available on a certain<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.fi FTP server in Finland.</p><p>The horse had already long left the barn and was now several fields over, but domestically, we were concerned that the barn door might get opened when the government wasn't approving.  Craziness.</p><p>These types of laws are no different.  Innovation will go where it is most free, and it will sell from there, and to those authors and countries will go the economic benefits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Somewhere other than the United States , I 'm thinking.Remember in the 1990 's when ITAR ( now EAR ) made domestic crypto development and export such a pain in the backside ?
Meanwhile , there was a ton of good symmetric and public key cryptography implementations of the very same algorithms available on a certain .fi FTP server in Finland.The horse had already long left the barn and was now several fields over , but domestically , we were concerned that the barn door might get opened when the government was n't approving .
Craziness.These types of laws are no different .
Innovation will go where it is most free , and it will sell from there , and to those authors and countries will go the economic benefits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Somewhere other than the United States, I'm thinking.Remember in the 1990's when ITAR (now EAR) made domestic crypto development and export such a pain in the backside?
Meanwhile, there was a ton of good symmetric and public key cryptography implementations of the very same algorithms available on a certain .fi FTP server in Finland.The horse had already long left the barn and was now several fields over, but domestically, we were concerned that the barn door might get opened when the government wasn't approving.
Craziness.These types of laws are no different.
Innovation will go where it is most free, and it will sell from there, and to those authors and countries will go the economic benefits.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278086</id>
	<title>This happened to inventors too</title>
	<author>gestalt\_n\_pepper</author>
	<datestamp>1267094280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Inventors with patents used to make money, but corporations make the laws in this country and have for a long time, despite grade school propaganda to the contrary. The independent entrepreneur is always a threat to large entrenched interests and will always be suppressed as much as possible without making the peasants revolt.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Inventors with patents used to make money , but corporations make the laws in this country and have for a long time , despite grade school propaganda to the contrary .
The independent entrepreneur is always a threat to large entrenched interests and will always be suppressed as much as possible without making the peasants revolt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Inventors with patents used to make money, but corporations make the laws in this country and have for a long time, despite grade school propaganda to the contrary.
The independent entrepreneur is always a threat to large entrenched interests and will always be suppressed as much as possible without making the peasants revolt.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277918</id>
	<title>Re:yeah. its much better to be p0wned</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267093620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No we need an "American party".  This partisan crap is getting as bad as all the nut-bag religions.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No we need an " American party " .
This partisan crap is getting as bad as all the nut-bag religions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No we need an "American party".
This partisan crap is getting as bad as all the nut-bag religions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277516</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281600</id>
	<title>Re:Ask Joe Stack</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267120320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, because when you just pay campaign bribes (err. donations) to congress to get yourself (and/or everyone you traded with) bailed out and then keep the money (goldmans?) as "profit" , thats not cheating..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , because when you just pay campaign bribes ( err .
donations ) to congress to get yourself ( and/or everyone you traded with ) bailed out and then keep the money ( goldmans ?
) as " profit " , thats not cheating. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, because when you just pay campaign bribes (err.
donations) to congress to get yourself (and/or everyone you traded with) bailed out and then keep the money (goldmans?
) as "profit" , thats not cheating..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277640</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31287242</id>
	<title>Re:More news at 11</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267208460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who the fuck modded you 'insightful'?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who the fuck modded you 'insightful ' ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who the fuck modded you 'insightful'?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276924</id>
	<title>Probably from universities...</title>
	<author>erikscott</author>
	<datestamp>1267089360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let's see - SAS from NC State, Linux from U. Helsinki, X11 from MIT, kerberos from MIT, BSD from Berkeley, Maple from Waterloo (?).  Matlab from U. of New Mexico.  Firefox from Mozilla from Netscape from Mosaic from UIUC.  I'd say pretty much any interesting software I can think of came from a university one way or another.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's see - SAS from NC State , Linux from U. Helsinki , X11 from MIT , kerberos from MIT , BSD from Berkeley , Maple from Waterloo ( ? ) .
Matlab from U. of New Mexico .
Firefox from Mozilla from Netscape from Mosaic from UIUC .
I 'd say pretty much any interesting software I can think of came from a university one way or another .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's see - SAS from NC State, Linux from U. Helsinki, X11 from MIT, kerberos from MIT, BSD from Berkeley, Maple from Waterloo (?).
Matlab from U. of New Mexico.
Firefox from Mozilla from Netscape from Mosaic from UIUC.
I'd say pretty much any interesting software I can think of came from a university one way or another.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281046</id>
	<title>Re:What a whiny load of crap.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267114260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You said it perfect. I have owned/operated my own S-Corp for about 10 years and have basically followed all 8 steps exactly.</p><p>It does take a certain type of person to tell the B. Lumbergs of the world to shove it and break out on your own.</p><p>One day I realized that I was not put on this earth to make somebody else rich.</p><p>The first few years were tough, but once things got rolling it was the best career move I have ever made.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You said it perfect .
I have owned/operated my own S-Corp for about 10 years and have basically followed all 8 steps exactly.It does take a certain type of person to tell the B. Lumbergs of the world to shove it and break out on your own.One day I realized that I was not put on this earth to make somebody else rich.The first few years were tough , but once things got rolling it was the best career move I have ever made .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You said it perfect.
I have owned/operated my own S-Corp for about 10 years and have basically followed all 8 steps exactly.It does take a certain type of person to tell the B. Lumbergs of the world to shove it and break out on your own.One day I realized that I was not put on this earth to make somebody else rich.The first few years were tough, but once things got rolling it was the best career move I have ever made.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277970</id>
	<title>Re:What a whiny load of crap.</title>
	<author>edmicman</author>
	<datestamp>1267093800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Adwords on the website would take care of that, right?  Any little bit would count, and it would all be a loss writeoff anyway wouldn't it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Adwords on the website would take care of that , right ?
Any little bit would count , and it would all be a loss writeoff anyway would n't it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Adwords on the website would take care of that, right?
Any little bit would count, and it would all be a loss writeoff anyway wouldn't it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278942</id>
	<title>Re:What a whiny load of crap.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267097640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then take it to a f*cking jury.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then take it to a f * cking jury .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then take it to a f*cking jury.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31289510</id>
	<title>Re:Just SOP</title>
	<author>commodore64\_love</author>
	<datestamp>1267216620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;&gt;he CEO of a major corporation could just as easily donate funds under his own name with a little post-it note asking for laws that help his corporation.</p><p>Yes he could, but he'd only be donating his own money, not raiding his emmployees' paychecks for cash and giving it away.  Also we have laws that limit how much a person can give ($4000 last I checked) whereas no such law exists for a corporation.  So the CEO really wouldn't have much power overall.</p><p>And most importantly, corporations would be blocked from hiring lobbyists, due to not having free speech rights.  They wouldn't be able to hijack our healthcare like they are doing now with the Obamacare bill.</p><p>&gt;&gt;&gt;Where did this originate? Fox News?</p><p>Hardly - they are probusiness. Try the Progressive Party and Greens.  Also Thomas Jefferson said corporations threatened to destroy democracy by becoming more powerful than the People's government.  Any power concentrated in the hands of a few, whether its a government or a board of directors, is dangerous to human liberty.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; &gt; he CEO of a major corporation could just as easily donate funds under his own name with a little post-it note asking for laws that help his corporation.Yes he could , but he 'd only be donating his own money , not raiding his emmployees ' paychecks for cash and giving it away .
Also we have laws that limit how much a person can give ( $ 4000 last I checked ) whereas no such law exists for a corporation .
So the CEO really would n't have much power overall.And most importantly , corporations would be blocked from hiring lobbyists , due to not having free speech rights .
They would n't be able to hijack our healthcare like they are doing now with the Obamacare bill. &gt; &gt; &gt; Where did this originate ?
Fox News ? Hardly - they are probusiness .
Try the Progressive Party and Greens .
Also Thomas Jefferson said corporations threatened to destroy democracy by becoming more powerful than the People 's government .
Any power concentrated in the hands of a few , whether its a government or a board of directors , is dangerous to human liberty .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;&gt;he CEO of a major corporation could just as easily donate funds under his own name with a little post-it note asking for laws that help his corporation.Yes he could, but he'd only be donating his own money, not raiding his emmployees' paychecks for cash and giving it away.
Also we have laws that limit how much a person can give ($4000 last I checked) whereas no such law exists for a corporation.
So the CEO really wouldn't have much power overall.And most importantly, corporations would be blocked from hiring lobbyists, due to not having free speech rights.
They wouldn't be able to hijack our healthcare like they are doing now with the Obamacare bill.&gt;&gt;&gt;Where did this originate?
Fox News?Hardly - they are probusiness.
Try the Progressive Party and Greens.
Also Thomas Jefferson said corporations threatened to destroy democracy by becoming more powerful than the People's government.
Any power concentrated in the hands of a few, whether its a government or a board of directors, is dangerous to human liberty.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279098</id>
	<title>I'm glad you agree with me, stylistically...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267098360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have long been an advocate of the use of unqualified generalizations in expressed judgments.  However, I disagree with you about the doctors.  Because some of them occasionally do plastic surgery for people I don't like (as opposed to burn victims, whom I just don't hear about), I have nothing but contempt for the entire profession.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have long been an advocate of the use of unqualified generalizations in expressed judgments .
However , I disagree with you about the doctors .
Because some of them occasionally do plastic surgery for people I do n't like ( as opposed to burn victims , whom I just do n't hear about ) , I have nothing but contempt for the entire profession .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have long been an advocate of the use of unqualified generalizations in expressed judgments.
However, I disagree with you about the doctors.
Because some of them occasionally do plastic surgery for people I don't like (as opposed to burn victims, whom I just don't hear about), I have nothing but contempt for the entire profession.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277750</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31284548</id>
	<title>Re:More news at 11</title>
	<author>zamfield</author>
	<datestamp>1267197240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Licensing professionals is another method large corporate / old wealth interest use to limit competition.  The original industrialists, like Ford and Carnegie do not want independent producers to compete with them.  It happened to every tradesperson since the mid 1800s.  Requirements for professional licensing cuts the supply of labor, raises the market prices for those still participating and increases the demand for those skills and products.  With the market primed, a corporation with near unlimited capital and fully limited liability comes in with mass produced and cost minimized solutions that undercut any professionals left in the market.  The result is few if any licensed professionals remain sole proprietors or partners for long.  Eventually they take the work at the nearby factory for less money, paying more for "professional" services like doctors and accountants (death and taxes).  Those company benefits come out of their wages and most of their annual raises will go towards maintaining their health insurance.
</p><p>Take the early Mini / Personal Computer days for programmers.  Very little off the shelf software existed.  Business had little choice but to hire free-lance programmers to write custom software.  Most needed to keep these programmers on retainer in order to make quick alterations of code to meet new market conditions and all were worried about long term support.  The independent programmer could have made a career at one or two firms just as a lawyer or accountant might today if they have large clients.
</p><p>But in order for off the shelf software to have a serious market in large enterprises, the independent programmer would have to go.  So they get the "professional" treatment just like all other tradespeople have received.  Certifications are issued and packaged software professionals are the replacement for highly skilled and familiar free-lance custom designers.  Business adjusts to an inferior product and less competent labor in order to perpetuate the idea that bigger is better and a piece of paper is more important that practical know-how.  Everyone is expected to get back in line, the wild frontier is now closed to the general public, come back in fifty years for the grand opening of the hacker museum were we celebrate how much better it now that nanny Micro-Mac-Bm provides all our "trusted" information needs with new titillating models coming next month.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Licensing professionals is another method large corporate / old wealth interest use to limit competition .
The original industrialists , like Ford and Carnegie do not want independent producers to compete with them .
It happened to every tradesperson since the mid 1800s .
Requirements for professional licensing cuts the supply of labor , raises the market prices for those still participating and increases the demand for those skills and products .
With the market primed , a corporation with near unlimited capital and fully limited liability comes in with mass produced and cost minimized solutions that undercut any professionals left in the market .
The result is few if any licensed professionals remain sole proprietors or partners for long .
Eventually they take the work at the nearby factory for less money , paying more for " professional " services like doctors and accountants ( death and taxes ) .
Those company benefits come out of their wages and most of their annual raises will go towards maintaining their health insurance .
Take the early Mini / Personal Computer days for programmers .
Very little off the shelf software existed .
Business had little choice but to hire free-lance programmers to write custom software .
Most needed to keep these programmers on retainer in order to make quick alterations of code to meet new market conditions and all were worried about long term support .
The independent programmer could have made a career at one or two firms just as a lawyer or accountant might today if they have large clients .
But in order for off the shelf software to have a serious market in large enterprises , the independent programmer would have to go .
So they get the " professional " treatment just like all other tradespeople have received .
Certifications are issued and packaged software professionals are the replacement for highly skilled and familiar free-lance custom designers .
Business adjusts to an inferior product and less competent labor in order to perpetuate the idea that bigger is better and a piece of paper is more important that practical know-how .
Everyone is expected to get back in line , the wild frontier is now closed to the general public , come back in fifty years for the grand opening of the hacker museum were we celebrate how much better it now that nanny Micro-Mac-Bm provides all our " trusted " information needs with new titillating models coming next month .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Licensing professionals is another method large corporate / old wealth interest use to limit competition.
The original industrialists, like Ford and Carnegie do not want independent producers to compete with them.
It happened to every tradesperson since the mid 1800s.
Requirements for professional licensing cuts the supply of labor, raises the market prices for those still participating and increases the demand for those skills and products.
With the market primed, a corporation with near unlimited capital and fully limited liability comes in with mass produced and cost minimized solutions that undercut any professionals left in the market.
The result is few if any licensed professionals remain sole proprietors or partners for long.
Eventually they take the work at the nearby factory for less money, paying more for "professional" services like doctors and accountants (death and taxes).
Those company benefits come out of their wages and most of their annual raises will go towards maintaining their health insurance.
Take the early Mini / Personal Computer days for programmers.
Very little off the shelf software existed.
Business had little choice but to hire free-lance programmers to write custom software.
Most needed to keep these programmers on retainer in order to make quick alterations of code to meet new market conditions and all were worried about long term support.
The independent programmer could have made a career at one or two firms just as a lawyer or accountant might today if they have large clients.
But in order for off the shelf software to have a serious market in large enterprises, the independent programmer would have to go.
So they get the "professional" treatment just like all other tradespeople have received.
Certifications are issued and packaged software professionals are the replacement for highly skilled and familiar free-lance custom designers.
Business adjusts to an inferior product and less competent labor in order to perpetuate the idea that bigger is better and a piece of paper is more important that practical know-how.
Everyone is expected to get back in line, the wild frontier is now closed to the general public, come back in fifty years for the grand opening of the hacker museum were we celebrate how much better it now that nanny Micro-Mac-Bm provides all our "trusted" information needs with new titillating models coming next month.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277880</id>
	<title>This is why I recommend against entering the field</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267093440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Spend $50k to $80k on a degree.</p><p>Get a job with required overtime, required holiday work, low status, poor dating prospects.</p><p>At least you used to have freedom, security, and high pay.</p><p>Now you've lost freedom (sarbanes oxley is horrific.  at my company, a one line change requires review and approval by multiple people (including me as I'm a supervisor).</p><p>You lost your security since so many jobs are being offshored (at my company we are down about 35 people and up about 80ish indians onshore and probably another 150 indians offshore.).</p><p>And lately, you've lost the high pay.  I have friends who only make about $58k a year.  That's about $46k after taxes but let's say $48k.  Interest on the college debts is $4k a year.  How do they live?</p><p>Stay away from computing for corporations.  It's a terrible job right now.  Perhaps things will be better once the dollar falls enough or enough baby boomers retire.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Spend $ 50k to $ 80k on a degree.Get a job with required overtime , required holiday work , low status , poor dating prospects.At least you used to have freedom , security , and high pay.Now you 've lost freedom ( sarbanes oxley is horrific .
at my company , a one line change requires review and approval by multiple people ( including me as I 'm a supervisor ) .You lost your security since so many jobs are being offshored ( at my company we are down about 35 people and up about 80ish indians onshore and probably another 150 indians offshore .
) .And lately , you 've lost the high pay .
I have friends who only make about $ 58k a year .
That 's about $ 46k after taxes but let 's say $ 48k .
Interest on the college debts is $ 4k a year .
How do they live ? Stay away from computing for corporations .
It 's a terrible job right now .
Perhaps things will be better once the dollar falls enough or enough baby boomers retire .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spend $50k to $80k on a degree.Get a job with required overtime, required holiday work, low status, poor dating prospects.At least you used to have freedom, security, and high pay.Now you've lost freedom (sarbanes oxley is horrific.
at my company, a one line change requires review and approval by multiple people (including me as I'm a supervisor).You lost your security since so many jobs are being offshored (at my company we are down about 35 people and up about 80ish indians onshore and probably another 150 indians offshore.
).And lately, you've lost the high pay.
I have friends who only make about $58k a year.
That's about $46k after taxes but let's say $48k.
Interest on the college debts is $4k a year.
How do they live?Stay away from computing for corporations.
It's a terrible job right now.
Perhaps things will be better once the dollar falls enough or enough baby boomers retire.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279086</id>
	<title>Re:More news at 11</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267098300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Word.  I needed that as I was suffering from lifelong geek elitism.  Pinch... no, still am.</p><p>When half these idiots can program and or understand these simple machines then maybe I will consider myself worthy of being treated like an idiot.</p><p>I do not work in the industry by choice.  I develop for myself and my clients and just the thrill of it.  You really want to get off and feel like your better than these idiots?  Create something.  Make something.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Word .
I needed that as I was suffering from lifelong geek elitism .
Pinch... no , still am.When half these idiots can program and or understand these simple machines then maybe I will consider myself worthy of being treated like an idiot.I do not work in the industry by choice .
I develop for myself and my clients and just the thrill of it .
You really want to get off and feel like your better than these idiots ?
Create something .
Make something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Word.
I needed that as I was suffering from lifelong geek elitism.
Pinch... no, still am.When half these idiots can program and or understand these simple machines then maybe I will consider myself worthy of being treated like an idiot.I do not work in the industry by choice.
I develop for myself and my clients and just the thrill of it.
You really want to get off and feel like your better than these idiots?
Create something.
Make something.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278966</id>
	<title>Independant Programmers....</title>
	<author>hackus</author>
	<datestamp>1267097700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In THE United Fascist States of AMERICA programmers have these problems.</p><p>Which means no, intelligent people do have a choice who write software.  Its called off shoring.</p><p>If the big guys can do it, so can the little guys, and too a much greater affect might I add.</p><p>So if your a company like Microsoft who has been blowing disinformation about not finding enough skilled labor like a lof of American companies do, surprise, you just might actually have that problem in the future and it might not actually be all lies.</p><p>If you are a talented programmer, move off shore: LOW medical expenses, LOW cost of living and virtually no legal issues.</p><p>People have to understand this whole thing is by design.</p><p>America is a fascist state, and now that all of government is controlled by unethical people in Wall Street and Banking, any competition to any other business the government favors is going to get whacked hard.</p><p>If I actually owned a business I would shut it down and move it off shore to the far east.</p><p>Good Luck Obama telling the Chinese how to run things.  If you try you will get your arse kicked.</p><p>-Hack</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In THE United Fascist States of AMERICA programmers have these problems.Which means no , intelligent people do have a choice who write software .
Its called off shoring.If the big guys can do it , so can the little guys , and too a much greater affect might I add.So if your a company like Microsoft who has been blowing disinformation about not finding enough skilled labor like a lof of American companies do , surprise , you just might actually have that problem in the future and it might not actually be all lies.If you are a talented programmer , move off shore : LOW medical expenses , LOW cost of living and virtually no legal issues.People have to understand this whole thing is by design.America is a fascist state , and now that all of government is controlled by unethical people in Wall Street and Banking , any competition to any other business the government favors is going to get whacked hard.If I actually owned a business I would shut it down and move it off shore to the far east.Good Luck Obama telling the Chinese how to run things .
If you try you will get your arse kicked.-Hack</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In THE United Fascist States of AMERICA programmers have these problems.Which means no, intelligent people do have a choice who write software.
Its called off shoring.If the big guys can do it, so can the little guys, and too a much greater affect might I add.So if your a company like Microsoft who has been blowing disinformation about not finding enough skilled labor like a lof of American companies do, surprise, you just might actually have that problem in the future and it might not actually be all lies.If you are a talented programmer, move off shore: LOW medical expenses, LOW cost of living and virtually no legal issues.People have to understand this whole thing is by design.America is a fascist state, and now that all of government is controlled by unethical people in Wall Street and Banking, any competition to any other business the government favors is going to get whacked hard.If I actually owned a business I would shut it down and move it off shore to the far east.Good Luck Obama telling the Chinese how to run things.
If you try you will get your arse kicked.-Hack</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31289626</id>
	<title>Re:Just SOP</title>
	<author>commodore64\_love</author>
	<datestamp>1267217220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;&gt;I don't know about that. Corporations are not just things, they are collections of people</p><p>Yes, but even if the Corporations lose their right to free speech (no donations/lobbyists), the people inside the corporation still retain their rights.  While Comcast might be silenced from lobbying, if the Comcast employees want to speak-out and say "Comcast is great" they still can.</p><p>And as for assembling, the Right refers to *voluntary* assembling.  There's nothing voluntary about a job, since you either have the right to show up, or the right to be fired and possibly go years without finding another job.   (Like I'm doing right now.)  Working for a corporation is very similar to working for a Lord of a manor - you exercise your rights; you get kicked out.  Or you keep silent and keep your position.  It's not true freedom.</p><p>Anyway taking away Comcast's right to lobby doesn't affect the rights of the People inside the organization.  They can still lobby if they so desire.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; &gt; I do n't know about that .
Corporations are not just things , they are collections of peopleYes , but even if the Corporations lose their right to free speech ( no donations/lobbyists ) , the people inside the corporation still retain their rights .
While Comcast might be silenced from lobbying , if the Comcast employees want to speak-out and say " Comcast is great " they still can.And as for assembling , the Right refers to * voluntary * assembling .
There 's nothing voluntary about a job , since you either have the right to show up , or the right to be fired and possibly go years without finding another job .
( Like I 'm doing right now .
) Working for a corporation is very similar to working for a Lord of a manor - you exercise your rights ; you get kicked out .
Or you keep silent and keep your position .
It 's not true freedom.Anyway taking away Comcast 's right to lobby does n't affect the rights of the People inside the organization .
They can still lobby if they so desire .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;&gt;I don't know about that.
Corporations are not just things, they are collections of peopleYes, but even if the Corporations lose their right to free speech (no donations/lobbyists), the people inside the corporation still retain their rights.
While Comcast might be silenced from lobbying, if the Comcast employees want to speak-out and say "Comcast is great" they still can.And as for assembling, the Right refers to *voluntary* assembling.
There's nothing voluntary about a job, since you either have the right to show up, or the right to be fired and possibly go years without finding another job.
(Like I'm doing right now.
)  Working for a corporation is very similar to working for a Lord of a manor - you exercise your rights; you get kicked out.
Or you keep silent and keep your position.
It's not true freedom.Anyway taking away Comcast's right to lobby doesn't affect the rights of the People inside the organization.
They can still lobby if they so desire.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280992</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930</id>
	<title>Just SOP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267089360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The corporations use bribes to buy politicians.  The politicians write the laws the corporations wants.  And the laws the corporations want are protective laws which discourage indepdent businesses (programmers or otherwise).</p><p>It doesn't matter whether we're talling about RIAA, Hollywood, Comcast, or Microsoft.  It's all the same operating procedure.</p><p>Corporations should have their free speech rights taken away (lobbyists/bribes).<br>They have no more rights than a Tree or a rock.<br>They are not THINGS not people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The corporations use bribes to buy politicians .
The politicians write the laws the corporations wants .
And the laws the corporations want are protective laws which discourage indepdent businesses ( programmers or otherwise ) .It does n't matter whether we 're talling about RIAA , Hollywood , Comcast , or Microsoft .
It 's all the same operating procedure.Corporations should have their free speech rights taken away ( lobbyists/bribes ) .They have no more rights than a Tree or a rock.They are not THINGS not people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The corporations use bribes to buy politicians.
The politicians write the laws the corporations wants.
And the laws the corporations want are protective laws which discourage indepdent businesses (programmers or otherwise).It doesn't matter whether we're talling about RIAA, Hollywood, Comcast, or Microsoft.
It's all the same operating procedure.Corporations should have their free speech rights taken away (lobbyists/bribes).They have no more rights than a Tree or a rock.They are not THINGS not people.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280880</id>
	<title>Re:socialized medicine...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267112400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Come to Massachusetts, you can check the premiums at "https://www.mahealthconnector.org/portal/site/connector/" just remember to use a MA zip code like 01507 when it asks for your zip code</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Come to Massachusetts , you can check the premiums at " https : //www.mahealthconnector.org/portal/site/connector/ " just remember to use a MA zip code like 01507 when it asks for your zip code</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Come to Massachusetts, you can check the premiums at "https://www.mahealthconnector.org/portal/site/connector/" just remember to use a MA zip code like 01507 when it asks for your zip code</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277136</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276818</id>
	<title>yeah. its much better to be p0wned</title>
	<author>FudRucker</author>
	<datestamp>1267089000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>its much better to work for some huge soulless corporate pig where everything you create is owned by the pig and all you get is a measly salary and the pig gets richer and fatter while you wonder if you have enough to retire on at 65</htmltext>
<tokenext>its much better to work for some huge soulless corporate pig where everything you create is owned by the pig and all you get is a measly salary and the pig gets richer and fatter while you wonder if you have enough to retire on at 65</tokentext>
<sentencetext>its much better to work for some huge soulless corporate pig where everything you create is owned by the pig and all you get is a measly salary and the pig gets richer and fatter while you wonder if you have enough to retire on at 65</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277518</id>
	<title>"status quo is the highest goal"</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1267091760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Welcome to the land of Socialism. Tho you are a bit late noticing, have a nice stay, and can I have that loaf of bread you are carrying?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Welcome to the land of Socialism .
Tho you are a bit late noticing , have a nice stay , and can I have that loaf of bread you are carrying ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Welcome to the land of Socialism.
Tho you are a bit late noticing, have a nice stay, and can I have that loaf of bread you are carrying?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277448</id>
	<title>This just in: Another industry goes borg</title>
	<author>Gabrill</author>
	<datestamp>1267091400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another cottage industry gets swallowed up by corporations who are able to spread risk and cost among a pool of workers and goods.  Wal-mart all over again.  Just ask the Mom &amp; Pop stores for a good reference.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another cottage industry gets swallowed up by corporations who are able to spread risk and cost among a pool of workers and goods .
Wal-mart all over again .
Just ask the Mom &amp; Pop stores for a good reference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another cottage industry gets swallowed up by corporations who are able to spread risk and cost among a pool of workers and goods.
Wal-mart all over again.
Just ask the Mom &amp; Pop stores for a good reference.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280526</id>
	<title>Re:Just SOP</title>
	<author>drfreak</author>
	<datestamp>1267108680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>THINGS might bet a bit harsh. I prefer to use the word "asset". Still able to be filed away forever or transferred at a moment's notice though.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>THINGS might bet a bit harsh .
I prefer to use the word " asset " .
Still able to be filed away forever or transferred at a moment 's notice though .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>THINGS might bet a bit harsh.
I prefer to use the word "asset".
Still able to be filed away forever or transferred at a moment's notice though.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31289054</id>
	<title>Re:More news at 11</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267214760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except for those of us who can generate more code by ourselves than a team of 20 people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except for those of us who can generate more code by ourselves than a team of 20 people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except for those of us who can generate more code by ourselves than a team of 20 people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281890</id>
	<title>Re:OK.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267124100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I know a lot of small business owners that can not grow there business because the cost of health care is too high.</p></div><p>Yeah, this is fucking hilarious.</p><p>I give two shits about rinky-dink small businesses that can't grow because they can't pack more expensive employees into their poorly-designed cubicle farms, and whose managers are too fucking stupid to come up with more efficient ways to work.</p><p>Meanwhile software programmers who can easily replace 3-5 employees each are prevented from doing so due to stupid laws.</p><p>It's going to be real sad in America 20 years from now, when India/China collectively reach the "information age" stage of development and we still haven't gotten our shit together.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I know a lot of small business owners that can not grow there business because the cost of health care is too high.Yeah , this is fucking hilarious.I give two shits about rinky-dink small businesses that ca n't grow because they ca n't pack more expensive employees into their poorly-designed cubicle farms , and whose managers are too fucking stupid to come up with more efficient ways to work.Meanwhile software programmers who can easily replace 3-5 employees each are prevented from doing so due to stupid laws.It 's going to be real sad in America 20 years from now , when India/China collectively reach the " information age " stage of development and we still have n't gotten our shit together .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know a lot of small business owners that can not grow there business because the cost of health care is too high.Yeah, this is fucking hilarious.I give two shits about rinky-dink small businesses that can't grow because they can't pack more expensive employees into their poorly-designed cubicle farms, and whose managers are too fucking stupid to come up with more efficient ways to work.Meanwhile software programmers who can easily replace 3-5 employees each are prevented from doing so due to stupid laws.It's going to be real sad in America 20 years from now, when India/China collectively reach the "information age" stage of development and we still haven't gotten our shit together.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31283416</id>
	<title>Re:yeah. its much better to be p0wned</title>
	<author>ultranova</author>
	<datestamp>1267187460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>And nutbags? what's so nutty about any of the libertarian positions? if you think about them for half a minute, and don't just knee jerk react to the views, i don't think you'd find they're nutty.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Libertarianism boils down to protecting property rights at any cost, and only them. If implemented, it would slant the playing field even more for the advantage of the rich against everyone else. I, for one, do not wish to re-enact Dark Ages with myself as a serf.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And nutbags ?
what 's so nutty about any of the libertarian positions ?
if you think about them for half a minute , and do n't just knee jerk react to the views , i do n't think you 'd find they 're nutty .
Libertarianism boils down to protecting property rights at any cost , and only them .
If implemented , it would slant the playing field even more for the advantage of the rich against everyone else .
I , for one , do not wish to re-enact Dark Ages with myself as a serf .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And nutbags?
what's so nutty about any of the libertarian positions?
if you think about them for half a minute, and don't just knee jerk react to the views, i don't think you'd find they're nutty.
Libertarianism boils down to protecting property rights at any cost, and only them.
If implemented, it would slant the playing field even more for the advantage of the rich against everyone else.
I, for one, do not wish to re-enact Dark Ages with myself as a serf.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277958</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280698</id>
	<title>Re:Most valuable my ass</title>
	<author>Betaemacs</author>
	<datestamp>1267110240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How does this statement, "In a knowledge economy, programmers rank among our most valuable workers" have anything to do with the most important professions in civilization?

If you conflate two very different concepts and then use it as an opportunity to bash programmers. That would seem to me at least to be trolling, instead it's insightful. Go figure.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How does this statement , " In a knowledge economy , programmers rank among our most valuable workers " have anything to do with the most important professions in civilization ?
If you conflate two very different concepts and then use it as an opportunity to bash programmers .
That would seem to me at least to be trolling , instead it 's insightful .
Go figure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does this statement, "In a knowledge economy, programmers rank among our most valuable workers" have anything to do with the most important professions in civilization?
If you conflate two very different concepts and then use it as an opportunity to bash programmers.
That would seem to me at least to be trolling, instead it's insightful.
Go figure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277750</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281858</id>
	<title>Re:Why now?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267123560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Totally agree.  If you have no imagination you're finished.  It's not that hard.  Starting out, maybe, but once you get going, my resume , even with one year contracts is now five pages long.  There is no way in hell anyone can claim I am an employee and make it stick.  Plus I am my own corp and follow the IRS rules and guidelines with my corporate accountant so no, it's no big deal - if you figured it out.   You just have to figure all the steps out and quit listening to the self-defeating-FUD.  Just like there is a difference between a good programmer and a bad programmer, there is a difference between getting it and not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Totally agree .
If you have no imagination you 're finished .
It 's not that hard .
Starting out , maybe , but once you get going , my resume , even with one year contracts is now five pages long .
There is no way in hell anyone can claim I am an employee and make it stick .
Plus I am my own corp and follow the IRS rules and guidelines with my corporate accountant so no , it 's no big deal - if you figured it out .
You just have to figure all the steps out and quit listening to the self-defeating-FUD .
Just like there is a difference between a good programmer and a bad programmer , there is a difference between getting it and not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Totally agree.
If you have no imagination you're finished.
It's not that hard.
Starting out, maybe, but once you get going, my resume , even with one year contracts is now five pages long.
There is no way in hell anyone can claim I am an employee and make it stick.
Plus I am my own corp and follow the IRS rules and guidelines with my corporate accountant so no, it's no big deal - if you figured it out.
You just have to figure all the steps out and quit listening to the self-defeating-FUD.
Just like there is a difference between a good programmer and a bad programmer, there is a difference between getting it and not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276892</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279458</id>
	<title>Raise you hands</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267100640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Raise your hands if this has happened to you.  I thought not.  The key here is that the amount of money being made vs the difficulty in collecting the taxes on it.  They are trying to avoid tax cheating.  Anyway, a company would never hire a programmer per se, they would be a "consultant" or an "engineer".  They get around the limits of the categories.  Likewise, you hire people who have day jobs.  There are also lists that rank countries on how easy it is to do business or start a business and the US usually comes out on top.  The bottom line is that there are the written rules and then there are the real world rules.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Raise your hands if this has happened to you .
I thought not .
The key here is that the amount of money being made vs the difficulty in collecting the taxes on it .
They are trying to avoid tax cheating .
Anyway , a company would never hire a programmer per se , they would be a " consultant " or an " engineer " .
They get around the limits of the categories .
Likewise , you hire people who have day jobs .
There are also lists that rank countries on how easy it is to do business or start a business and the US usually comes out on top .
The bottom line is that there are the written rules and then there are the real world rules .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Raise your hands if this has happened to you.
I thought not.
The key here is that the amount of money being made vs the difficulty in collecting the taxes on it.
They are trying to avoid tax cheating.
Anyway, a company would never hire a programmer per se, they would be a "consultant" or an "engineer".
They get around the limits of the categories.
Likewise, you hire people who have day jobs.
There are also lists that rank countries on how easy it is to do business or start a business and the US usually comes out on top.
The bottom line is that there are the written rules and then there are the real world rules.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280458</id>
	<title>Re:yeah. its much better to be p0wned</title>
	<author>turbidostato</author>
	<datestamp>1267108080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"if you think about them for half a minute, and don't just knee jerk react to the views, i don't think you'd find they're nutty."</p><p>Probably you are right.  It's when you think about it five minutes or more when you find what a dumb idea it is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" if you think about them for half a minute , and do n't just knee jerk react to the views , i do n't think you 'd find they 're nutty .
" Probably you are right .
It 's when you think about it five minutes or more when you find what a dumb idea it is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"if you think about them for half a minute, and don't just knee jerk react to the views, i don't think you'd find they're nutty.
"Probably you are right.
It's when you think about it five minutes or more when you find what a dumb idea it is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277958</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277204</id>
	<title>Poor programmers...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267090440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another article about how programmers are somehow better than anyone else in the SERVICE industry.  Here's a tip for you...  Everyone working on their own or owner of a small company doing service work has the same responsibilities and various legal obligations as well.  If a dude putting a new roof on your house causes your roof to collapse, it is his contractor license and insurance carrying ass that is liable for the damages, as is the landscape company that cuts into your underground power line or knocks a branch into your car or house, as is the low life plumber that is installing your gas hot water heater if your house explodes.  Welcome to reality where your dreams and expectations were wrong, you are actually not untouchable and are replaceable by someone else in your field because the barrier to entry to join starts with nothing more than a computer, some software, and a desire.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another article about how programmers are somehow better than anyone else in the SERVICE industry .
Here 's a tip for you... Everyone working on their own or owner of a small company doing service work has the same responsibilities and various legal obligations as well .
If a dude putting a new roof on your house causes your roof to collapse , it is his contractor license and insurance carrying ass that is liable for the damages , as is the landscape company that cuts into your underground power line or knocks a branch into your car or house , as is the low life plumber that is installing your gas hot water heater if your house explodes .
Welcome to reality where your dreams and expectations were wrong , you are actually not untouchable and are replaceable by someone else in your field because the barrier to entry to join starts with nothing more than a computer , some software , and a desire .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another article about how programmers are somehow better than anyone else in the SERVICE industry.
Here's a tip for you...  Everyone working on their own or owner of a small company doing service work has the same responsibilities and various legal obligations as well.
If a dude putting a new roof on your house causes your roof to collapse, it is his contractor license and insurance carrying ass that is liable for the damages, as is the landscape company that cuts into your underground power line or knocks a branch into your car or house, as is the low life plumber that is installing your gas hot water heater if your house explodes.
Welcome to reality where your dreams and expectations were wrong, you are actually not untouchable and are replaceable by someone else in your field because the barrier to entry to join starts with nothing more than a computer, some software, and a desire.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280118</id>
	<title>Re:What a whiny load of crap.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267105320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Step 7. Get health coverage. We found insurance through a local trade group for $600 a month for my wife and I. Pay it out of the company, it's a write off.</p></div><p>I followed every step up to here. Could not locate any means, no group, no carrier, no nothing. My wife has preexisting conditions, and the insurance companies would not cover her, not for any price.</p><p>This continued for two years. I billed 80 dollars an hour on 60 hour weeks for two years, and the LLC built up quite the bankroll. I had to end it, however, because my wife needs ( thankfully, not immediately ) surgery. I took a 40\% pay cut to become a plain old employee, and now she has coverage. I'm grateful she does, and I'd make the same decision again, absent the ability to find coverage independently.</p><p>I'd sure like that money, though.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Step 7 .
Get health coverage .
We found insurance through a local trade group for $ 600 a month for my wife and I. Pay it out of the company , it 's a write off.I followed every step up to here .
Could not locate any means , no group , no carrier , no nothing .
My wife has preexisting conditions , and the insurance companies would not cover her , not for any price.This continued for two years .
I billed 80 dollars an hour on 60 hour weeks for two years , and the LLC built up quite the bankroll .
I had to end it , however , because my wife needs ( thankfully , not immediately ) surgery .
I took a 40 \ % pay cut to become a plain old employee , and now she has coverage .
I 'm grateful she does , and I 'd make the same decision again , absent the ability to find coverage independently.I 'd sure like that money , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Step 7.
Get health coverage.
We found insurance through a local trade group for $600 a month for my wife and I. Pay it out of the company, it's a write off.I followed every step up to here.
Could not locate any means, no group, no carrier, no nothing.
My wife has preexisting conditions, and the insurance companies would not cover her, not for any price.This continued for two years.
I billed 80 dollars an hour on 60 hour weeks for two years, and the LLC built up quite the bankroll.
I had to end it, however, because my wife needs ( thankfully, not immediately ) surgery.
I took a 40\% pay cut to become a plain old employee, and now she has coverage.
I'm grateful she does, and I'd make the same decision again, absent the ability to find coverage independently.I'd sure like that money, though.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31292158</id>
	<title>Re:yeah. its much better to be p0wned</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1267187220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I appreciate your explanation, my definitions might be half-baked in some ways, but "capitalism" and "regulation" in the same sentence is a paradox-- the whole point of capitalism is that a deregulated market can find its own way (invisible hand).</p></div><p>Again, not really. What you describe is laissez-faire capitalism, which is merely a subset. Capitalism, in general, is defined by the right to own and trade private property, and specifically factors of production - namely land and <b>capital</b> (hence the name "capitalism").</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I dunno if there is a truly "socialist" country in the world today (even china has rudimentary free markets in some sense), at the same rate there isn't a truly "capitalist" country either.</p></div><p>Generally agreed. As for specifics...</p><p>China is unabashedly capitalist, actually. It's also heavily regulated to reach certain goals set by the state, so the overall system is closest to fascism.</p><p>A "100\% socialist" country today would probably be North Korea, at least if you discount tourist shops.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Socialism doesn't work for the same reasons regulation of the free market has never yielded beneficial change in the long run... there simply isn't a person, or group of people, a committee if you will that can accurately predict economic causes. When left to its own devices, a free market is self-regulating.</p></div><p>Socialism that was tried failed for other reasons. Most importantly, it failed because it was of a statist kind, and the state did not represent the interests of the people (i.e. it was not democratic). Consequently, people did not feel any responsibility towards meeting the set goals, because it was not <em>their</em> goals - the whole "they pretend that they pay us, and we pretend that we work" kind of thing. At that state, socialism essentially equals slavery.</p><p>Planning was also a problem, but again, not due to lack of prediction ability, but due to corruption in the system. A "bright idea" of some high-ranked party official would overrule any and all rational arguments raised by people qualified in the people; furthermore, because meddling with party career of your higher-up could be extremely damaging for your own, people would tend to keep it hush in the first place. That is the flaw of any large authoritarian system, capitalist or not.</p><p>The only time I can think of where the world did come close to actually seeing how a democratic and technocratic socialist system (which wouldn't have these problems, at least in theory - not that it couldn't have other problems) could work out was in Chile, but Pinochet messed that up, unfortunately. So it's still all purely hypothetical either way.</p><p>As for "regulation of the free market has never yielded beneficial change in the long run" - said regulation was introduced largely in response to the hugely detrimental effects of private monopolies that formed in largely unregulated market at the end of 19th century. The beneficial changes are many, and primarily have to do with business not dealing with people as cattle to be worked to death anymore. I guess that you wouldn't call that beneficial if your sole criteria is that elusive "market efficiency", though...</p><p><div class="quote"><p>In all, I wouldn't call any country on this planet "successful" socialist or not... we're in a global crisis right now with very few if any indications of positive change happening soon... caused in my opinion by decades of socialist leaning around the world.</p></div><p>Ugh... I don't even know where to start here. The global consensus by a <em>huge</em> margin is that what got us into this mess was rapid deregulation of markets that started in 80s, especially so in U.S. Heck, even the people responsible (like Greenspun) said as much!</p><p>It's also immediately visible by who is affected worst. Compare U.S., and, say, Canada. You know that no banks were bailed out in Canada, because none went down in the first place? And guess why? Because banks in Canada were much heavier regulated in many things, including how much risky they can get with other people's money, and to whom they can hand out credits.</p><p>Meanwhile, a lot of countries around the world that were libertarian showcases (such as Baltics) were decimated by the whole thing, with economy crashing and burning practically overnight...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I appreciate your explanation , my definitions might be half-baked in some ways , but " capitalism " and " regulation " in the same sentence is a paradox-- the whole point of capitalism is that a deregulated market can find its own way ( invisible hand ) .Again , not really .
What you describe is laissez-faire capitalism , which is merely a subset .
Capitalism , in general , is defined by the right to own and trade private property , and specifically factors of production - namely land and capital ( hence the name " capitalism " ) .I dunno if there is a truly " socialist " country in the world today ( even china has rudimentary free markets in some sense ) , at the same rate there is n't a truly " capitalist " country either.Generally agreed .
As for specifics...China is unabashedly capitalist , actually .
It 's also heavily regulated to reach certain goals set by the state , so the overall system is closest to fascism.A " 100 \ % socialist " country today would probably be North Korea , at least if you discount tourist shops.Socialism does n't work for the same reasons regulation of the free market has never yielded beneficial change in the long run... there simply is n't a person , or group of people , a committee if you will that can accurately predict economic causes .
When left to its own devices , a free market is self-regulating.Socialism that was tried failed for other reasons .
Most importantly , it failed because it was of a statist kind , and the state did not represent the interests of the people ( i.e .
it was not democratic ) .
Consequently , people did not feel any responsibility towards meeting the set goals , because it was not their goals - the whole " they pretend that they pay us , and we pretend that we work " kind of thing .
At that state , socialism essentially equals slavery.Planning was also a problem , but again , not due to lack of prediction ability , but due to corruption in the system .
A " bright idea " of some high-ranked party official would overrule any and all rational arguments raised by people qualified in the people ; furthermore , because meddling with party career of your higher-up could be extremely damaging for your own , people would tend to keep it hush in the first place .
That is the flaw of any large authoritarian system , capitalist or not.The only time I can think of where the world did come close to actually seeing how a democratic and technocratic socialist system ( which would n't have these problems , at least in theory - not that it could n't have other problems ) could work out was in Chile , but Pinochet messed that up , unfortunately .
So it 's still all purely hypothetical either way.As for " regulation of the free market has never yielded beneficial change in the long run " - said regulation was introduced largely in response to the hugely detrimental effects of private monopolies that formed in largely unregulated market at the end of 19th century .
The beneficial changes are many , and primarily have to do with business not dealing with people as cattle to be worked to death anymore .
I guess that you would n't call that beneficial if your sole criteria is that elusive " market efficiency " , though...In all , I would n't call any country on this planet " successful " socialist or not... we 're in a global crisis right now with very few if any indications of positive change happening soon... caused in my opinion by decades of socialist leaning around the world.Ugh... I do n't even know where to start here .
The global consensus by a huge margin is that what got us into this mess was rapid deregulation of markets that started in 80s , especially so in U.S. Heck , even the people responsible ( like Greenspun ) said as much ! It 's also immediately visible by who is affected worst .
Compare U.S. , and , say , Canada .
You know that no banks were bailed out in Canada , because none went down in the first place ?
And guess why ?
Because banks in Canada were much heavier regulated in many things , including how much risky they can get with other people 's money , and to whom they can hand out credits.Meanwhile , a lot of countries around the world that were libertarian showcases ( such as Baltics ) were decimated by the whole thing , with economy crashing and burning practically overnight.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I appreciate your explanation, my definitions might be half-baked in some ways, but "capitalism" and "regulation" in the same sentence is a paradox-- the whole point of capitalism is that a deregulated market can find its own way (invisible hand).Again, not really.
What you describe is laissez-faire capitalism, which is merely a subset.
Capitalism, in general, is defined by the right to own and trade private property, and specifically factors of production - namely land and capital (hence the name "capitalism").I dunno if there is a truly "socialist" country in the world today (even china has rudimentary free markets in some sense), at the same rate there isn't a truly "capitalist" country either.Generally agreed.
As for specifics...China is unabashedly capitalist, actually.
It's also heavily regulated to reach certain goals set by the state, so the overall system is closest to fascism.A "100\% socialist" country today would probably be North Korea, at least if you discount tourist shops.Socialism doesn't work for the same reasons regulation of the free market has never yielded beneficial change in the long run... there simply isn't a person, or group of people, a committee if you will that can accurately predict economic causes.
When left to its own devices, a free market is self-regulating.Socialism that was tried failed for other reasons.
Most importantly, it failed because it was of a statist kind, and the state did not represent the interests of the people (i.e.
it was not democratic).
Consequently, people did not feel any responsibility towards meeting the set goals, because it was not their goals - the whole "they pretend that they pay us, and we pretend that we work" kind of thing.
At that state, socialism essentially equals slavery.Planning was also a problem, but again, not due to lack of prediction ability, but due to corruption in the system.
A "bright idea" of some high-ranked party official would overrule any and all rational arguments raised by people qualified in the people; furthermore, because meddling with party career of your higher-up could be extremely damaging for your own, people would tend to keep it hush in the first place.
That is the flaw of any large authoritarian system, capitalist or not.The only time I can think of where the world did come close to actually seeing how a democratic and technocratic socialist system (which wouldn't have these problems, at least in theory - not that it couldn't have other problems) could work out was in Chile, but Pinochet messed that up, unfortunately.
So it's still all purely hypothetical either way.As for "regulation of the free market has never yielded beneficial change in the long run" - said regulation was introduced largely in response to the hugely detrimental effects of private monopolies that formed in largely unregulated market at the end of 19th century.
The beneficial changes are many, and primarily have to do with business not dealing with people as cattle to be worked to death anymore.
I guess that you wouldn't call that beneficial if your sole criteria is that elusive "market efficiency", though...In all, I wouldn't call any country on this planet "successful" socialist or not... we're in a global crisis right now with very few if any indications of positive change happening soon... caused in my opinion by decades of socialist leaning around the world.Ugh... I don't even know where to start here.
The global consensus by a huge margin is that what got us into this mess was rapid deregulation of markets that started in 80s, especially so in U.S. Heck, even the people responsible (like Greenspun) said as much!It's also immediately visible by who is affected worst.
Compare U.S., and, say, Canada.
You know that no banks were bailed out in Canada, because none went down in the first place?
And guess why?
Because banks in Canada were much heavier regulated in many things, including how much risky they can get with other people's money, and to whom they can hand out credits.Meanwhile, a lot of countries around the world that were libertarian showcases (such as Baltics) were decimated by the whole thing, with economy crashing and burning practically overnight...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31288760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277192</id>
	<title>Health care costs</title>
	<author>Stonefred</author>
	<datestamp>1267090380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"[...] the hurdles and costs of obtaining health care for one's own family [...]"

Health care costs? Good thing every European is integrated in the public health care system of his/her country.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" [ ... ] the hurdles and costs of obtaining health care for one 's own family [ ... ] " Health care costs ?
Good thing every European is integrated in the public health care system of his/her country .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"[...] the hurdles and costs of obtaining health care for one's own family [...]"

Health care costs?
Good thing every European is integrated in the public health care system of his/her country.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277364</id>
	<title>Sure it can be done.</title>
	<author>mswhippingboy</author>
	<datestamp>1267091100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The point of TFA was not that it was impossible, just that the system's stacked against indies.<br>Maybe you like that.<br>As a former indy forced into submission, it pissed me off!</htmltext>
<tokenext>The point of TFA was not that it was impossible , just that the system 's stacked against indies.Maybe you like that.As a former indy forced into submission , it pissed me off !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The point of TFA was not that it was impossible, just that the system's stacked against indies.Maybe you like that.As a former indy forced into submission, it pissed me off!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279522</id>
	<title>Re:yeah. its much better to be p0wned</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267101120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We need a actual centrist party, that has not sold out to corporate interests</p></div><p>Quite possibly, "centrist" and "not sold out" are mutually exclusive properties.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We need a actual centrist party , that has not sold out to corporate interestsQuite possibly , " centrist " and " not sold out " are mutually exclusive properties .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We need a actual centrist party, that has not sold out to corporate interestsQuite possibly, "centrist" and "not sold out" are mutually exclusive properties.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277516</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276986</id>
	<title>Re:yeah. its much better to be p0wned</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267089480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>its much better to work for some huge soulless corporate pig where everything you create is owned by the pig and all you get is a measly salary and the pig gets richer and fatter while you wonder if you have enough to retire on at 65</p></div><p> When you have a wife a kid(s) depending on you, when health benefits for you/your wife/kids would cost 5 times as much (if they are available at all, if you have any kind of special needs, or pre-existing conditions, forget it) and half as good, then yeah, it does...

The republicans like to burn sacrifices at the alter of "small business" and entrepreneurship, but they are full of it..
There are plenty of folks out there who have idea/dreams, who would go out on their own, but have to make the decision to stay in a job's that don't reveal their full potential, jobs they may even hate because of this..</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>its much better to work for some huge soulless corporate pig where everything you create is owned by the pig and all you get is a measly salary and the pig gets richer and fatter while you wonder if you have enough to retire on at 65 When you have a wife a kid ( s ) depending on you , when health benefits for you/your wife/kids would cost 5 times as much ( if they are available at all , if you have any kind of special needs , or pre-existing conditions , forget it ) and half as good , then yeah , it does.. . The republicans like to burn sacrifices at the alter of " small business " and entrepreneurship , but they are full of it. . There are plenty of folks out there who have idea/dreams , who would go out on their own , but have to make the decision to stay in a job 's that do n't reveal their full potential , jobs they may even hate because of this. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>its much better to work for some huge soulless corporate pig where everything you create is owned by the pig and all you get is a measly salary and the pig gets richer and fatter while you wonder if you have enough to retire on at 65 When you have a wife a kid(s) depending on you, when health benefits for you/your wife/kids would cost 5 times as much (if they are available at all, if you have any kind of special needs, or pre-existing conditions, forget it) and half as good, then yeah, it does...

The republicans like to burn sacrifices at the alter of "small business" and entrepreneurship, but they are full of it..
There are plenty of folks out there who have idea/dreams, who would go out on their own, but have to make the decision to stay in a job's that don't reveal their full potential, jobs they may even hate because of this..
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31284042</id>
	<title>Re:no one told me I shouldn't be winning</title>
	<author>markov23</author>
	<datestamp>1267194360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Welcome to the club brother.  Best post I've read here about the reality of owning your own business.  Its not easy,  you work your ass off, and you pay some other professions to keep the govt away - but its the only way to live.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Welcome to the club brother .
Best post I 've read here about the reality of owning your own business .
Its not easy , you work your ass off , and you pay some other professions to keep the govt away - but its the only way to live .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Welcome to the club brother.
Best post I've read here about the reality of owning your own business.
Its not easy,  you work your ass off, and you pay some other professions to keep the govt away - but its the only way to live.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278392</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278130</id>
	<title>Next Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267094400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Where will the next Microsoft come from?  I don't get it.  Section 1706 deals with contractors and consultants who look, act, and quack like full time employees.  The next Microsoft is unlikely to come from that pool, and they don't fit my pictures of entrepreneurs.<br><br>Now an entrepreneur with a home/garage business will still feel the problems of health care costs; but wasn't that true in the past as well?  Most entrepreneurs all start by taking an incredibly risky step of becoming unemployed (ie, mortgaging the house).  It has never been a safe option.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Where will the next Microsoft come from ?
I do n't get it .
Section 1706 deals with contractors and consultants who look , act , and quack like full time employees .
The next Microsoft is unlikely to come from that pool , and they do n't fit my pictures of entrepreneurs.Now an entrepreneur with a home/garage business will still feel the problems of health care costs ; but was n't that true in the past as well ?
Most entrepreneurs all start by taking an incredibly risky step of becoming unemployed ( ie , mortgaging the house ) .
It has never been a safe option .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where will the next Microsoft come from?
I don't get it.
Section 1706 deals with contractors and consultants who look, act, and quack like full time employees.
The next Microsoft is unlikely to come from that pool, and they don't fit my pictures of entrepreneurs.Now an entrepreneur with a home/garage business will still feel the problems of health care costs; but wasn't that true in the past as well?
Most entrepreneurs all start by taking an incredibly risky step of becoming unemployed (ie, mortgaging the house).
It has never been a safe option.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280128</id>
	<title>What a whiny load of crap.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267105440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>By the way, digital, where is that TPS report you were supposed to hand in last Friday?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>By the way , digital , where is that TPS report you were supposed to hand in last Friday ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By the way, digital, where is that TPS report you were supposed to hand in last Friday?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278602</id>
	<title>Re:Most valuable my ass</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267096200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You forgot teachers.</p><p>None of the important people you listed learn how to do their jobs through osmosis!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You forgot teachers.None of the important people you listed learn how to do their jobs through osmosis !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You forgot teachers.None of the important people you listed learn how to do their jobs through osmosis!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277750</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31287372</id>
	<title>Re:Most valuable my ass</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267208940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Boy, are you stupid. They all depend on software, dumbfuck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Boy , are you stupid .
They all depend on software , dumbfuck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Boy, are you stupid.
They all depend on software, dumbfuck.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277750</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276996</id>
	<title>Next Microsoft?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267089540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Next Microsoft won't appear, that business model is not working that well anymore. Programmers that view their profession as nothing more than a job are not the type that innovate or try something like entrepreneurship. The other type of programmers will still want to make something new or just to work on something where their view counts, that's why I expect the open-source community to grow even larger.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Next Microsoft wo n't appear , that business model is not working that well anymore .
Programmers that view their profession as nothing more than a job are not the type that innovate or try something like entrepreneurship .
The other type of programmers will still want to make something new or just to work on something where their view counts , that 's why I expect the open-source community to grow even larger .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Next Microsoft won't appear, that business model is not working that well anymore.
Programmers that view their profession as nothing more than a job are not the type that innovate or try something like entrepreneurship.
The other type of programmers will still want to make something new or just to work on something where their view counts, that's why I expect the open-source community to grow even larger.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277280</id>
	<title>Bunch of FUD</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267090740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I really don't understand this sort of post.<br>I'm 26; I made 118k last year as an independent contractor. I get job offers all the time. Nobody is looking to out-source me, move me oversees, anything like that. Why? Because I'm good at what I do and easy to work with.<br>I doubt I'm going to see that change any time soon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I really do n't understand this sort of post.I 'm 26 ; I made 118k last year as an independent contractor .
I get job offers all the time .
Nobody is looking to out-source me , move me oversees , anything like that .
Why ? Because I 'm good at what I do and easy to work with.I doubt I 'm going to see that change any time soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really don't understand this sort of post.I'm 26; I made 118k last year as an independent contractor.
I get job offers all the time.
Nobody is looking to out-source me, move me oversees, anything like that.
Why? Because I'm good at what I do and easy to work with.I doubt I'm going to see that change any time soon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277804</id>
	<title>Excellent article but it makes to much sense</title>
	<author>pacoder</author>
	<datestamp>1267093140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The suggestions for what to change at the end of the article make far to much sense for the government to ever seriously consider implementing them. Why would a bureaucrat want to simplify himself out of a job?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The suggestions for what to change at the end of the article make far to much sense for the government to ever seriously consider implementing them .
Why would a bureaucrat want to simplify himself out of a job ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The suggestions for what to change at the end of the article make far to much sense for the government to ever seriously consider implementing them.
Why would a bureaucrat want to simplify himself out of a job?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277076</id>
	<title>..only in USA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267089900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As an independent programmer in Europe, I'm not worried about any of those issues.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As an independent programmer in Europe , I 'm not worried about any of those issues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As an independent programmer in Europe, I'm not worried about any of those issues.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277290</id>
	<title>Re:Just SOP</title>
	<author>mujadaddy</author>
	<datestamp>1267090800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Corporations should have their free speech rights taken away (lobbyists/bribes).
They have no more rights than a Tree or a rock.
They are not THINGS not people. The Bill of Rights is for the People, not trees, rocks, or things.</p></div><p>Where's my '-1 Ignorant of the last 130 years of American History and Law?'  I, of course, completely agree that it's ridiculous that we're in this situation, but the groundwork was laid long ago.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Corporations should have their free speech rights taken away ( lobbyists/bribes ) .
They have no more rights than a Tree or a rock .
They are not THINGS not people .
The Bill of Rights is for the People , not trees , rocks , or things.Where 's my '-1 Ignorant of the last 130 years of American History and Law ?
' I , of course , completely agree that it 's ridiculous that we 're in this situation , but the groundwork was laid long ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Corporations should have their free speech rights taken away (lobbyists/bribes).
They have no more rights than a Tree or a rock.
They are not THINGS not people.
The Bill of Rights is for the People, not trees, rocks, or things.Where's my '-1 Ignorant of the last 130 years of American History and Law?
'  I, of course, completely agree that it's ridiculous that we're in this situation, but the groundwork was laid long ago.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280282</id>
	<title>Re:yeah. its much better to be p0wned</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1267106400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>oh jesus bloody christ... seriously? socialist? are you completely mad? if socialism worked, then we'd still have a U.S.S.R.</p> </div><p>USSR was a failure of totalitarian socialism, not socialism in general.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>pray for more government sponsored programs and interventions (that is the definition of socialism my friends)</p></div><p>The definition of socialism is actually collective (via state in statist socialism, directly by community in anarcho-socialism) ownership of means of production. That's all there is to it. If a person can own factory or land for themselves, then it's not socialism - it's still capitalism (albeit possibly regulated).</p><p>Going by your definition, though, there are many successful "socialist" states - most of Europe, for example.</p><p>That's what I actually find funny about some of you pro-capitalist guys... you use the example of USSR to show why "socialism cannot work", but then give a definition of socialism that is <em>much</em> more broad than the specific stillborn variety that was practiced in USSR and its client states.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>oh jesus bloody christ... seriously ? socialist ?
are you completely mad ?
if socialism worked , then we 'd still have a U.S.S.R. USSR was a failure of totalitarian socialism , not socialism in general.pray for more government sponsored programs and interventions ( that is the definition of socialism my friends ) The definition of socialism is actually collective ( via state in statist socialism , directly by community in anarcho-socialism ) ownership of means of production .
That 's all there is to it .
If a person can own factory or land for themselves , then it 's not socialism - it 's still capitalism ( albeit possibly regulated ) .Going by your definition , though , there are many successful " socialist " states - most of Europe , for example.That 's what I actually find funny about some of you pro-capitalist guys... you use the example of USSR to show why " socialism can not work " , but then give a definition of socialism that is much more broad than the specific stillborn variety that was practiced in USSR and its client states .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>oh jesus bloody christ... seriously? socialist?
are you completely mad?
if socialism worked, then we'd still have a U.S.S.R. USSR was a failure of totalitarian socialism, not socialism in general.pray for more government sponsored programs and interventions (that is the definition of socialism my friends)The definition of socialism is actually collective (via state in statist socialism, directly by community in anarcho-socialism) ownership of means of production.
That's all there is to it.
If a person can own factory or land for themselves, then it's not socialism - it's still capitalism (albeit possibly regulated).Going by your definition, though, there are many successful "socialist" states - most of Europe, for example.That's what I actually find funny about some of you pro-capitalist guys... you use the example of USSR to show why "socialism cannot work", but then give a definition of socialism that is much more broad than the specific stillborn variety that was practiced in USSR and its client states.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278550</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31294486</id>
	<title>Re:Yep, I've lost hope.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267204260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you thought about going to Canada? I'm stuck in a similar situation, and I'm saving money to head to a decent country. I just lost my job and I'm loosing my place (I think I have 2 weeks left). I have a family and I can't just "give up". Things are difficult, but I have seen that a bunch of people are hiring and I've had some interesting interviews so far. I'm crossing my fingers. I have my AA too, and I haven't found it to always be a problem (depends on the company). Last place I worked at, my manager was a college drop out -- he is doing alright.</p><p>Re: medical - go to the ER. If they won't treat you, go to another one and tell them that you don't remember your name or where you are (I remember something about them unable to refuse helping you if you said that) -- no guarantees - just an idea. The way I see it, if you have to lie to stay alive - go for it.</p><p>Don't give up. Things are difficult now, but people are hiring. I just came across this today: <a href="http://twitter.com/positions.html" title="twitter.com" rel="nofollow">http://twitter.com/positions.html</a> [twitter.com]</p><p>Another thing to consider is applying *everywhere*, don't just look in your state -- look in others (even in Canada). I'm not sure how hard it would be to get a Visa to work there (not even sure you need one).</p><p>Good luck, I know that you will find something.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you thought about going to Canada ?
I 'm stuck in a similar situation , and I 'm saving money to head to a decent country .
I just lost my job and I 'm loosing my place ( I think I have 2 weeks left ) .
I have a family and I ca n't just " give up " .
Things are difficult , but I have seen that a bunch of people are hiring and I 've had some interesting interviews so far .
I 'm crossing my fingers .
I have my AA too , and I have n't found it to always be a problem ( depends on the company ) .
Last place I worked at , my manager was a college drop out -- he is doing alright.Re : medical - go to the ER .
If they wo n't treat you , go to another one and tell them that you do n't remember your name or where you are ( I remember something about them unable to refuse helping you if you said that ) -- no guarantees - just an idea .
The way I see it , if you have to lie to stay alive - go for it.Do n't give up .
Things are difficult now , but people are hiring .
I just came across this today : http : //twitter.com/positions.html [ twitter.com ] Another thing to consider is applying * everywhere * , do n't just look in your state -- look in others ( even in Canada ) .
I 'm not sure how hard it would be to get a Visa to work there ( not even sure you need one ) .Good luck , I know that you will find something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you thought about going to Canada?
I'm stuck in a similar situation, and I'm saving money to head to a decent country.
I just lost my job and I'm loosing my place (I think I have 2 weeks left).
I have a family and I can't just "give up".
Things are difficult, but I have seen that a bunch of people are hiring and I've had some interesting interviews so far.
I'm crossing my fingers.
I have my AA too, and I haven't found it to always be a problem (depends on the company).
Last place I worked at, my manager was a college drop out -- he is doing alright.Re: medical - go to the ER.
If they won't treat you, go to another one and tell them that you don't remember your name or where you are (I remember something about them unable to refuse helping you if you said that) -- no guarantees - just an idea.
The way I see it, if you have to lie to stay alive - go for it.Don't give up.
Things are difficult now, but people are hiring.
I just came across this today: http://twitter.com/positions.html [twitter.com]Another thing to consider is applying *everywhere*, don't just look in your state -- look in others (even in Canada).
I'm not sure how hard it would be to get a Visa to work there (not even sure you need one).Good luck, I know that you will find something.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278160</id>
	<title>Incorporate</title>
	<author>DalDei</author>
	<datestamp>1267094460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Except for the health insurance part which is expensive, the rest is FUD.  You get around these laws by incorporating, then you make yourself a W2 employee of your own corporation and invoice clients corp to corp.  This totally gets around all this nonsense.   Did it for 15 years, its quite easy.

The REAL problem with independent programming is not the laws, its the business model and complexity of modern software.
I learned a long time ago that it doesnt matter how good a programmer you are, at least 80\% of the software business is marketing, sales, and other business related tasks.

The days of whipping up your own title at home and trying to sell it are long gone.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except for the health insurance part which is expensive , the rest is FUD .
You get around these laws by incorporating , then you make yourself a W2 employee of your own corporation and invoice clients corp to corp. This totally gets around all this nonsense .
Did it for 15 years , its quite easy .
The REAL problem with independent programming is not the laws , its the business model and complexity of modern software .
I learned a long time ago that it doesnt matter how good a programmer you are , at least 80 \ % of the software business is marketing , sales , and other business related tasks .
The days of whipping up your own title at home and trying to sell it are long gone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except for the health insurance part which is expensive, the rest is FUD.
You get around these laws by incorporating, then you make yourself a W2 employee of your own corporation and invoice clients corp to corp.  This totally gets around all this nonsense.
Did it for 15 years, its quite easy.
The REAL problem with independent programming is not the laws, its the business model and complexity of modern software.
I learned a long time ago that it doesnt matter how good a programmer you are, at least 80\% of the software business is marketing, sales, and other business related tasks.
The days of whipping up your own title at home and trying to sell it are long gone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277824</id>
	<title>Re:Why now?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267093260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is it really "getting around" the law?<br>
This seems to me more like "going with" the law to actually fulfill its intent.<br>
If one claims to be an "entrepreneur" running a "consulting firm" then one has to actually act like an entrepreneur by soliciting business and hiring people.<br>
This law is the government giving itself permission to tax one as one really is and not as one labels one's self to be.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it really " getting around " the law ?
This seems to me more like " going with " the law to actually fulfill its intent .
If one claims to be an " entrepreneur " running a " consulting firm " then one has to actually act like an entrepreneur by soliciting business and hiring people .
This law is the government giving itself permission to tax one as one really is and not as one labels one 's self to be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it really "getting around" the law?
This seems to me more like "going with" the law to actually fulfill its intent.
If one claims to be an "entrepreneur" running a "consulting firm" then one has to actually act like an entrepreneur by soliciting business and hiring people.
This law is the government giving itself permission to tax one as one really is and not as one labels one's self to be.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276892</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278240</id>
	<title>Re:More news at 11</title>
	<author>asc99c</author>
	<datestamp>1267094760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well said.  I think a lot of people forget all the things that go into making a piece of software than pure programming, and pretty much everything in the article is just describing some of the things in that list.  Personally, I didn't even think it was all that comprehensive.</p><p>I've thought about going it alone myself, because when it comes down to coding stuff, I'm pretty self suffficient now.  It's still very useful to be able to easily go and ask an AIX or Oracle expert when I don't know stuff, but I can mostly figure it out myself.  Unfortunately, I'm not enough of a salesperson, and not a people-person in general.  And to be honest I'm just not that interested in the business side.  I'd be bored senseless dealing with that side of things.</p><p>The other difference with plumbers and many similar occupations is that self employed plumbers get a lot of business from individuals.  On a person-to-person basis, a whole load of overhead of dealing with companies tends to just disappear; other than a one page overview and a receipt, there's almost no paperwork for my new bathroom.  But individuals don't have that much use for custom software, so as an independant developer you're not really in the same type of business as an independant plumber anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well said .
I think a lot of people forget all the things that go into making a piece of software than pure programming , and pretty much everything in the article is just describing some of the things in that list .
Personally , I did n't even think it was all that comprehensive.I 've thought about going it alone myself , because when it comes down to coding stuff , I 'm pretty self suffficient now .
It 's still very useful to be able to easily go and ask an AIX or Oracle expert when I do n't know stuff , but I can mostly figure it out myself .
Unfortunately , I 'm not enough of a salesperson , and not a people-person in general .
And to be honest I 'm just not that interested in the business side .
I 'd be bored senseless dealing with that side of things.The other difference with plumbers and many similar occupations is that self employed plumbers get a lot of business from individuals .
On a person-to-person basis , a whole load of overhead of dealing with companies tends to just disappear ; other than a one page overview and a receipt , there 's almost no paperwork for my new bathroom .
But individuals do n't have that much use for custom software , so as an independant developer you 're not really in the same type of business as an independant plumber anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well said.
I think a lot of people forget all the things that go into making a piece of software than pure programming, and pretty much everything in the article is just describing some of the things in that list.
Personally, I didn't even think it was all that comprehensive.I've thought about going it alone myself, because when it comes down to coding stuff, I'm pretty self suffficient now.
It's still very useful to be able to easily go and ask an AIX or Oracle expert when I don't know stuff, but I can mostly figure it out myself.
Unfortunately, I'm not enough of a salesperson, and not a people-person in general.
And to be honest I'm just not that interested in the business side.
I'd be bored senseless dealing with that side of things.The other difference with plumbers and many similar occupations is that self employed plumbers get a lot of business from individuals.
On a person-to-person basis, a whole load of overhead of dealing with companies tends to just disappear; other than a one page overview and a receipt, there's almost no paperwork for my new bathroom.
But individuals don't have that much use for custom software, so as an independant developer you're not really in the same type of business as an independant plumber anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278184</id>
	<title>Re:yeah. its much better to be p0wned</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267094580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>(Obama's environmental policies aren't really any different from Bush's, for instance).  </p></div><p>Woah, holy shit, have you not even read the news in the past year? Or the past eight years for that matter?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>( Obama 's environmental policies are n't really any different from Bush 's , for instance ) .
Woah , holy shit , have you not even read the news in the past year ?
Or the past eight years for that matter ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(Obama's environmental policies aren't really any different from Bush's, for instance).
Woah, holy shit, have you not even read the news in the past year?
Or the past eight years for that matter?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279426</id>
	<title>Re:This is why I recommend against entering the fi</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267100400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>And don't mind that all the stuff you learned in school is useless. <br>
Today, there's no such thing as a s/w development process (only in big slow corps) compared to 15yrs ago.
<p>Web development or DB development has become the wild-west (IT orgs have turned process upside-down due to TCO/ROI requirements) since the big s/w vendors can now push out changes <b>daily</b>--<i>they control your process</i>.
</p><p>Product owners are caring less about the software, more about time to market and window dressing (endless Beta releases).
</p><p>System analysts are even more clueless on software development and the benefits of OOD/Functional, etc...
</p><p>Development as a discipline, like electrical engineering  or architecture, is either found in academia (those studying software engineering, <b>not</b> CS), or aerospace companies. Everyone else, it's being outsourced or back to cowboy coding--we're losing the predictability of completing a piece of s/w since everything is always in beta and iterative.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And do n't mind that all the stuff you learned in school is useless .
Today , there 's no such thing as a s/w development process ( only in big slow corps ) compared to 15yrs ago .
Web development or DB development has become the wild-west ( IT orgs have turned process upside-down due to TCO/ROI requirements ) since the big s/w vendors can now push out changes daily--they control your process .
Product owners are caring less about the software , more about time to market and window dressing ( endless Beta releases ) .
System analysts are even more clueless on software development and the benefits of OOD/Functional , etc.. . Development as a discipline , like electrical engineering or architecture , is either found in academia ( those studying software engineering , not CS ) , or aerospace companies .
Everyone else , it 's being outsourced or back to cowboy coding--we 're losing the predictability of completing a piece of s/w since everything is always in beta and iterative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And don't mind that all the stuff you learned in school is useless.
Today, there's no such thing as a s/w development process (only in big slow corps) compared to 15yrs ago.
Web development or DB development has become the wild-west (IT orgs have turned process upside-down due to TCO/ROI requirements) since the big s/w vendors can now push out changes daily--they control your process.
Product owners are caring less about the software, more about time to market and window dressing (endless Beta releases).
System analysts are even more clueless on software development and the benefits of OOD/Functional, etc...
Development as a discipline, like electrical engineering  or architecture, is either found in academia (those studying software engineering, not CS), or aerospace companies.
Everyone else, it's being outsourced or back to cowboy coding--we're losing the predictability of completing a piece of s/w since everything is always in beta and iterative.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320</id>
	<title>Re:yeah. its much better to be p0wned</title>
	<author>Grishnakh</author>
	<datestamp>1267090920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Republicans are liars.  They're always posturing and claiming they're for small government, small business, etc., but it's all complete lies.  They're really little different from the Democrats.  They favor BIG business, and helping out already-rich people instead of providing a level playing field or doing anything at all to encourage entrepreneurship.  The main difference between the Dems and the Reps is which BIG businesses they're allied with.  With the Reps, it's oil, gas, and defense contractors; with the Dems, it's the RIAA, MPAA, etc.  The other main difference is which special-interest groups they pander to: Reps pander to fundamentalist Christians, gun owners, and homophobes, while Dems pander to environmentalists, gun-banners, and minority groups.  However, it should be noted that in their pandering, they talk a lot to these groups about how much they support them, but in reality, they don't actually do that much to help them when they're in power (Obama's environmental policies aren't really any different from Bush's, for instance).  They're all a bunch of liars.</p><p>The best thing America could do later this year in the election is to vote out EVERY incumbent (except maybe Ron Paul; he's the only one who isn't a liar from what I can tell, even if I don't agree with him on everything).  Of course, that's not going to happen; the people complain about Congress all the time, but they're really complaining about everyone else's Congressmen, not their own.  When it comes time to vote out their own Congresscritter, they re-elect him.  Of course, part of the problem here is that we don't have very many decent people running.  For instance, my state, Arizona, has to elect a new Senator this year for McCain's seat.  McCain is running for re-election of course, but lots of people (including myself) hate him for various reasons, such as selecting that twit Palin as his running mate.  So another guy named JD Hayworth is challenging him for the Republican ticket, but that guy's even worse: he's a blowhard moron that was involved in a corruption scandal when he was a Representative, and was replaced by a Democrat in a Republican stronghold.  Maybe we'll get lucky and a "blue dog" Democrat will run against these two morons and win, but it's unlikely as AZ is very hard for Democrats to get elected in, even if they're not the liberal type.  Or who knows, maybe a Libertarian will run and get elected because everyone's so pissed that they don't want to vote for either of the two main parties.  One can dream.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Republicans are liars .
They 're always posturing and claiming they 're for small government , small business , etc. , but it 's all complete lies .
They 're really little different from the Democrats .
They favor BIG business , and helping out already-rich people instead of providing a level playing field or doing anything at all to encourage entrepreneurship .
The main difference between the Dems and the Reps is which BIG businesses they 're allied with .
With the Reps , it 's oil , gas , and defense contractors ; with the Dems , it 's the RIAA , MPAA , etc .
The other main difference is which special-interest groups they pander to : Reps pander to fundamentalist Christians , gun owners , and homophobes , while Dems pander to environmentalists , gun-banners , and minority groups .
However , it should be noted that in their pandering , they talk a lot to these groups about how much they support them , but in reality , they do n't actually do that much to help them when they 're in power ( Obama 's environmental policies are n't really any different from Bush 's , for instance ) .
They 're all a bunch of liars.The best thing America could do later this year in the election is to vote out EVERY incumbent ( except maybe Ron Paul ; he 's the only one who is n't a liar from what I can tell , even if I do n't agree with him on everything ) .
Of course , that 's not going to happen ; the people complain about Congress all the time , but they 're really complaining about everyone else 's Congressmen , not their own .
When it comes time to vote out their own Congresscritter , they re-elect him .
Of course , part of the problem here is that we do n't have very many decent people running .
For instance , my state , Arizona , has to elect a new Senator this year for McCain 's seat .
McCain is running for re-election of course , but lots of people ( including myself ) hate him for various reasons , such as selecting that twit Palin as his running mate .
So another guy named JD Hayworth is challenging him for the Republican ticket , but that guy 's even worse : he 's a blowhard moron that was involved in a corruption scandal when he was a Representative , and was replaced by a Democrat in a Republican stronghold .
Maybe we 'll get lucky and a " blue dog " Democrat will run against these two morons and win , but it 's unlikely as AZ is very hard for Democrats to get elected in , even if they 're not the liberal type .
Or who knows , maybe a Libertarian will run and get elected because everyone 's so pissed that they do n't want to vote for either of the two main parties .
One can dream .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Republicans are liars.
They're always posturing and claiming they're for small government, small business, etc., but it's all complete lies.
They're really little different from the Democrats.
They favor BIG business, and helping out already-rich people instead of providing a level playing field or doing anything at all to encourage entrepreneurship.
The main difference between the Dems and the Reps is which BIG businesses they're allied with.
With the Reps, it's oil, gas, and defense contractors; with the Dems, it's the RIAA, MPAA, etc.
The other main difference is which special-interest groups they pander to: Reps pander to fundamentalist Christians, gun owners, and homophobes, while Dems pander to environmentalists, gun-banners, and minority groups.
However, it should be noted that in their pandering, they talk a lot to these groups about how much they support them, but in reality, they don't actually do that much to help them when they're in power (Obama's environmental policies aren't really any different from Bush's, for instance).
They're all a bunch of liars.The best thing America could do later this year in the election is to vote out EVERY incumbent (except maybe Ron Paul; he's the only one who isn't a liar from what I can tell, even if I don't agree with him on everything).
Of course, that's not going to happen; the people complain about Congress all the time, but they're really complaining about everyone else's Congressmen, not their own.
When it comes time to vote out their own Congresscritter, they re-elect him.
Of course, part of the problem here is that we don't have very many decent people running.
For instance, my state, Arizona, has to elect a new Senator this year for McCain's seat.
McCain is running for re-election of course, but lots of people (including myself) hate him for various reasons, such as selecting that twit Palin as his running mate.
So another guy named JD Hayworth is challenging him for the Republican ticket, but that guy's even worse: he's a blowhard moron that was involved in a corruption scandal when he was a Representative, and was replaced by a Democrat in a Republican stronghold.
Maybe we'll get lucky and a "blue dog" Democrat will run against these two morons and win, but it's unlikely as AZ is very hard for Democrats to get elected in, even if they're not the liberal type.
Or who knows, maybe a Libertarian will run and get elected because everyone's so pissed that they don't want to vote for either of the two main parties.
One can dream.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276986</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277958</id>
	<title>Re:yeah. its much better to be p0wned</title>
	<author>gangien</author>
	<datestamp>1267093740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How does this crap get modded up?  libertarians are racists and homophobes?  i'm not really sure how to respond to that, other than to say, the ideal of libertarianism is pretty much against any sort of collectivist thought, so we're by definition about as un racist/homophobic as you can get.</p><p>And nutbags?  what's so nutty about any of the libertarian positions?  if you think about them for half a minute, and don't just knee jerk react to the views, i don't think you'd find they're nutty.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How does this crap get modded up ?
libertarians are racists and homophobes ?
i 'm not really sure how to respond to that , other than to say , the ideal of libertarianism is pretty much against any sort of collectivist thought , so we 're by definition about as un racist/homophobic as you can get.And nutbags ?
what 's so nutty about any of the libertarian positions ?
if you think about them for half a minute , and do n't just knee jerk react to the views , i do n't think you 'd find they 're nutty .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does this crap get modded up?
libertarians are racists and homophobes?
i'm not really sure how to respond to that, other than to say, the ideal of libertarianism is pretty much against any sort of collectivist thought, so we're by definition about as un racist/homophobic as you can get.And nutbags?
what's so nutty about any of the libertarian positions?
if you think about them for half a minute, and don't just knee jerk react to the views, i don't think you'd find they're nutty.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277516</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277560</id>
	<title>Re:What a whiny load of crap.</title>
	<author>digitalsushi</author>
	<datestamp>1267092000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Step 9:  Pray step 5 worked out cause you gonna get an audit</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Step 9 : Pray step 5 worked out cause you gon na get an audit</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Step 9:  Pray step 5 worked out cause you gonna get an audit</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277854</id>
	<title>Re:What a whiny load of crap.</title>
	<author>DaveGod</author>
	<datestamp>1267093380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whilst agreeing with all your other points:</p><blockquote><div><p>Now get creative. Like to go to theme parks? Set up another LLC and create a website dedicated to reviewing them, talking about which ones have what etc. Now you get to write off trips to Six Flags and Cedar point as legitimate business research.</p></div></blockquote><p>I would be very surprised if the US does not have an equivalent to the UK "<a href="http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/MANUALS/BIMMANUAL/bim37000.htm" title="hmrc.gov.uk">wholly and exclusively</a> [hmrc.gov.uk]" rule. Secondly, there is the whole <a href="http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/bimmanual/BIM20200.htm" title="hmrc.gov.uk">badges of a trade</a> [hmrc.gov.uk] thing. Thirdly, more relevant to an LLC, is <a href="http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/paye/exb/overview/" title="hmrc.gov.uk">employee expenses and benefits</a> [hmrc.gov.uk]. Also critical to an LLC is the accounting/legal concept of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Going\_concern" title="wikipedia.org">going concern</a> [wikipedia.org].</p><p>Basically the tax man is going to argue there is a) no view to a profit therefore expenses are not deductible for tax (see <a href="http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/faqs/general.htm#4" title="hmrc.gov.uk">revenue expenditure</a> [hmrc.gov.uk]) and/or b) a substantial element of the expense is employee benefit and therefore counts as taxable income to you personally. </p><p>Sure, everybody knows someone who seems to be pulling stunts like these. Some of them aren't really: I did tax and VAT for a second hand car salesman who was like a comedy cartoon epitome of a tax evader - I suspect he utilised the image as a sales pitch - but was actually ultra clean.   Some people actually are doing it then suddenly aren't after they get an inspection (with penalties and interest). Many people think they are being "a bit cheeky" with the expenses, though the accountant is probably adding back much of the non-deductible stuff in the tax comp. </p><p>And yeah, some are getting away with it. Some from being lucky with their gamble and never being inspected, and some because they are very good at it. Of course this is quite the risk and IMO not worth it. A good accountant should have you running quite tax efficient - through good business structure, some <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax\_avoidance\_and\_tax\_evasion" title="wikipedia.org">avoidance but <i>not</i> evasion</a> [wikipedia.org] (even paying yourself dividends through the LLC can be a great tax advantage compared to the same income as salary).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whilst agreeing with all your other points : Now get creative .
Like to go to theme parks ?
Set up another LLC and create a website dedicated to reviewing them , talking about which ones have what etc .
Now you get to write off trips to Six Flags and Cedar point as legitimate business research.I would be very surprised if the US does not have an equivalent to the UK " wholly and exclusively [ hmrc.gov.uk ] " rule .
Secondly , there is the whole badges of a trade [ hmrc.gov.uk ] thing .
Thirdly , more relevant to an LLC , is employee expenses and benefits [ hmrc.gov.uk ] .
Also critical to an LLC is the accounting/legal concept of going concern [ wikipedia.org ] .Basically the tax man is going to argue there is a ) no view to a profit therefore expenses are not deductible for tax ( see revenue expenditure [ hmrc.gov.uk ] ) and/or b ) a substantial element of the expense is employee benefit and therefore counts as taxable income to you personally .
Sure , everybody knows someone who seems to be pulling stunts like these .
Some of them are n't really : I did tax and VAT for a second hand car salesman who was like a comedy cartoon epitome of a tax evader - I suspect he utilised the image as a sales pitch - but was actually ultra clean .
Some people actually are doing it then suddenly are n't after they get an inspection ( with penalties and interest ) .
Many people think they are being " a bit cheeky " with the expenses , though the accountant is probably adding back much of the non-deductible stuff in the tax comp .
And yeah , some are getting away with it .
Some from being lucky with their gamble and never being inspected , and some because they are very good at it .
Of course this is quite the risk and IMO not worth it .
A good accountant should have you running quite tax efficient - through good business structure , some avoidance but not evasion [ wikipedia.org ] ( even paying yourself dividends through the LLC can be a great tax advantage compared to the same income as salary ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whilst agreeing with all your other points:Now get creative.
Like to go to theme parks?
Set up another LLC and create a website dedicated to reviewing them, talking about which ones have what etc.
Now you get to write off trips to Six Flags and Cedar point as legitimate business research.I would be very surprised if the US does not have an equivalent to the UK "wholly and exclusively [hmrc.gov.uk]" rule.
Secondly, there is the whole badges of a trade [hmrc.gov.uk] thing.
Thirdly, more relevant to an LLC, is employee expenses and benefits [hmrc.gov.uk].
Also critical to an LLC is the accounting/legal concept of going concern [wikipedia.org].Basically the tax man is going to argue there is a) no view to a profit therefore expenses are not deductible for tax (see revenue expenditure [hmrc.gov.uk]) and/or b) a substantial element of the expense is employee benefit and therefore counts as taxable income to you personally.
Sure, everybody knows someone who seems to be pulling stunts like these.
Some of them aren't really: I did tax and VAT for a second hand car salesman who was like a comedy cartoon epitome of a tax evader - I suspect he utilised the image as a sales pitch - but was actually ultra clean.
Some people actually are doing it then suddenly aren't after they get an inspection (with penalties and interest).
Many people think they are being "a bit cheeky" with the expenses, though the accountant is probably adding back much of the non-deductible stuff in the tax comp.
And yeah, some are getting away with it.
Some from being lucky with their gamble and never being inspected, and some because they are very good at it.
Of course this is quite the risk and IMO not worth it.
A good accountant should have you running quite tax efficient - through good business structure, some avoidance but not evasion [wikipedia.org] (even paying yourself dividends through the LLC can be a great tax advantage compared to the same income as salary).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277538</id>
	<title>Re:Yep, I've lost hope.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267091880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Have you thought about learning to fly a plane?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you thought about learning to fly a plane ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you thought about learning to fly a plane?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126</id>
	<title>More news at 11</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267090140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, working in a group makes it easier than working by yourself.</p><p>Thats why companies exist, they can be more productive and efficient than a single person if they properly pool resources and talents.</p><p>Accountability in code defects?  Lawsuits?  Are you fucking kidding me?    What universe do you live in where this is happening?  Certainly not the one with Microsoft or Toyota in it.</p><p>Hold on to their jobs until retirement?   Yes, the industry is no longer a fledgling industry.  Yes businesses are getting better at figuring out who is actually useful as a programmer and who just happened to pass some courses at the college they went to.  The article confuses the industry coming of age and realizing how useless most of the people who claim to be in it are and people not being able to hold on to a job.</p><p>People get fired because they are less valuable than something/someone else that can replace them or the need for them has simply went away.  Yes companies try to cycle through low cost employees as a way to cut costs, but they end up moving so slowly after a short period of time that they disappear quickly and account for a small percentage of the workforce.</p><p>Reality:</p><p>Working independently and competing against people who work in groups is generally hard.  Doing it as a programmer is no different than doing it as a plumber, with one exception.  The plumber isn't so retarded as to expect it to be any different nor do they have the sense of entitlement to think that it should be different for them.</p><p>Plenty of people DO go it alone.  Happens constantly all the time.  The company I work for actually works with more self employed people than companies.</p><p>Its not impossible, it just takes effort and is harder than working for a company with shared resources.  Yes there are some silly laws aimed at software developers working on their own, but there are also some silly laws aimed at plumbers working alone.  God, slashdot would just keel over dead if governments started requiring developers to be licensed and show they are qualified to do so like MANY MANY other professions.</p><p>I have a better question:</p><p>Why is it IT people in general feel that they are somehow different than everyone else in the world?  Are they really so ignorant and socially dysfunctional to not realize that they are no different than any other part of society in any way?  Is this ignorance or a form a geek elitism, thinking that we geeks can't possibly be expected to suffer under the same working conditions of the rest of the pathetic planet of idiots?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , working in a group makes it easier than working by yourself.Thats why companies exist , they can be more productive and efficient than a single person if they properly pool resources and talents.Accountability in code defects ?
Lawsuits ? Are you fucking kidding me ?
What universe do you live in where this is happening ?
Certainly not the one with Microsoft or Toyota in it.Hold on to their jobs until retirement ?
Yes , the industry is no longer a fledgling industry .
Yes businesses are getting better at figuring out who is actually useful as a programmer and who just happened to pass some courses at the college they went to .
The article confuses the industry coming of age and realizing how useless most of the people who claim to be in it are and people not being able to hold on to a job.People get fired because they are less valuable than something/someone else that can replace them or the need for them has simply went away .
Yes companies try to cycle through low cost employees as a way to cut costs , but they end up moving so slowly after a short period of time that they disappear quickly and account for a small percentage of the workforce.Reality : Working independently and competing against people who work in groups is generally hard .
Doing it as a programmer is no different than doing it as a plumber , with one exception .
The plumber is n't so retarded as to expect it to be any different nor do they have the sense of entitlement to think that it should be different for them.Plenty of people DO go it alone .
Happens constantly all the time .
The company I work for actually works with more self employed people than companies.Its not impossible , it just takes effort and is harder than working for a company with shared resources .
Yes there are some silly laws aimed at software developers working on their own , but there are also some silly laws aimed at plumbers working alone .
God , slashdot would just keel over dead if governments started requiring developers to be licensed and show they are qualified to do so like MANY MANY other professions.I have a better question : Why is it IT people in general feel that they are somehow different than everyone else in the world ?
Are they really so ignorant and socially dysfunctional to not realize that they are no different than any other part of society in any way ?
Is this ignorance or a form a geek elitism , thinking that we geeks ca n't possibly be expected to suffer under the same working conditions of the rest of the pathetic planet of idiots ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, working in a group makes it easier than working by yourself.Thats why companies exist, they can be more productive and efficient than a single person if they properly pool resources and talents.Accountability in code defects?
Lawsuits?  Are you fucking kidding me?
What universe do you live in where this is happening?
Certainly not the one with Microsoft or Toyota in it.Hold on to their jobs until retirement?
Yes, the industry is no longer a fledgling industry.
Yes businesses are getting better at figuring out who is actually useful as a programmer and who just happened to pass some courses at the college they went to.
The article confuses the industry coming of age and realizing how useless most of the people who claim to be in it are and people not being able to hold on to a job.People get fired because they are less valuable than something/someone else that can replace them or the need for them has simply went away.
Yes companies try to cycle through low cost employees as a way to cut costs, but they end up moving so slowly after a short period of time that they disappear quickly and account for a small percentage of the workforce.Reality:Working independently and competing against people who work in groups is generally hard.
Doing it as a programmer is no different than doing it as a plumber, with one exception.
The plumber isn't so retarded as to expect it to be any different nor do they have the sense of entitlement to think that it should be different for them.Plenty of people DO go it alone.
Happens constantly all the time.
The company I work for actually works with more self employed people than companies.Its not impossible, it just takes effort and is harder than working for a company with shared resources.
Yes there are some silly laws aimed at software developers working on their own, but there are also some silly laws aimed at plumbers working alone.
God, slashdot would just keel over dead if governments started requiring developers to be licensed and show they are qualified to do so like MANY MANY other professions.I have a better question:Why is it IT people in general feel that they are somehow different than everyone else in the world?
Are they really so ignorant and socially dysfunctional to not realize that they are no different than any other part of society in any way?
Is this ignorance or a form a geek elitism, thinking that we geeks can't possibly be expected to suffer under the same working conditions of the rest of the pathetic planet of idiots?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280638</id>
	<title>Re:More news at 11</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267109760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is that so much to ask? To be treated differently? We've been fucked our entire lives? Why SHOULDN'T we be entitled to some fucking differentiation now? Something for the better perhaps!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is that so much to ask ?
To be treated differently ?
We 've been fucked our entire lives ?
Why SHOULD N'T we be entitled to some fucking differentiation now ?
Something for the better perhaps !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is that so much to ask?
To be treated differently?
We've been fucked our entire lives?
Why SHOULDN'T we be entitled to some fucking differentiation now?
Something for the better perhaps!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281560</id>
	<title>Knowledge economy? Pftttt</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1267119900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>In a knowledge economy,</p></div> </blockquote><p>It's not a knowledge economy, but an <b>influence</b> economy. The knowledge economy is a fantasy. Besides, knowledge can be offshored fairly easily to low-wage countries, and thus cannot be America's comparative advantage, at least not by itself.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In a knowledge economy , It 's not a knowledge economy , but an influence economy .
The knowledge economy is a fantasy .
Besides , knowledge can be offshored fairly easily to low-wage countries , and thus can not be America 's comparative advantage , at least not by itself .
       </tokentext>
<sentencetext>In a knowledge economy, It's not a knowledge economy, but an influence economy.
The knowledge economy is a fantasy.
Besides, knowledge can be offshored fairly easily to low-wage countries, and thus cannot be America's comparative advantage, at least not by itself.
       
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31284042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276986
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278550
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31288760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31292158
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281774
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276986
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277246
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276986
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280458
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278930
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276986
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279522
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277870
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276986
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280562
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278418
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31289510
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278100
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280768
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276986
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277894
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281024
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276986
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276986
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31283416
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31289626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279464
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278942
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276986
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278286
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276892
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277824
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31304024
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278530
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31287242
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279098
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280698
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279426
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278240
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281242
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276986
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277640
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31283844
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31287372
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280118
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31283896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281046
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278602
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31284548
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276892
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280394
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277560
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276986
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278550
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31283492
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31289054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276986
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31313956
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278522
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31294486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277136
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279312
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277412
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276986
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278484
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278034
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276986
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31282608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31283948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31287264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276892
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281340
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280642
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277250
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280526
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278070
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276892
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_25_1949223_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277970
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31287242
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278320
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31284548
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278884
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281242
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278240
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280638
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31304024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279464
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31289054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278070
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277224
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281774
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277044
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277640
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281600
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277750
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280698
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280518
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31287372
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279098
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278602
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279316
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31282608
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277066
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31283844
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278034
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31294486
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31313956
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277412
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277538
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276890
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277562
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278488
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278706
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31283948
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277194
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280128
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278100
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281046
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277596
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278942
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277870
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279984
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278906
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280118
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278930
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278200
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277560
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281264
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277576
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278570
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277970
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278890
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278392
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31287264
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31284042
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279180
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277246
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281890
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276930
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280768
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279198
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280642
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277270
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277290
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280992
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31289626
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277318
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31289510
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280424
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280526
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277330
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277076
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277880
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279426
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278522
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276892
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281340
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277824
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280394
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31281858
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277136
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279312
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280880
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278530
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31283896
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276818
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276986
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277320
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278204
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277516
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278550
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280282
------http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31288760
-------http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31292158
------http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31283492
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279522
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277958
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280458
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280618
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31283416
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278368
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278484
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277918
-----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31280562
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31279280
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277894
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278286
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31278184
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276924
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277316
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276996
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31276946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277250
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277070
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_25_1949223.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_25_1949223.31277192
</commentlist>
</conversation>
