Did you catch what Eric Schmidt said about capitalism and taxation last week?
From the Belfast Telegraph:
"Google boss Eric Schmidt: I'm proud of our tax avoidance scheme...it's called capitalism" by Nikhil Kumar and Oliver Wright
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/uk/google-boss-eric-schmidt-im-proud-of-our-tax-avoidance-schemeits-called-capitalism-16249970.html
Yes, even when you follow all the rules, people still get mad. Jealousy and greed are ugly things. There are many small-minded people in the world, and they're not shy about taking things that don't belong to them.
I love how honest and correct Eric is in his quotes:
“I am very proud of the structure that we set up. We did it based on the incentives that the governments offered us to operate.”
“It’s called capitalism. We are proudly capitalistic. I’m not confused about this.”
“It's very good for us, but to go back to shareholders and say, 'We looked at 200 countries but felt sorry for those British people so we want to [pay them more]', there is probably some law against doing that.”
Monday, December 17, 2012
Friday, December 14, 2012
Google Zeitgeist 2012
Did you catch Google's latest Zeitgeist video? No??? Well, here it is. It would be worth digging back into the old videos for past years, too. Just do a search on YouTube...
From the Google Official Blog:
"Zeitgeist 2012: What piqued your curiosity this year?"
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2012/12/zeitgeist2012.html
From Google's YouTube channel:
"Zeitgeist 2012: Year In Review"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xY_MUB8adEQ
And the Google Zeitgeist 2012 website:
http://www.google.com/zeitgeist/2012/#the-world
From the Google Official Blog:
"Zeitgeist 2012: What piqued your curiosity this year?"
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2012/12/zeitgeist2012.html
From Google's YouTube channel:
"Zeitgeist 2012: Year In Review"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xY_MUB8adEQ
And the Google Zeitgeist 2012 website:
http://www.google.com/zeitgeist/2012/#the-world
1.2 trillion searches.
146 languages.
WHAT DID THE WORLD SEARCH FOR IN 2012?
Thursday, December 13, 2012
Right to Work
Did you catch the news from Michigan lately? Did you see the eloquent arguments from union workers, arguing their point of view? If not, you can find them here:
From MackinacCenter:
"Unions Right-to-Work Protesters Take Down 'Worker Freedom' Tent"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P97oDKzOd3I
Another from MackinacCenterMackinacCenter:
"The AFP-Michigan Tent: A Casualty of Union Mob Tactics"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkZfKx74IBg
From PatriotPost:
"Union Goons Tear Down AFP Tent at Michigan Right-to-Work Rally"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0uz1aLP1iA
From AforP:
"Brutality & Violence from Union Protestors, AFP Activists Trampled On"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSRabbK-vQ0
From WatchdogOrg:
"Inside view as unions tear down AFP tent"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj_Lra1lvxw
From JobCreatorsSolutions:
"Cutting Up AFP Tent on Michigan Capitol Lawn"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhyooRy9PMQ
This last video has someone questioning the union scum, and the union scum not having any answers to her questions.
That reminds me of my own union experience. Yes, I was a member of Hotel and Restaurant Workers Local 122 in Milwaukee a long time ago, for about four years. The biggest impact the union ever had on me was that it protected drunks from getting fired--even though all of us who worked with the drunks would gladly have fired them. They simply didn't pull their weight on the job.
So naturally, this news story caught my eye. From the Detroit News:
"Chrysler reinstates 13 workers fired for drinking on job" by Bryce G. Hoffman
http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20121210/AUTO0101/212100439#ixzz2EtMVhbfI
Not enough evidence? Videotape is not evidence? Amazing.
From MackinacCenter:
"Unions Right-to-Work Protesters Take Down 'Worker Freedom' Tent"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P97oDKzOd3I
Another from MackinacCenterMackinacCenter:
"The AFP-Michigan Tent: A Casualty of Union Mob Tactics"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkZfKx74IBg
From PatriotPost:
"Union Goons Tear Down AFP Tent at Michigan Right-to-Work Rally"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0uz1aLP1iA
From AforP:
"Brutality & Violence from Union Protestors, AFP Activists Trampled On"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSRabbK-vQ0
From WatchdogOrg:
"Inside view as unions tear down AFP tent"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj_Lra1lvxw
From JobCreatorsSolutions:
"Cutting Up AFP Tent on Michigan Capitol Lawn"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhyooRy9PMQ
This last video has someone questioning the union scum, and the union scum not having any answers to her questions.
That reminds me of my own union experience. Yes, I was a member of Hotel and Restaurant Workers Local 122 in Milwaukee a long time ago, for about four years. The biggest impact the union ever had on me was that it protected drunks from getting fired--even though all of us who worked with the drunks would gladly have fired them. They simply didn't pull their weight on the job.
So naturally, this news story caught my eye. From the Detroit News:
"Chrysler reinstates 13 workers fired for drinking on job" by Bryce G. Hoffman
http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20121210/AUTO0101/212100439#ixzz2EtMVhbfI
Not enough evidence? Videotape is not evidence? Amazing.
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
Quote of the Day: Cicero on Government
The more things change, the more they stay the same. Does this quote remind you of any current events? It should...
"Do not blame Caesar, blame the people of Rome who have so enthusiastically acclaimed and adored him and rejoiced in their loss of freedom and danced in his path and given him triumphal processions. Blame the people who hail him when he speaks in the Forum of the new wonderful good society which shall now be Rome's, interpreted to mean more money, more ease, more security, and more living fatly at the expense of the industrious." - Roman philosopher and statesman Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 BC)
"Do not blame Caesar, blame the people of Rome who have so enthusiastically acclaimed and adored him and rejoiced in their loss of freedom and danced in his path and given him triumphal processions. Blame the people who hail him when he speaks in the Forum of the new wonderful good society which shall now be Rome's, interpreted to mean more money, more ease, more security, and more living fatly at the expense of the industrious." - Roman philosopher and statesman Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 BC)
Tuesday, December 11, 2012
Google Shuts Down GMail
What were you doing around 10:45-11a eastern yesterday? Were you using GMail? I doubt it!
Did you know WHY Gmail shut down? From The Onion:
"Google Shuts Down Gmail For Two Hours To Show Its Immense Power"
http://www.theonion.com/video/google-shuts-down-gmail-for-two-hours-to-show-its,27610/
More information, from Twitter:
https://twitter.com/search?q=gmail+down
Did you know WHY Gmail shut down? From The Onion:
"Google Shuts Down Gmail For Two Hours To Show Its Immense Power"
http://www.theonion.com/video/google-shuts-down-gmail-for-two-hours-to-show-its,27610/
More information, from Twitter:
https://twitter.com/search?q=gmail+down
Saturday, December 1, 2012
A Simple Question the Democrats Won't Answer
Here is a simple question that demonstrates that Democrats are not serious about taxing the so-called "rich." They're simply demagoguing this issue.
From National Review Online:
"A Rude Question" by Michael Walsh
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/334055/rude-question-michael-walsh#
"Then again, if the Democrats are really serious about soaking the rich, why don’t they come out in favor of replacing the income tax — which is basically a mechanism to prevent the upper-middle class from becoming wealthy — with a wealth tax? Holders of great family fortunes can easily live off their inheritances, with no taxable 'income' whatsoever, but imagine if the Kennedys, the Rockefellers, and those who grabbed the swag by marrying the widow of a rich Republican senator, were forced to cough up a sizable percentage of their estates to the feds each year. Then you’d see real tax reform, and in a hurry. "
Great question. Why DON'T the Democrats tax the rich? They constantly say that that is their intention. And yet they simply don't do it. Hypocrites.
From National Review Online:
"A Rude Question" by Michael Walsh
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/334055/rude-question-michael-walsh#
"Then again, if the Democrats are really serious about soaking the rich, why don’t they come out in favor of replacing the income tax — which is basically a mechanism to prevent the upper-middle class from becoming wealthy — with a wealth tax? Holders of great family fortunes can easily live off their inheritances, with no taxable 'income' whatsoever, but imagine if the Kennedys, the Rockefellers, and those who grabbed the swag by marrying the widow of a rich Republican senator, were forced to cough up a sizable percentage of their estates to the feds each year. Then you’d see real tax reform, and in a hurry. "
Great question. Why DON'T the Democrats tax the rich? They constantly say that that is their intention. And yet they simply don't do it. Hypocrites.
Friday, November 30, 2012
Guns and Crime
You know the old saying, "Life is tough but it's even tougher when you're stupid"? Consider this next story, from the Hampton Roads (VA) Daily Press:
"Gun violence in Virginia falls, firearms sales up" by the Associated Press
http://www.dailypress.com/news/breaking/dp-nws-wire-gun-sales-violence-20121124,0,5325773.story
Here's the first line in the story:
"Gun-related violence has fallen steadily since 2006 in Virginia despite record firearm sales, according to a university professor's analysis."
What? "Despite"? Why do people cling to the ridiculous notion that increased firearm sales would lead to more gun-related crime???
Once again, the simple fact is that if you try to limit legal access to guns you are only stopping law-abiding citizens from getting guns. Criminals clearly don't obey the law, by definition!
"Baker, who specializes in research methods and criminology theory, said the comparison seems to contradict the premise that more guns lead to more crime in Virginia."
Well, no shit, Sherlock.
"It's quite possible that you can sell a whole lot more guns and crime is still going down," Goddard said. "But is the crime going down because more people are buying guns, or is the crime going down because the crime is going down?"
Here's another possibility: When more law-abiding citizens do have guns, maybe, just maybe, criminals are more likely to think twice before breaking into a house or assaulting someone is his car.
As usual, the gun rights supporters are on the side of common sense:
"Gun-rights supporter Philip Van Cleave, president of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, said whether gun-related violent crimes are committed depends on who possesses the firearms. 'As long as it's going into the hands of people like you or me, there's not going to be a problem,' he said. 'Criminals are going to continue to get their guns no matter what.'"
"Gun violence in Virginia falls, firearms sales up" by the Associated Press
http://www.dailypress.com/news/breaking/dp-nws-wire-gun-sales-violence-20121124,0,5325773.story
Here's the first line in the story:
"Gun-related violence has fallen steadily since 2006 in Virginia despite record firearm sales, according to a university professor's analysis."
What? "Despite"? Why do people cling to the ridiculous notion that increased firearm sales would lead to more gun-related crime???
Once again, the simple fact is that if you try to limit legal access to guns you are only stopping law-abiding citizens from getting guns. Criminals clearly don't obey the law, by definition!
"Baker, who specializes in research methods and criminology theory, said the comparison seems to contradict the premise that more guns lead to more crime in Virginia."
Well, no shit, Sherlock.
"It's quite possible that you can sell a whole lot more guns and crime is still going down," Goddard said. "But is the crime going down because more people are buying guns, or is the crime going down because the crime is going down?"
Here's another possibility: When more law-abiding citizens do have guns, maybe, just maybe, criminals are more likely to think twice before breaking into a house or assaulting someone is his car.
As usual, the gun rights supporters are on the side of common sense:
"Gun-rights supporter Philip Van Cleave, president of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, said whether gun-related violent crimes are committed depends on who possesses the firearms. 'As long as it's going into the hands of people like you or me, there's not going to be a problem,' he said. 'Criminals are going to continue to get their guns no matter what.'"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
