[QUOTE=Sexy Eskimo;33621181]This is the most important stuff a president should do according to Facepunch.
Legalize drugs
Take the Troops home
Tax the rich
Fuck Israel and Support Palestine
Legalize gay marriage
Drive over the WBC with a pickup
Make sure kittens are worth more then human beings.
Not be a religious zealot.
Death sentence for animal abusers.[/QUOTE]
hello i am thisispain and i approve this message
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;33621173]Actually his support had already dropped down since then.
[url]http://www.hist.umn.edu/~ruggles/Approval.htm[/url][/QUOTE]
He would have lost further support than that had he not gone to Iraq, abusing the "Rally Around The Flag" effect.
[QUOTE=person11;33621294]He would have lost further support than that had he not gone to Iraq, abusing the "Rally Around The Flag" effect.[/QUOTE]
Still, it's proof that even with under 50% approval you can win be a fair amount. That's how elections are. I have faith that Obama's going to win again, because, again, he's the incumbent.
It's because every time the economy turns to shit/stays the same, people always vote for the other party. No matter what.
Our economy is in the crapper so a lot more people are just going to vote the other way because of that.
Maybe it wouldn't be the worst thing if a Republican was elected. The amount of dissent and anger it would cause would pretty much fuck up the status quo. You think the occupy business is big right now? Think about if we had a Republican President.
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;33621308]Still, it's proof that even with under 50% approval you can win be a fair amount. That's how elections are. I have faith that Obama's going to win again, because, again, he's the incumbent.[/QUOTE]
The economy was bad when Carter and Bush Sr lost their elections. It is even worse now. I don't want Obama to lose, but I cannot blindly assume that he will win.
[editline]7th December 2011[/editline]
I hope you guys like baseball, cause our next President is named Mitt!
Glad I don't live in America.
Obama's not going to lose.
[QUOTE=CakeMaster7;33621220]reform the patent system[/QUOTE]
FUCK YES.
If someone promised to do that, I'd actually vote.
Seriously, just put everything in the public domain and close the patent office. Ideas are not physical goods and people shouldn't be allowed to 'own' them.
You can't get anything done without an army of lawyers these days.
I don't think you all realize what becoming president means.
You can't always do exactly what was on your campaign platform, otherwise you piss off the other people who didn't want you to be elected.
If a Republican gets elected, he won't run things much differently than Obama did, since large amounts of revisions and changes would prevent him from getting reelected in 2016.
[QUOTE=ROBO_DONUT;33621464]FUCK YES.
If someone promised to do that, I'd actually vote.
Seriously, just put everything in the public domain and close the patent office. Ideas are not physical goods and people shouldn't be allowed to 'own' them.[/QUOTE]
That's idiotic. Why would companies innovate if another company can just steal their innovation? What incentive is there then to innovate?
Oh god.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PAJNntoRgA&feature=channel_video_title[/media]
[QUOTE=OhHello;33621574]Oh god.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PAJNntoRgA&feature=channel_video_title[/media][/QUOTE]
Reported for inciting hatred against gay people god I can't believe people make youtube videos like this.
I hope the GOP actually does nominate this "Generic Republican". Just a blank white guy. An NPC without any scripting. He'll just stand in one spot all day doing absolutely nothing, and will be the best modern Republican ever.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;33621676]I hope the GOP actually does nominate this "Generic Republican". Just a blank white guy. An NPC without any scripting. He'll just stand in one spot all day doing absolutely nothing, and will be the best modern Republican ever.[/QUOTE]
Actually, by the standards set before he was president, Obama is currently the best moderate Republican president we have ever had. A modern day Eisenhower!
(sorry for the shitty joke)
[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;33621527]That's idiotic. Why would companies innovate if another company can just steal their innovation? What incentive is there then to innovate?[/QUOTE]
Money.
It's always an incentive, regardless of what circumstances surround obtaining it.
[editline]8th December 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=person11;33621659]Reported for inciting hatred against gay people god I can't believe people make youtube videos like this.[/QUOTE]
I flagged it for promoting terrorism.
[QUOTE=LunchboxOfDoom;33621694]Money.
It's always an incentive, regardless of what circumstances surround obtaining it.[/QUOTE]
How will innovations result in greater income if everyone can use the innovation? Companies would gain no advantage from their innovations.
[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;33621727]How will innovations result in greater income if everyone can use the innovation? Companies would gain no advantage from their innovations.[/QUOTE]
And yet businesses were around and were thriving the world over long before the concept of patents even existed, much less its legal implementation.
You dwell too much on theory. Trust me, if there's a way to make something profitable, human beings will find a way.
[QUOTE=stepat201;33621448]Obama's not going to lose.[/QUOTE]
You underestimate human stupidity.
[QUOTE=LunchboxOfDoom;33621817]And yet businesses were around and were thriving the world over long before the concept of patents even existed, much less its legal implementation.[/QUOTE]
500 BC?
[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;33621527]That's idiotic. Why would companies innovate if another company can just steal their innovation? What incentive is there then to innovate?[/QUOTE]
That's a non-innovator's view on how the innovation process works.
People who genuinely appreciate their field will innovate regardless. Ideas just hit you, and you're driven to experiment. Innovation still happened in software before software was patentable.
Patents are no longer serving their original purpose. They initially existed to protect the rights of [i]individual[/i] inventors and engineers and ensure that they were justly compensated for their work. This is no longer the case. When most engineers/inventors are employed, the agreement is that their employer will [i]own every idea they have[/i] for the duration of their employment. It's no longer about the individual. The individual can't function on his own, because he doesn't have the sheer legal power necessary to plow through the IP minefield. You're forced into this system whether you like it or not.
Consider the [i]massive[/i] legal force required just to support this system. We spend more time arguing over IP disputes than we do actually innovating. It's so fucking backwards it's ridiculous. It all needs to be torn down and rebuilt from the ground up.
Finally, consider how the flow of ideas and information works in this society that we've built for ourselves. You have $[i]x[/i] and can buy [i]y[/i] ideas with this money. Everyone else also has $[i]x[/i] with which to buy [i]y[/i] ideas. It costs [i]absolutely nothing[/i] to duplicate an idea. It is not a limited resource like, say, wood or gasoline. So, why is it that you are only allowed to have [i]y[/i] information when you, and everyone else, could pay your $[i]x[/i] so that the artists, engineers, inventors, and everyone else in an intellectual trade is adequately compensated, but you could copy ideas freely, so that instead of getting [i]y[/i] ideas, you pay your $[i]x[/i] and [i]get as much information as you can use[/i].
We've imposed this artificial limit on the supply of information because we decided to shoe-horn it into our stone-age economy which is based around the notion that all goods have limited supply.
Ideas should work by their own laws. Ideas should be free to all people, art and research should be subsidized by the government and academic institutions, and we should just accept that we might have to pay a little extra in taxes to gain access to a vast amount of information and entertainment (and save [i]well more[/i] on these things than we pay to the government).
What good is innovation when the patents exist to disallow use of the innovation?
Anything that inhibits the flow of information or imposes restrictions on ideas is a fundamental evil.
We're bombarded by IP law propaganda from a very young age, whether we realize it or not. It's our responsibility as young people to thoroughly examine what we're taught and exercise skepticism at all times, lest we become another generation of close-minded bureaucrats.
you're only saying that because of apple aren't you
[QUOTE=thisispain;33621848]500 BC?[/QUOTE]
Modern patents did not originate until the Venetian Statute of 1474, and they were the most basic form imaginable (with protection for inventions only extending up to ten years). What you're thinking of is the "encouragement" process the Greeks came up with.
[QUOTE=LunchboxOfDoom;33621817]And yet businesses were around and were thriving the world over long before the concept of patents even existed, much less its legal implementation.[/QUOTE]
Because back then the nations essentially controlled the economy (mercantilism) and kept their innovations as state secrets. Most economic advanteges, anyways, had to do with cheaper labor or more abundant resources at the time. There is a reason why recipes and inventions used to be kept secret.
Nowadays, patents are needed because otherwise companies could just buy another company's stuff and then take it apart and use everything they did. Patents just allow you to go public with an invention more easily and encourage innovation.
[QUOTE=OhHello;33621574]Oh god.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PAJNntoRgA&feature=channel_video_title[/media][/QUOTE]
Something is wrong in this country when people get the equal rights they deserve, and when public schools follow the US Constitution? Interesting
It's not too much about popular support either. It is about States. Obama lost a lot of key swing states in 2010 when they all elected firm conservatives. I doubt they will swing back to being democratic in '12. Around now, Obama is 20 electoral votes short of the 270 needed to win.
[QUOTE=person11;33621928]It's not too much about popular support either. It is about States. Obama lost a lot of key swing states in 2010 when they all elected firm conservatives. I doubt they will swing back to being democratic in '12. Around now, Obama is 20 electoral votes short of the 270 needed to win.[/QUOTE]
You're underestimating the power of incumbency, as most Americans do. Swing states may be easy to manipulate but there are factors that always affect them, and incumbency is without a doubt the biggest one.
I think newt would be the best of the GOP. Because he can debate like a pro.
[QUOTE=The one that is;33622039]I think newt would be the best of the GOP. Because he can debate like a pro.[/QUOTE]
Yeah but he's a scumbag
CANADA YOU BETTER OPEN UP YER BORDERS CUZ HERE WE COME. YEEEEEEEEEHAW
Seriously though my family has discussed it and if any of them get elected we're moving
[quote]Yeah but he's a scumbag[/quote]
But he's an exceptional* scumbag
*He gets different treatment and doesn't get barred from politics for his personal life. ~exceptional~
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
