| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<101df7s$nrpr$2@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc Subject: Re: Rewriting SSA. Is This A Chance For GNU/Linux? Date: Sat, 31 May 2025 00:33:16 +0100 Organization: A little, after lunch Lines: 33 Message-ID: <101df7s$nrpr$2@dont-email.me> References: <pan$54963$b3f3d4e6$ae35ff46$71fe05c9@linux.rocks> <gXCdnTD2YLRBaHX6nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@giganews.com> <m4tf1dFmvh3U1@mid.individual.net> <vsd0ui$365s0$1@dont-email.me> <vsds7u$2u8h$1@dont-email.me> <101bmca$cc5u$2@dont-email.me> <20250530105929.00000a4e@gmail.com> <231k3kdedo3ehicbstcluh3lb4440tro86@4ax.com> <wNqdnWk_NvaHmKf1nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sat, 31 May 2025 01:33:16 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ca28cd1bb688aa049361b0e5f3fc82fd"; logging-data="782139"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19bgsM98TYW5BqTtFOzkEMumYRAr2bxeFY=" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:9y6uj4Bz/GJwtfHm0UAcGtuKRwc= In-Reply-To: <wNqdnWk_NvaHmKf1nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com> Content-Language: en-GB On 30/05/2025 20:21, % wrote: > Joel wrote: >> John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Fri, 30 May 2025 07:22:51 -0000 (UTC) >>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: >>> >>>> Well, I guess that’s over, now that Elon Musk has left the building. >>>> That’s the end of DOGE, without “saving” anywhere near the trillion >>>> dollars he originally promised. >>> >>> Comes as a *total* shock, lemmetellya. >> >> >> Let's say they had cut that much with this DOGE BS (not that it's 100% >> a stupid idea, of course, but they were not approaching very >> rationally), wouldn't the proposed tax breaks offset it? Wouldn't we >> still be spending a large fortune every year on the damn military? >> > no because there would be tariffs that go to trumps pocket Military spending is pretty low in reality. And it is a *pragmatic* program, whereas so much is spent on purely *moral* initiatives to employ people who think they can therefore tell how to run your life better than you can yourself. -- "Anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the windows of my apartment. (I live on the twenty-first floor.) " Alan Sokal