| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Battling Microsoft Again | |
|
||
| Time: 10:51 EST/15:51 GMT | News Source: Washington Post | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
Microsoft scored a major victory last month when a federal judge approved an antitrust settlement between the software giant, the Justice Department and state governments. Most of the nine states involved in the legal wrangling with Microsoft hinted that the ruling signaled the end of their legal battle -- except for Massachusetts. The Bay State on Friday said it wants to still play ball and continue its legal fight. "We are prepared to go our own way," Massachusetts Attorney General Tom Reilly said at a news conference, as quoted by Reuters. "There was nothing in the deal that would change Microsoft's business practices in any substantial way." Reilly also issued a statement. West Virginia today is expected to decide whether it will join forces with Massachusetts in the case. Seven other states and the District of Columbia said that they will not appeal the federal judge's approval. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 306 Last | Next |
The time now is
2:52:58 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 4209 (67.97.216.252) at 12/2/2002 2:15:59 PM |
| How much money does Mass Have??? I hope quite a bit since they are going it alone. |
| #2 By 20 (24.243.41.64) at 12/2/2002 3:50:08 PM |
|
#1: There is Boston, though.
#3: Money's not an issue in Taxachusetts the liberals will just raise taxes until they can pay for it all. Tax and Spend, it's a way of life for liberals. |
| #3 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 12/2/2002 4:55:35 PM |
|
daz - Well let's instead take a look at the conservative mentality of fiscal irresponsibility.
You have a budget of $200/month to spend on groceries. But you find out that you can take out a 30 year loan at 7% interest to buy your groceries. This makes your groceries only cost $1.33/month! WOO HOO! the conservatives say, what a savings! Now we can go blow that $198.67 buying candy! Why? Because candy tastes good, and everybody likes candy, right!? The thing is, borrowing to pay for current expenses starts adding up over the long haul. After your first year you're spending $16/month on loan payments. After 5 years you are spending $80/month in loan payments. After 10 years it's up to $160/month and after 20 you're now spending $320/month. And that's the simple equation, chances are the cost of groceries will go up over the years, and those new loans will be even larger. Unfortunately your debt payments prevent you from now just buying the groceries outright and forgoing candy, you're now stuck in the cycle of forever taking out new loans. And it's not like groceries are a appreciating asset, like a home... Once you've spent the $200, it's gone, you don't get a return other than the knowledge you'll have to buy food again next month to survive. Sounds kind of stupid, doesn't it? Unfortunately that's how conservatives like daz think. The US budget today is about $2 trillion, of which 10% is spent just paying interest on the over $6 trillion in debt we've collected as a result of Reaganomics. Don't believe me? Here's what the Bush administration had to say back in 2001... source: http://w3.access.gpo.gov/usbudget/fy2002/pdf/guide.pdf "Deficits increase the Federal debt and, with it, the Government's obligation to pay interest. The more it must pay in interest, the less it has available to spend on education, defense, law enforcement, and other important services or themore it must collect in taxes. As recently as 1997, the Government spent more than 15 percent of its budget to pay interest, in contrast to less than 10 percent projected for 2002. The President's budget will reduce these interest payments dramatically in the next 10 years." Strange how they're singing a new tune now. Or rather it's an old tune that budget deficits aren't bad, don't worry be happy. Fade to sound of Bobby Mcferin whistling... |
| #4 By 20 (24.243.41.64) at 12/3/2002 3:20:39 PM |
|
sodablue: It's unfortunate that you blame all that on conservatives since the national debt didn't start until FDR's Give-Everyone-Everything Deal... oops i mean New Deal.
The Conservatives contributed to it, of course, but you can't blame them for everything. At least the conservatives are aware of it and are trying to do something about it. The liberals are just happy raising taxes and spending it on snail anus research in Mexico rather than paying down the debt. Yes, yes, I know the Great Evil Satan Reagan raised our debt considerably, but as a result we no longer have Soviet Communist hostile missles pointed at our cities. I think that's a fair trade. Government having debt to our own corporations isn't all that bad. Sure, we'd like to have no debt, but at least a huge portion of it rests in American hands and helps the economy overall. Did you watch Meet the Press on Sunday? They had a quote from a famous politician. It was something to the effect that raising taxes eventually results in less revenue because you limit people's ability to make leaps and innovations because they are so burdened with taxes. Lowering taxes will eventually result in higher income. Sounds like Reagan right? Well, Reagen followed that philosophy, but guess who said it? John Fitzgerald Kennedy. It's a shame he had to die because maybe he could've set the M.O. for liberals today to be fiscally conservative while still achieving their goals. But he died and LBJ came in and introduced them to a whole knew philosophy: class warfare (aka Hate the Rich) and tax the middle class to hell while blaming it on the poor or rich to keep them biting at each other while the government blows your money on snail anus research in Mexico. Face it Soda, there is no defense for liberalism. Liberalism is socialism and socialism is opposite of American/capitalist ideals. |
| #5 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 12/3/2002 9:17:51 PM |
|
"Liberalism is socialism and socialism is opposite of American/capitalist ideals."
Liberalism isn't really defined as anything. People use the term so rediculously loosely that it has effectively lost all value. The only term, perhaps, that has been as missused is socialism. At any rate, liberalism is a governmental idea. Socialism is an economic idea. These are different things. The root ideal of socialism is "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." Another way, perhaps, of saying this came from our founding fathers (Ben Franklin IIRC) "United We Stand." Yet another way we express this idea is "Be a team player." One last one "The whole is greater than the sum of its parts." This is what socialism is all about. The idea is you give everything you can to the whole, and the whole gives you everything you need back. If you don't give, you don't get back. This is the heart and mind of Christianity. This is the heart of America. "Give me your tired, your poor, ....." The statue of liberty agrees with me. Perhaps, the statue is a little too liberal for you though. This post was edited by BobSmith on Tuesday, December 03, 2002 at 21:18. |
| #6 By 135 (208.50.206.187) at 12/4/2002 12:26:33 AM |
|
daz: "The Conservatives contributed to it, of course, but you can't blame them for everything. "
Why not? You go around blaming liberals for everything. Seems only fair, doesn't it? You are so funny, and so predictable. "They had a quote from a famous politician. It was something to the effect that raising taxes eventually results in less revenue because you limit people's ability to make leaps and innovations because they are so burdened with taxes. " How about this quote from Churchill, which is something like "To think you can make a man rich by taxing him is like a man thinking he can stand in a bucket and pick himself up by the handle." I can't believe you don't know Churchill. For what it's worth, that quote was referring to protectionist tariffs such as our dear President Bush just levied on Steel and Lumber. I think it's sad you still can't get past the fact that I'm not a liberal. This isn't a debate about lowering taxes or raising taxes. This debate is about revenues meeting expenditures, i.e. fiscally sound policy. You claim the Liberals are "Tax and Spend", I simply point out that Conservatives are "Borrow and Spend", and in the long term the "Borrow and Spend" attitude is far more damaging. And you'll note the White House agrees with me as you'll see in that quote from the 2002 budget. Which I just have to chuckle about. This is why I tend to side with the Democrats. In 1993 they came into office and fixed the tax cuts that Reagan implemented back in the 80's. The result of this was fantastic economic growth and a balanced budget. In 2002 Bush gave us his version of tax cuts. No economic growth, all it resulted in was budget deficits. Why? Because his tax cuts didn't target job growth, they just gave a kickback to wealthy contributors to his campaign. You need more tricks in your book, daz... the ones you got just ain't working. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 306 Last | Next |
The time now is
2:52:58 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
