patrick.net

curious2 says

thomaswong.1986 says

They died because of they were inflexible, unable to change with overhang of govt bureaucrats.

Which universities died?

no not the universities .. but the tech companies. Route 128 had more employers and more employees far far more than Silicon Valley even with all the Universities it didnt help in the long run. So Universities were not the factor.

the short of it is ... many "borrowed" their ideas from their prior employer and created new companies. In Boston they would have been sued and jailed.

http://techcrunch.com/2009/10/31/the-valley-of-my-dreams-why-silicon-valley-left-bostons-route-128-in-the-dust/

By the mid-1990s the east had missed the shift from minicomputers to personal computers as the flexible Silicon Valley ecosystem sped ahead with innovation across a diversifying range of components and systems going from chips, routers, and application software to ecommerce and search engines. Today Silicon Valley is the leading location for cleantech venture activity, an area widely considered to be the next big value creation engine for the U.S. and the world.

Boston, however, is no slouch. The Route 128 community remains the second biggest in the U.S. in terms of venture funds committed. Boston has powerful research institutions, still, and lots of very strong companies. In some areas, such as biotech, Boston may even rival Silicon Valley. But overall, its pretty clear that the Valley has not only won but is racing further ahead.

curious2 says

curious2 says

I thought Obama won [tonight's debate]

CNN says a plurality of voters agree, Obama by 8 points, 48%-40%.

Obama said in his closing:

"Yes, I want to reduce our deficit by cutting spending that we don't need but also by asking the wealthy to do a little bit more so that we can invest in things like research and technology that are the key to a 21st century economy."

We here in Silicon Valley created something of a 21st century over the past decades.. but it certainly wasnt from Govt spending or forced taxation siphoned into some govt mandated R&D programs like Solar or Wind energy. If anything over the past 4 years the Govt backed, taxpayer funded initiatives/programs all have gone down as failures. Tax dollars lost... and nothing to show for it.

Pretty much all of our R&D / Manufacturing funding which created new industries/companies and employed benefiting untold thousands came by voluntarily contributions from the upper class excess savers (the top 10%). They take the risk and we create the industries and job. It has by all accounts created a booming middle class.

We had an financial/economic/taxing/regulatory environment which allowed us to create this success story of today. But its the unfair foreign trading practice and domestic taxing/regulatory environment which is choking off any recovery and further progress, if any.

So do we believe in some Govt backed confiscation/distribution of wealth policy based on governments own agenda or the past tried and true success story which has worked for decades.

Its time to unshackle from this government bondage on our industries so we can grow and compete globally as we see fit. Stop the over regulation and let investments flow to create domestic careers and jobs.

As Mitt said to Obama.. "In my 25 years in Business, I have no idea what your talking about".

I agree with Mitt.

"Yes, I want to reduce our deficit by cutting spending that we don't need but also by asking the wealthy to do a little bit more so that we can invest in things like research and technology that are the key to a 21st century economy."

Ha, Ha! That is like the vapid beauty queen calling for world peace.

Stating the obvious followed by a couple of non sequitur free associations. That's our fearless leader!

thomaswong.1986 says

As Mitt said to Obama..

I checked the transcript and can't find Romnesia saying anything like the quote you attributed to him. Please confirm?

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/22/transcript-third-presidential-debate/comment-page-2/

Anyway agreeing with Romnesia always requires a timestamp because he changes so completely from one speech to the next. He was for ObamneyCare before he was against it, now he's for parts of it again but not the rest. He promises to increase spending, cut taxes, and balance the budget, all at the same time. Agreeing with Romnesia requires abandoning math, logic, and all reason.

Romnesia is a lemon socialist and crony capitalist just like W appointee Bubbles Ben Bernanke. W authorized TARP and appointed Bubbles Ben, and the beneficiaries of that largesse are now supporting Romnesia. The result is an economy dominated by zombie banks and GSEs with centrally planned pricing for essential assets including housing.

You might really prefer former Governor Gary Johnson. Unlike Romnesia, Johnson actually supports free markets.

curious2 says

I checked the transcript and can't find Romnesia saying anything like the quote you attributed to him. Please confirm?

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/10/03/debate-quote-romney-you-need-to-get-a-new-accountant/

curious2 says

Romnesia

Thats funny.. but we need a president in the office not a comedian.
Leave the one liners for the late night talk shows... thats their job.

President, not a comedian... Do you guys just make shit up as it seems to fit the moment, regardless of whether or not it's ... Oh, right.

Anyway, No, you need someone in there who has character and integrity, someone who you know what they stand for. Remember what that is? None of you can name one single thing you actually support about romney because nobody actually knows! Every time he opens his mouth something different comes out.

"Romney has publicly demonstrated no core convictions beyond his obvious belief that he should be president. He apparently thinks that simply not being Obama is qualification enough." and for you it is. And like him You keep spouting on about the economy and policy like you know what youre talking about, but all of your points have been proven in study after study and in country after country where they've been tried to be false and failures.

Like America: "George W. Bush’s. His central economic policy was tax cuts for the rich, and he produced the slowest job growth of any president since the Depression. Romney will do that again. Promise." (nationalmemo.com). it's what he did in mass: It Only Took Romney One Term as Governor to Raise the Debt and Ruin Jobs (politicususa.com) "Romney took office during an economic uptick. Massachusetts had a net job growth of 1.4 percent under Romney. However, that was far slower growth than the national average of 5.3%. As Romney’s opponents have frequently, and correctly, noted, Massachusetts ranked 47th in job growth over the entirety of Romney’s term. The only states that did worse: Louisiana, Michigan and Ohio.” Obama doubled the national debt? No, but Bush 1 and 2 nearly did. Reagan almost TRIPLED it. (usgovinfo.about.com)
So I wish you would just shut the hell up about pretending you care about economics and policy because its bullshit and just admit that your only real point is your blind hatred of anything not republican.

By the way, your great and proudly independent silicone valley was built on the back of DARPA research and publicly funded universities, asshole. It was private enterprise that took it all to wonderful heights but it didn't happen in a vacuum.

Go back to your comic books.

A Tale of Two Presidents

Mitt Romney: The Next President -
As president of Bain Capital, invested billions in private equity in these companies:

Staples Office Supply
Burger King
Burlington Coat Factory
AMC Entertainment
Domino's Pizza
Dunkin' Donuts
Sports Authority
Toys "R" Us
Warner Music Group

All of the above are profitable businesses
that have created hundreds of thousands of jobs.

President Barack Obama -
As president of the United States, invested billions of your tax dollars in these companies:

Solyndra-Bankrupt
Ener 1-Bankrupt
Beacon Power-Bankrupt
Abound Solar-Bankrupt
Amonix Solar-Bankrupt
Spectra Watt-Bankrupt
Eastern Energy-Bankrupt
Ener Del-Bankrupt
Range Fuels-Bankrupt

All of the above bankrupt companies were major contributors to Barack Obama's 2008 presidential campaign.

curious2 says

Romnesia is a lemon socialist

If true. that would still be a big improvement over Obama.

Call it Crazy says

Yo Adrian...

See John Stewart, that's how you make a Political funny with out being a party schill.

robertoaribas says

Bap33 says

we need to make stupid people votes count for less than smart people votes.

BAP finally said something I almost agree with! My vote would count for 100 bap votes, if this xenophobic troglodyte had to compare to me on IQ!

The only assumption you make here is the entire post. lol. At any rate, if you scored 97% and I scored 75%, I think your vote should carry the weighted difference.
Having the votes weighted to match the percentage of income paid in taxes (less any handouts) should be a part of the system too. If roberto pays 40% of his income in taxes and I pay 20%, his vote should carry more weight. Just my opinion.

Whatever happened to Romney in last night's debate? He looked like he was attending somebody's funeral, not a Presidential debate?

Yes the dumb and poor should not be able to vote. But they should be free to ransack gated community neighborhoods, plunder, rape and pillage leaving behind a barren waste and destruction. Until the whole country is as desperate, dumb and poor as the next guy.

These people have had ten years of watching Jack Ass the movie to prepare for the civil Apocalypse do you really want them to practice what they've learned on you as you exit the polls where they are barred from participating in their fundamental right that makes them American?

I'm disgusted by this place more and more everyday.

curious2 says

Universities failed in Boston? I haven't heard of that before. Can you cite any examples? From what I heard, the 128 corridor prospered at least until RomneyCare kicked in.

Not only does Mass have a multitude of small R&D firms, it also has the back offices of countless insurance and financial companies. As as the notorious MIB - which I think got renamed recently; where they keep records of every private insurance policy ever (in order to look back and find reasons to deny claims). The Population of Boston declines about 33% in the summer time due to the university kids leaving the city. It has the highest concentration of schools of any city in the US. Boston College, Boston University, UMass, Harvard, Simmons, Suffolk, MIT, Emmerson, Northeastern, Berkeley, etc. etc.

Barlowe says

Either way, most of you are relying on purposely skewed polls. For real poll data, see http://www.unskewedpolls.com.

Bwawawawawa. Anti-Obama Right-wing propaganda page.

I think if there is going to be a surprise, it's not going to be Michigan going for Romney, it's going to be one district in Maine going for Romney. I suspect the above pic would be something more like the results if Obama were not an incumbent.

thunderlips11 says

The Population of Boston declines about 33% in the summer time due to the university kids leaving the city. It has the highest concentration of schools of any city in the US. Boston College, Boston University, UMass, Harvard, Simmons, Suffolk, MIT, Emmerson, Northeastern, Berkeley, etc. etc.

This is high, considering the population of Boston is about 625k. One third of that would be ~208K. Those colleges have total enrollment of around 120k at most, many of those are graduate students who do not leave the city, or those that go home from uni to their familiy who live in the city. I would say the exodus from Boston in the summer is at most 100k, making your estimate about twice what it should be.

Berklee, by the way.

Barlowe says

This is how the map will most likely look based on unskewed polling data:

Not even the most suspect right wing funded "polling" agency is predicting Romney to win in a landslide. If Romney gets even 300 electoral votes I'll turn in my liberal member card because everything right wing media says about skewed polls and liberal media bias will be true.

If Obama wins though, will you do the same? Will you admit that these polls at unskewed polls are manipulated to support a predetermined narrative? Along with others like Fox News and Rasmussen? What about the owrst one, Gravis Marketing?

CaptainShuddup says

Yes the dumb and poor should not be able to vote.

not what was said. what was said was, the voting power should be weighted to help keep the nation working properly, since the voter is supposed to be in charge, not some king in DC.

The original system did not include some members of this nation that should have been able to vote. Today there are people voting that should not be. A simple IQ, history, economics test used to weight the vote, plus weight the votes using the percentage of income paid in tax, that would be much more fair. Everyone that is legal to vote gets to vote, but their vote is weighted by those two things. That might help the republic to survive. CNN is not allowed to make up the test.

Why is Mittens doing so poorly in any of his home states? Can you imagine the "conclusions" of our rightwing friends here if Obama was losing Illinois or Hawaii?

CL says

Why is Mittens doing so poorly in any of his home states? Can you imagine the "conclusions" of our rightwing friends here if Obama was losing Illinois or Hawaii?

Exactly what is Obama's home state? Hawaii, Illinois, or Kenya?

Bap33 says

A simple IQ, history, economics test used to weight the vote, plus weight the votes using the percentage of income paid in tax, that would be much more fair. Everyone that is legal to vote gets to vote, but their vote is weighted by those two things.

Brilliant. The wealthy, well-educated and intelligent get more votes. The beauty of this is that the wealthy will have more influence over laws that will keep them wealthy and they will get to decide how the intelligence tests are applied.

BTW, Captain America is gay, so I'm guessing you are more open minded then your posts suggest.

Bap33 says

CNN is not allowed to make up the test

Exact example of the absurdity of ths idea. Who makes it up then?

The test writer essentially has the power to determine elections - a right leaning test writer would have questions biased towards conservatives - a left leaning test writer would have questions biased towards liberals.

Why not just let the test writers determine who wins then?

The idea of a couple of "smart guys' making better decisions than "dumb" groups has never been proven to be true.

There is nothing to say that "smart" people are any less prone to abuses of power, especially when given unlicensed reign. They simply create isolated, self serving hierarchies.

Ironically, consensus by groups tend to make better decisions overall for everybody than isolated individuals of any talent descriptor. Groups simply have more information than individuals and tend to balance the information better. This is why democracies can work, at least for a while.

Distributed planning and distributed power sharing tends to work best for everybody, even if certain individuals might hand it to themselves that they are "smarter". This applies to both liberals and conservatives.

Psychopaths typically think that they are smarter than everyone else and can lie and cheat their way out of any situation. Obviously, when given power, they abuse it and attempt in every way to get all of it in their hands no matter what the pain and consequences to others.

The USA tends to operate as a distributed power grid, no matter who is president and who votes. The real enemy to all would be absolute central planning authority.

zzyzzx says

Exactly what is Obama's home state? Hawaii, Illinois, or Kenya?

And Romney's home planet is Kolob?

Romney:"In my 25 years in Business, I have no idea what your talking about".
Romney, stop flip flopping & try to figure out what your talking about.

rooemoore says

Bap33 says

A simple IQ, history, economics test used to weight the vote, plus weight the votes using the percentage of income paid in tax, that would be much more fair. Everyone that is legal to vote gets to vote, but their vote is weighted by those two things.

Brilliant. The wealthy, well-educated and intelligent get more votes. The beauty of this is that the wealthy will have more influence over laws that will keep them wealthy and they will get to decide how the intelligence tests are applied.

BTW, Captain America is gay, so I'm guessing you are more open minded then your posts suggest.

help me out, where does my post mention wealth? I am pretty sure it says taxes paid as a percentage of income. If you want folks to have equal weight votes, then have a flat tax. Pretty simple. Oh, now I see, you only want folks to be treated equal when the lazy, drugged, or ignorant is given a special leg up? I am for equal treatment under the law. No special interests. If you think a tax of 75% on Voter #1 is a great idea, but a tax of .0002% is ok for Voter #2, and then you think they should have the same vote, then you support an unfair system. EEO has left the building?

Today's tax system sees your average male that is unmarried, no baby-mamas, in his mid 30's and making 90K is paying BIG TIME income taxes. Not for his benefit, but for the benefit of another voter. The founding fathers knew this to be a very bad idea.

The single male voter in his 30's is also seen as a queer superhero if he wears tights. It's a cruel world. lol

My Capn America is not a sodomite. You can make yours what you wish.

Honest Abe says

Who do you trust more, yourself or government?

If you trust yourself to make the best decisions for you and your family vote for the American, Romney.

If you trust government to make better decisions than you could make for yourself and your family, then vote for the muslim.

You are beginning to sound like Saul Alinsky! What an irony.

Bap33 says

My Capn America is not a sodomite. You can make yours what you wish.

Something was up with Bucky. Plus, we all know those overcompensating jingoists are usually closeted queens.

ohomen171 says

My 'wild card" prediction is that the pollsters have not correctly identified and counted potential Hispanic voters who are going to turn out.

I always get the impression that telephone polls, household surveys are no longer representative in this day and age.

Take myself as an example, you will never reach me on a landline, nor any of family members. So far, I have never heard of any situation where pollsters call cell phone nor anyone would even talk to a pollster on a cell phone.

The most likely people who take the time to answer these things are retirees and a certain demograhic.

Despite what the polls indicate, my prediction is Obama 300.

Daytona says

o far, I have never heard of any situation where pollsters call cell phone nor anyone would even talk to a pollster on a cell phone.

I believe even that Gallup outlier used cell phones. Question is, how was it weighted?

Daytona says

Take myself as an example, you will never reach me on a landline, nor any of family members. So far, I have never heard of any situation where pollsters call cell phone nor anyone would even talk to a pollster on a cell phone.

I still have a Florida cell phone number. I was polled on it.

CL says

I believe even that Gallup outlier used cell phones. Question is, how was it weighted?

I am thinking that they all use cell phone numbers, since that would be a seriously amateurish move not to. I do believe that there was a previous election where somebody didn't and it did affect their accuracy.

I've never, ever, been poled. I'm a virgin. (cheap pun ... but kinda funny)

Bap33 says

help me out, where does my post mention wealth? I am pretty sure it says taxes paid as a percentage of income.

Fair enough - I get two votes, Romney gets one.

Bap33 says

. Oh, now I see, you only want folks to be treated equal when the lazy, drugged, or ignorant is given a special leg up?

The lazy and drugged don't vote. As for the ignorant, well, that would be swell if we could agree what constitutes "ignorant". And we'll let you tell the rednecks with shotguns that they don't get full voting privileges.

rooemoore says

we'll let you tell the rednecks with shotguns that they don't get full voting privileges.

Stop it! I laughed so hard I nearly launched my dinner across the table when I read that one..

The premise that a representative democracy was predicated on the fact that not all the constituents were literate (in fact a small percentage were), or informed about issues. At least in theory, both of those hurdles should no longer be present, although the latter is very debatable.

I don't know if this is news. Polls pretty much show Obama winning the electoral vote by a fairly good margin and winning the popular vote, but by a very narrow margin. That just about sums it up...

http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/story/19905504/michigan-poll-obama-and-romney-in-dead-heat

Michigan Poll: Obama and Romney in dead heat

President Barack Obama 46.92%
Republican Nominee Mitt Romney 46.56%

Detroit newspaper endorses Romney
http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20121025/OPINION01/210250332/1008/opinion01/Editorial-Mitt-Romney-President

Seriously, if Obama can't beat Romney in Michigan by a substantial margin, it might be over for Obama.

zzyzzx says

Seriously, if Obama can't beat Romney in Michigan by a substantial margin, it might be over for Obama.

Beckel ... Its Over !

http://www.youtube.com/embed/4emiu81OTdU