Slashdot Mirror

Hi,

when I remember correct for people from US, Canada and Israel there are special "lessend" restrictions.

I think the best(easiest) way to find a job here, is to study. Because you have time to get to know german "beurocratic" specialties, also company internships are mostly part of a universitty education, so this is a good way to getting to know the companies. There are many students from vietnam & china, and sometimes they decide to stay here for a while after they received their b.sc. /b.eng./m.sc./m.eng.
(a good amount of courses are only taught in english)

Nearly every university has special internal consultants for foreigners to guide them through the beurocratic jungle.

Just a Job:
1st applying for a "good" (sometimes starting at or even less don't know right now exact 36000â/year) paying job, this will differ as for certain jobs.

European/German job sites like monster, xing, and so on, are good for looking into job offers, just try "google.de" and enter some german words like "Ingenieur Stelle Angebot"

Linked.in is also good!

Then there is a priorization, german & EU workers first, if there are no applicants (equally quallified) than the foreign applicant is good to go.

Then there are "Engpassberufe"
- Medical doctors
- mechanical, electrical, automobile engineers

where getting a job for a foreigner is much easier

But an at least 2 year education is mostly needed.

Even company leading jobs might be excluded from the german & EU first rule! ("FührungskrÃfte")

Members from these countries do not need a visa:
Australia, Israel, Japan, Canada, South Korea, Newzeland, USA

others need one even for a job interview

Some sites with information

http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/ -> set to english
-> entry & residence

http://www.bmas.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/faq-beschaeftigung-auslaendischer.pdf?__blob=publicationFile

sorry for the messed up posting,
I just woke up.

Are you sure they did get a few warnings?

Hungary got warnings about banning gene-modified crops. Fortunately, we were not the only ones to do so, and for good reason.

See here for some details. Also, I was told the corn in question was modified to protect itself from a bug not found in Central Europe, yet they still wanted to force it on us.

Nationmaster is fairly accurate as far as I know.

I'm not sure it is as accurate as you think. Err let me restate that, I'm not sure the stat being reported are saying what you think they are. I looked at a few other stats about things like Co2 emisions I know to be true and they were off on them for some reason too. It also only appears to be accurate until 2003 which forgets the last 4-5 years.

The per-capita statistic is fairly interesting, too:

Well, despite that both graphs only count IUCN recognized preserves and the numbers are only accurate to 2003, you also have to look at the wetland watershed projects where they have placed numerous private lands into a state of preserve. The Federal government alone spend 3 billion on this since 2001 and has spent/committed another 87 billion helping others countries resist deforestation. I mentioned committed because it is still being spent. And this doesn't take into consideration the private non government coordinated preserves like the 100,000 acre preserve created by the tejon ranch near los angeles CA that won't be counted or the 1150 acres Illinois obtained and set aside in 2005 also. I mean why should we exclude Chicago's 350 acre commitment in addition to all the others they have made. And this is all just off the top of my head.

Um ... carbon dioxide ? That's fairly toxic. Concentrations above 7% in the inhaled air will kill in a matter of minutes. That's very easy to verify and even less disputed than it being a greenhouse gas.

Well, it is a good thing that you and I both know that we aren't talking about level of 7%. Hell we aren't even talking about 1%. We are talking about .0383% (three hundred and eighty three millionths of one percent). But I can see how you would bring the 7% up. I mean after all, I mentioned it was a by product of staying alive and a humans breath is about 4.5% Co2 on exhale. But once that is diluted into the atmosphere, we are talking fractions of fraction of a percent. It is so minor that to claim it is a pollution seems ridiculous.

For example ... ?

An example would be Czechoslvakia in the 90's after the Russian military pulled out. I suppose the aid for Chernobyl won't count because I said Europe. But this isn't just limited to former soviet countries being ignored by Europe when they came back. There are other example too.

Here, for example:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/lab_une-labor-unemployment [nationmaster.com]

That these numbers aren't pulled out of someone's ass can be cross-checked:

Cross checked yes, accurate maybe not.

The number I was going from came directly from the Germany's Federal Employment Office. This is the department in Germany that counts and reports the unemployment rates. While most of it is in German that I don't read, here is an article in english that I found from a search on their site proclaiming the drop in unemployment listing it as 9% down 1.8% from the previous year. I should note that it's date is Jan 4 2008. I Really don't know what cooked up numbers your site is using or how they claim accuracy. Maybe it is part of the reason you are in such a strong disagreement.

I would contest that. The people who die aren't in the unemployment statistics anymore. In fact, the number of people who do have a job has increased:

I severely don't think your seeing the point I made. It wasn't that dead people where in the system, it was that a higher percentage of the population is working because more people

Nationmaster is fairly accurate as far as I know.

I'm not sure it is as accurate as you think. Err let me restate that, I'm not sure the stat being reported are saying what you think they are. I looked at a few other stats about things like Co2 emisions I know to be true and they were off on them for some reason too. It also only appears to be accurate until 2003 which forgets the last 4-5 years.

The per-capita statistic is fairly interesting, too:

Well, despite that both graphs only count IUCN recognized preserves and the numbers are only accurate to 2003, you also have to look at the wetland watershed projects where they have placed numerous private lands into a state of preserve. The Federal government alone spend 3 billion on this since 2001 and has spent/committed another 87 billion helping others countries resist deforestation. I mentioned committed because it is still being spent. And this doesn't take into consideration the private non government coordinated preserves like the 100,000 acre preserve created by the tejon ranch near los angeles CA that won't be counted or the 1150 acres Illinois obtained and set aside in 2005 also. I mean why should we exclude Chicago's 350 acre commitment in addition to all the others they have made. And this is all just off the top of my head.

Um ... carbon dioxide ? That's fairly toxic. Concentrations above 7% in the inhaled air will kill in a matter of minutes. That's very easy to verify and even less disputed than it being a greenhouse gas.

Well, it is a good thing that you and I both know that we aren't talking about level of 7%. Hell we aren't even talking about 1%. We are talking about .0383% (three hundred and eighty three millionths of one percent). But I can see how you would bring the 7% up. I mean after all, I mentioned it was a by product of staying alive and a humans breath is about 4.5% Co2 on exhale. But once that is diluted into the atmosphere, we are talking fractions of fraction of a percent. It is so minor that to claim it is a pollution seems ridiculous.

For example ... ?

An example would be Czechoslvakia in the 90's after the Russian military pulled out. I suppose the aid for Chernobyl won't count because I said Europe. But this isn't just limited to former soviet countries being ignored by Europe when they came back. There are other example too.

Here, for example:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/lab_une-labor-unemployment [nationmaster.com]

That these numbers aren't pulled out of someone's ass can be cross-checked:

Cross checked yes, accurate maybe not.

The number I was going from came directly from the Germany's Federal Employment Office. This is the department in Germany that counts and reports the unemployment rates. While most of it is in German that I don't read, here is an article in english that I found from a search on their site proclaiming the drop in unemployment listing it as 9% down 1.8% from the previous year. I should note that it's date is Jan 4 2008. I Really don't know what cooked up numbers your site is using or how they claim accuracy. Maybe it is part of the reason you are in such a strong disagreement.

I would contest that. The people who die aren't in the unemployment statistics anymore. In fact, the number of people who do have a job has increased:

I severely don't think your seeing the point I made. It wasn't that dead people where in the system, it was that a higher percentage of the population is working because more people

It's slightly more, and is exactly at the 22% maximum (which was set by the UN itself for any one country's contribution in 2002.) It's still more than any other country, and more than twice that of any other country excluding Japan. Here's the breakdown for 2001:

USA 22 %
Japan 19.628 %
Germany 9.493 %
France 6.283 %
United Kingdom 5.380 %
Italy 4.922 %
Canada 2.573 %
Spain 2.448 %
Brazil 1.702 %
Netherlands 1.688 %
Australia 1.604 %
Korea, Republic of 1.318 %
Russia 1.200 %
Belgium 1.098 %
Sweden 0.998 %


I guess we should update our "long outdated view" to something like The US and Japan contribute 41% of all UN funding. That better?

I'm living in Frankfurt/Germany. Last month I was at a study session in Strasbourg/France. I could have left my passport or my ID card at home. As long as your skin is white enough, borders within the Schengen countries do not apply to you. You enter the train in - let's say Karlsruhe - and you leave it in Strasbourg without having noticed a thing called "border".

If I were a German of turkish origin, my experience would be totally different. German or French border police would have picked me up, would have checked my passport and maybe my pockets.

Under these circumstances, it might be arrogant to say ist but for me as some kind of WASP, Europe has become one country.

If you take it from a legal perspective, there is more evidence. About 50 per cent of the new laws in 'the German part of Europe' are more or less ratifications from European ones.

Well, and nobody can take away my optimism that this European Constitution will come into effect soon. (Actually, this is not the first European Constitution but this is the first time they call it that way).