Slashdot Mirror

the real problem is we accepted oligarchy in exchange for some minor bigotry and a general fear of change. The bigots are actually a minor problem. Sure, getting rid of their bigotry would fix things (since they tip the scales) but the real problem is folks who see things like minimum wage hike not as paying a living wage but as too risky since it might raise the price of a pizza 75 cents... Nevermind that it's just restaurants that saw a hike or that the hikes are small enough that it's just as likely to be inflation...

Point is, too many Americans living paycheck to paycheck and in a constant state of fear of change means it's damn near impossible to get them to want to fix anything. Which is working exactly as intended...

News last year was the GBR was showing substantial signs of recovery.

That actual experience contradicts the theoretical findings of this study, so right off the bat you should be suspicious of the conclusions they are leading you to.

I'm not saying it's Fake News per se, but the contradiction does need explanation.

"Boeing should just scrap the design."

The 2 comments above this one disagreed. I think you are correct. I've done electronic design and computer programming. The entire 737 MAX-8 new system components need re-consideration.

Others agree. For example: Boeing 737 MAX-8 Scandal Grows: Doomed Lion Air Flight Should Never Have Flown. (Yesterday, Mar. 21, 2019)

FBI joining criminal investigation into certification of Boeing 737 MAX . (Mar. 20, 2019)

Pentagon to probe if Shanahan used office to help Boeing. (Mar. 20, 2019) "Shanahan, 56, joined Boeing in 1986, rose through its ranks and is credited with rescuing the troubled Dreamliner 787 program."

Boeing has a history of flawed management: A flawed missile defense system generates $2 billion in bonuses for Boeing (Sept. 2, 2016)

"Boeing should just scrap the design."

The 2 comments above this one disagreed. I think you are correct. I've done electronic design and computer programming. The entire 737 MAX-8 new system components need re-consideration.

Others agree. For example: Boeing 737 MAX-8 Scandal Grows: Doomed Lion Air Flight Should Never Have Flown. (Yesterday, Mar. 21, 2019)

FBI joining criminal investigation into certification of Boeing 737 MAX . (Mar. 20, 2019)

Pentagon to probe if Shanahan used office to help Boeing. (Mar. 20, 2019) "Shanahan, 56, joined Boeing in 1986, rose through its ranks and is credited with rescuing the troubled Dreamliner 787 program."

Boeing has a history of flawed management: A flawed missile defense system generates $2 billion in bonuses for Boeing (Sept. 2, 2016)

The Seattle Times has a good article on this although it should be taken as preliminary data subject to change.

To summarise

Due to airframe changes from previous models Boeing introduced MCAS which automatically lowers the nose when approaching a stall.

The MCAS was introduced to allow pilots with 737 experience to fly the 737 MAX with a minimal amount of conversion training thus saving airlines a lot of cost and making the MAX even more attractive to them.

As initially designed a failure of MCAS was classed as a "Major" hazard in that it could cause passenger discomfort but not death. This was because MCAS was limited to a very small change to the flight control surfaces. For this category the use of a single sensor is allowed assuming the sensor reliability is sufficient.

During the flight test phase the ability for MCAS was extended to unlimited repeat operations. These repeat operations have a cumulative effect on the flight control surfaces. The MCAS can now lead to a catastrophic failure.

At this point the category of hazard should have been changed. This should have lead to a design change but because the category remained at "Major" and not "Catastrophic" no further changes were made.

There could be any number of reasons why this categorisation change was missed, hopefully any future investigations will get to the root cause.

I point to the article where they explain the factors which make the interpretation harder and increase the chance of misinterpretation. Quoting it here including the link to a previous article. I'm fine with it if you believe you would never make that mistake. The pilots were experienced.

However, pilots and aviation experts say that what happened on the Lion Air flight doesn’t look like a standard stabilizer runaway, because that is defined as continuous uncommanded movement of the tail.

On the accident flight, the tail movement wasn’t continuous; the pilots were able to counter the nose-down movement multiple times.

In addition, the MCAS altered the control column response to the stabilizer movement. Pulling back on the column normally interrupts any stabilizer nose-down movement, but with MCAS operating that control column function was disabled.

These differences certainly could have confused the Lion Air pilots as to what was going on.

.

The class of problem, "runaway trim" can be caused by a few different systems malfunctioning. Most of those systems also exist on the old 737, but MCAS is new to the MAX and behaves a little differently, though if you figure that out, the remedial action is the same.

This isn't quite true - in older versions of the 737, pulling up on the stick against runaway trim prevented stabilizers (automatically acting or otherwise) from moving the nose down, in addition to the checklist item of disabling it through switches:

In addition, the MCAS altered the control column response to the stabilizer movement. Pulling back on the column normally interrupts any stabilizer nose-down movement, but with MCAS operating that control column function was disabled.

(from the Seattle Times article).

There was no MCAS documentation and training, so that is the likely reason the pilots did not remember to follow the checklist - they tried the same thing they did on the old 737 models and it didn't work, because of the actions of a system they weren't told about.

As I quoted in my other post, this specific problem was difficult to recognize as runaway trim so the fix was counterintuitive. Look for 'runaway' in https://www.seattletimes.com/b...

What a coincidence that Boeing presents us with a version which makes the pilots look like clowns.
As explained here it's easy to say you documented how to fix a problem when you omit telling them that the problem will appear to be another problem. https://www.seattletimes.com/b...

Boeing has pointed out that the pilots flying the same plane on the day before the crash experienced similar behavior to Flight 610 and did exactly that: They threw the stabilizer cutoff switches, regained control and continued with the rest of the flight.

However, pilots and aviation experts say that what happened on the Lion Air flight doesn’t look like a standard stabilizer runaway, because that is defined as continuous uncommanded movement of the tail.

On the accident flight, the tail movement wasn’t continuous; the pilots were able to counter the nose-down movement multiple times.

In addition, the MCAS altered the control column response to the stabilizer movement. Pulling back on the column normally interrupts any stabilizer nose-down movement, but with MCAS operating that control column function was disabled.

These differences certainly could have confused the Lion Air pilots as to what was going on.

https://www.seattletimes.com/b... They have sensors on BOTH sides of the cockpit, but only sample data from ONE? Plus, some other site I read (no, I don't know if it is credible), say multiple pilots report the sensors on the GROUND didn't show a zero angle. Unless Boeing figures a way out, this will get EXPENSIVE, but, not as expensive if it had been an American based airline. I'm guessing lawsuits can be harder overseas, especially in some of the under developed countries.

ANOTHER example of poor management at Boeing: Boeing tanker jets grounded due to tools and debris left during manufacturing. (Feb. 28, 2019)

The safety analysis:

"1) Understated the power of the new flight control system, which was designed to swivel the horizontal tail to push the nose of the plane down to avert a stall. When the planes later entered service, MCAS was capable of moving the tail more than four times farther than was stated in the initial safety analysis document."

"2) Failed to account for how the system could reset itself each time a pilot responded, thereby missing the potential impact of the system repeatedly pushing the airplane's nose downward."

"3) ...

I think this is the most important story on Slashdot in a long time.

The article linked by Slashdot is the best, deepest story in a long time: Flawed analysis, failed oversight: How Boeing, FAA certified the suspect 737 MAX flight control system.

> fairly easy to detect AoA sensor failures....it is not.

GTFO out.. one is clearly fucked here:

https://static.seattletimes.co...

The 737 incorporates dual AOA vanes, therefore it is not "single instrument".

https://www.seattletimes.com/b...

Dual systems are standard on aircraft which detect AOA (not all do). It should be obvious to anyone but you that a dual system is redundant, but that the redundancy cannot be automated. If one sensor is giving bad data there's no way of automatically detecting which one is right and which one is wrong. Therefore the computer has to either make a best-guess, or it has to default to a single channel. This, again, is the same on all aircraft which have AOA sensors.

Of course none of that has anything to do with either the fact that the aircraft was allowed to fly with a known AOA problem, or the fact that the pilots didn't seem to have any idea how to disengage electrical actuation of the trim system.

Please stop making up nonsense.

If I recall, the previous crash has been linked to a bad angle of attack sensor. This sensor is only used by a new stall protection feature in the 737 Max. When it fails, the stall protection algorithm thinks the plane is stuck in a nose up orientation, and tries to force the nose down... into the ground.

There are several things that should happen:

1. Interim corrective action. Disable stall protection on all 737 Max aircraft.

My first thought as well, but apparently the engine nacelles have been moved further along the wing and higher so that the risk of stalls have increased. That's why the MCAS (anti-stall) system was introduced in the 737 MAX. If this can't be corrected to the satisfaction of the CAA and others, the type may have to be withdrawn, at least until it's re-engineered.

Rent growth in Seattle has gone stagnant and may start decreasing thanks to increased development. https://www.seattletimes.com/b...

If I recall, the previous crash has been linked to a bad angle of attack sensor. This sensor is only used by a new stall protection feature in the 737 Max. When it fails, the stall protection algorithm thinks the plane is stuck in a nose up orientation, and tries to force the nose down... into the ground.

There are several things that should happen:

1. Interim corrective action. Disable stall protection on all 737 Max aircraft.
2. Quality control investigation into the angle of attack sensor reliability.
3. Implement diagnostic algorithms into the control strategy to detect failed angle of attack sensors automatically. A failed sensor should disable the stall protection feature automatically, and alert the pilot.

We are not

This wasn't a minimum wage increase. Amazon increased their wages. If we'd done a federal increase then the workers could leave or go get second jobs and do just fine. If we did Medicare for All they wouldn't have to fear losing health benefits (and the employers wouldn't have to worry about paying for them).

Progressive policy works when it's not being actively sabotaged by bad actors.

and the problems go away. The trouble here is that this wasn't a minimum wage increase. It was a pay increase by Amazon.

I've pointed this out elsewhere on the thread, but either Amazon didn't increase payrolls and set their store managers up to fail or they did and the store manager is taking advantage of the situation to lower his wage costs in the hopes of netting a nice fat bonus.

In either case the solution is to fix the systemic problems at the top. To wit:

1. Raise Federal minimum wage so the employees can go find other work at the same pay.

2. Implement Medicare for All so employers no longer fear paying benefits just because they gave somebody 30hr/week.

As an added bonus you'll get a stronger economy from increased spending by low wage earners (who tend to spend 100% of their income), studies show you won't see inflation and you'll save $5 trillion every 10 years on healthcare while giving everyone access.

There is literally no reason not to do this except "I feel like I earn less when somebody earns more".

True story, a bud worked for a shitty call center that cut everybody's pay. This caused a ton of backlash so they company said that, as a reward for their years of good service, they would be starting new employees at $2/hr less than the existing employees.

Those parents will just have to grit their teeth and stop imagining every bad thing in the world that could possibly happen to their children.

The Seattle Times has a better article regarding the proposed change.

As that article points out, 'a survey by the National Safety Council of 42 states and the District of Columbia that found daylight saving time had “little or no effect on the number of early-morning traffic fatalities among schoolchildren.”'.

That article also points out that, here in Washington state, kids are already standing out in the dark waiting for their busses for a short part of the year. If people are that concerned about it, they should convince the schools to change their schedules.

No you don't. Those 25,000 highly skilled workers are not going to sit at home unemployed. NYC has record low unemployment. They are going to work for other companies that will pay the full $30B in taxes.

You have a fundamental misunderstand of macroeconomics. New business increases migration into a state which increases the total GDP (and therefore revenue) of the state. It's not current jobs/population that matter, but future jobs/population. Just look what Boeing, Microsoft, and Amazon did for Seattle: https://static.seattletimes.co...

New York is losing money not welcoming Amazon with open arms. 3B is a pittance compared to what it would have done for the state.

NYC is the second biggest tech cluster in the world, bested only by the SF Bay Area.

Nope, Seattle is bigger. NY labor dept puts the number of IT personnel at 73 thousand: https://www.labor.ny.gov/stats... , Seattle and Bellevue have about 100k IT workers.

IT in the Seattle area got so big that software developers are now more numerous than retail workers: https://www.seattletimes.com/s... , NYC is nowhere close to that.

Trump cuts Hanford funding.

Oops! Guess you forgot who is setting the budget now. Don't worry, just tell him Mexico will pay for it. That's what he wants to hear, so he'll believe it.

Yup. Rather than build a high-rise or at least an apartment complex, they took a plot of land and built...tiny houses.

Only written by someone who knows nothing about Seattle transit. What kind of misleading comment is "Seattle has won accolades for its transit system, where 93 percent of riders report being happy with service" Right all few thousand of them?

You claim to be familiar with Seattle but obviously aren't. Transit use is popular - and growing. Fewer people drive to work in Seattle than take transit, bike, or walk - and that's been true for a number of years.

As of February 2018:
48% of Seattle workers are taking transit
25.4% are driving solo
10% car or van pool
8% walk
3% bicycle to work
6% "other"

Back in February 2013:
43% of Seattle workers rode either the bus or the train
34% drove solo
9% car or van pooled
6% walked
4% telecommuted
3% biked

I've been taking transit to work in Seattle since 2003 - And absolutely LOVE having light rail to UW (since 2016)!

Same contractor for healthcare.gov seems they are trying to unload the equipment to a school . https://www.seattletimes.com/n...

I have seen many, many examples of insufficient management at Amazon.

It is VERY important to recognize ALL of the abusiveness of Amazon. Only a small part of that is mentioned here, in this re-post of a former comment, with added information:

My opinion: Jeff Bezos is not a sufficiently capable manager. Evidence: Look at any Amazon web page. As you are researching some product that is interesting, you are often distracted by other products. One fix: Put any distractions at the bottom of the page. There are many other shortcomings of the Amazon web site besides those mentioned in this Slashdot story.

A few of the stories about Amazon being abusive:

Inside Amazon: Wrestling Big Ideas in a Bruising Workplace. (New York Times, Aug. 15, 2015)

Quote: "The company is conducting an experiment in how far it can push white-collar workers..."

Amazon warehouse jobs push workers to physical limit (Seattle Times, April 3, 2012)

Worse than Wal-Mart: Amazon's sick brutality and secret history of ruthlessly intimidating workers (Salon.com, Feb. 23, 2014)

Amazon paid no US income taxes for 2017 (SeattlePI, Feb. 27, 2018)

Undercover author finds Amazon warehouse workers in UK 'peed in bottles' over fears of being punished for taking a break (Business Insider, April 16, 2018)

The undercover author who discovered Amazon warehouse workers were peeing in bottles tells us the culture was like a 'prison' (Business Insider, April 18, 2018)

Amazon Gets Tax Breaks While Its Employees Rely on Food Stamps, New Data Shows (The Intercept, April 19, 2018)

Quote: "Though the company now employs 200,000 people in the United States, many of its workers are not making enough money to put food on the table."

Amazon Under Fire Over Alleged Worker Abuse in Germany (bloomberg.com, Feb 19, 2013)

Quote from the Wikipedia page for Jeff Bezos. (Nov. 29, 2018):

"Journalist Nellie Bowles of The New York Times has described the public persona and personality of Bezos as that of 'a brilliant but mysterious and coldblooded corporate titan'. During the 1990s, Bezos earned a reputation for relentlessly pushing Amazon forward, often at the expense of public charity and social welfare."

In my opinion, Bezos is not "brilliant". No one who is habitually abusive can be called brilliant; his abusiveness damages the quality of his own life.

Would you fly into space if the company has a manager who shows serious limits? Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos owns Blue Origin.. Blue Origin does NOT now have the capability of orbiting the earth. Would you fly into space with a company owned by someone who makes huge mistakes and doesn't detect them?

"if they were smarter they'd make them add-on bundle products, ..."

Exactly! I'm seeing many, many examples of Amazon managers not being smart.

It is VERY important to recognize ALL of the abusiveness of Amazon. Only a small part of that is mentioned here, in this re-post of a former comment, with added information:

My opinion: Jeff Bezos is not a sufficiently capable manager. Evidence: Look at any Amazon web page. As you are researching some product that is interesting, you are often distracted by other products. One fix: Put any distractions at the bottom of the page. There are many other shortcomings of the Amazon web site.

A few of the stories about Amazon being abusive:

Inside Amazon: Wrestling Big Ideas in a Bruising Workplace. (New York Times, Aug. 15, 2015)

Quote: "The company is conducting an experiment in how far it can push white-collar workers..."

Amazon warehouse jobs push workers to physical limit (Seattle Times, April 3, 2012)

Worse than Wal-Mart: Amazon's sick brutality and secret history of ruthlessly intimidating workers (Salon.com, Feb. 23, 2014)

Amazon paid no US income taxes for 2017 (SeattlePI, Feb. 27, 2018)

Undercover author finds Amazon warehouse workers in UK 'peed in bottles' over fears of being punished for taking a break (Business Insider, April 16, 2018)

The undercover author who discovered Amazon warehouse workers were peeing in bottles tells us the culture was like a 'prison' (Business Insider, April 18, 2018)

Amazon Gets Tax Breaks While Its Employees Rely on Food Stamps, New Data Shows (The Intercept, April 19, 2018)

Quote: "Though the company now employs 200,000 people in the United States, many of its workers are not making enough money to put food on the table."

Amazon Under Fire Over Alleged Worker Abuse in Germany (bloomberg.com, Feb 19, 2013)

Quote from the Wikipedia page for Jeff Bezos. (Nov. 29, 2018):

"Journalist Nellie Bowles of The New York Times has described the public persona and personality of Bezos as that of 'a brilliant but mysterious and coldblooded corporate titan'. During the 1990s, Bezos earned a reputation for relentlessly pushing Amazon forward, often at the expense of public charity and social welfare."

In my opinion, Bezos is not "briliant". No one who is habitually abusive can be called brilliant; his abusiveness damages the quality of his own life.

Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos owns Blue Origin.. Blue Origin does NOT now have the capability of orbiting the earth. Would you fly into space with a company owned by someone who makes huge mistakes and doesn't detect them?

Provisional ballots allow a person to cast a ballot even though they are not listed on the voter rolls. Yes, you don't even have to prove you are registered in order to cast a ballot which, in at least one instance, were mixed in with regular ballots potentially throwing the election which was decided by less than 130 votes.

Seattle raised it to $15.45 for large chains this year, with exceptions for smaller businesses that go as low as $14 without benefits and $11.50 with them. Meanwhile, Portland's current minimum wage is actually $12.00 and not $11.25 as you've stated.

Thus, it is presently possible to actually earn a smaller official minimum in Seattle than in Portland, provided you work for a small company with tips and/or good benefits.

When actually considering the past the situation is not that different: In 2009, Seattle's minimum matched its state minimum at $8.55. Meanwhile, in Portland the minimum wage was $8.40.

In both cities, the minimum wage has been increasing at since the recession. In 2016, when it was $9.25 state-wide, Oregon assed a bill to increase it every year by 50 cents, with Portland having a dollar more than standard and $1.25 over rural. Although Seattle's minimum is higher, it has exceptions and a greater cost of living than Portland. Minimum wages will be pegged to inflation by 2021 for Washington and 2023 for Oregon, with continued cost-of-living adjustments for their respective urban juggernauts.

It might also be worth it to consider how different state regulations, port access, and local industries affect these cities and their unemployment rates. I don't have all day for that, but if you're truely interested in this subject feel free to dive in.

Apparently not the world's coral reef, but 80% of areef in the Cayman islands.
https://www.seattletimes.com/n...

Although, looking at the yacht, I kinds despise the guy now. People driving around in yachts like this are lecturing us on climate change , so...yeah, good riddance.

My opinion: Jeff Bezos is not a sufficiently capable manager. Evidence: Look at any Amazon web page. As you are researching some product that is interesting, you are often distracted by other products. One fix: Put any distractions at the bottom of the page.

There are many other shortcomings of the Amazon web site.

Inside Amazon: Wrestling Big Ideas in a Bruising Workplace (New York Times, Aug. 15, 2015)

Quote: "The company is conducting an experiment in how far it can push white-collar workers..."

Amazon warehouse jobs push workers to physical limit (Seattle Times, April 3, 2012)

Worse than Wal-Mart: Amazon's sick brutality and secret history of ruthlessly intimidating workers (Salon.com, Feb. 23, 2014)

Amazon paid no US income taxes for 2017 (SeattlePI, Feb. 27, 2018)

Undercover author finds Amazon warehouse workers in UK 'peed in bottles' over fears of being punished for taking a break (Business Insider, April 16, 2018)

The undercover author who discovered Amazon warehouse workers were peeing in bottles tells us the culture was like a 'prison' (Business Insider, April 18, 2018)

Amazon Gets Tax Breaks While Its Employees Rely on Food Stamps, New Data Shows (The Intercept, April 19, 2018)

Quote: "Though the company now employs 200,000 people in the United States, many of its workers are not making enough money to put food on the table."

Amazon Under Fire Over Alleged Worker Abuse in Germany (bloomberg.com, Feb 19, 2013)

Would you fly into space with a company managed by someone who makes those mistakes and doesn't detect them? Note that Blue Origins does not have the capability of orbiting the earth.

https://www.seattletimes.com/b...

Amazon has 566,000 employees (source).

A cynic would say that is only a one time payout of ~$3,533 per employee. A realist would understand that only the bottom rungs of the income ladder should get this money, so let's redo the math:

Amazon has "125,000 full-time hourly associates in the U.S" (source).

Now it's a one time payout of $16,000!

A "warehouse associate" earns ~$13/hr (source).

That is a staggering (/s) $27,040 per year.

Does Bezos really think that the overhead of starting, yet another, charity and its administrative costs is cheaper than just giving his lowest level employees a decent living wage?

This announcement says, yes, he does think that. But you say, that's just stupid.

So a then you would say, who benefits?

The Day 1 Academies Fund "will launch and operate a network of high-quality, full-scholarship, Montessori-inspired preschools in underserved communities," Bezos said.

Bezos said that the preschools will be directly operated by the organization and "use the same set of principles that have driven Amazon."

"Most important among those will be genuine, intense customer obsession," Bezos wrote. "The child will be the customer."

(source)

"The child will be the customer."...

In the age of DeVos, Bezos is going to open private charter schools, for the youngest among us, and run them like a business, but the difference is that the "child will be the customer".

Smell something?

Would someone learn the likes and dislikes of these children and slowly build an "anonymized" ad profile for that child, following them throughout their life span, knowing exactly what products they are likely and not likely to buy?

Now the decision to pass over that wage increase and open a "charity" makes sense.

The consent decree shackling Microsoft after the IE bundling case expired in 2011. At the time it was made, a lot of us complained about it only lasting 9 years, when a similar consent decree against IBM was in place for 40 years.

Anyhow, bottom line is that stopping Microsoft's behavior this time around will require a new DoJ investigation, which if history is any guide will take more than a decade. Given the history, hopefully it'll be done quickly enough or the judges will be willing to grant restraining orders to prevent Edge's market share rising up to 90% as IE did.

I still maintain that the best solution back in the 1990s would've been to break apart Microsoft into two companies - an OS company and an applications company. Then there would've been no reason for the OS (Windows) to favor Edge or Office (ever notice a trial starter version comes with Win 10?) or any other Microsoft application.

I mean, sure, a russian oligarch gave Trump 50 million profit for a house ($13 million more than it was worth) , that he has never had inspected or stepped foot in, and is now to be demolished, but it was totally Clinton that was the one that was in Russia's pocket.

You fool! It's only bad when Americans hunt cute furry things or choose humans over animals.

First, let me preface this by saying I've been doing the full Philip "shut up and take my money" Fry impression ever since Dodge announced they were putting a V6 diesel in a Ram truck....but not in the Durango. Now Ford and Chevy are jumping on the 3.0L bandwagon, so if another model year goes by without a diesel going into a durango/explorer/expedition/tahoe imma gonna cut a bitch. Mercedes has a diesel for the GL line, but for 19 mpg on the highway I want a lot more than 7500 lbs towing. Now, that said...

Why is there so much concern on diesel cycle engines? As heat engines go they are quite efficient devices. As far as providing a lightweight and compact power source for transportation these things are close to miraculous. So, where is the problem?

The pollution they generate is a problem. If pure biodiesel doesn't produce the particulates or NOx that petroleum does, cool beans, but I've never seen anyone make that claim.

I hear people claim that electric cars are the future, charged up by electricity from wind, water, and sun. But has anyone done the math on what it would take to make that happen? It turns out that people have and the math does not work out for such a world.

The same sort of higher math that claims a Prius or a golden retriever pollutes more than a Hummer.

First thing is to do the math on how much in resources we'd need to just make up for the electrical use right now and replace that with wind, water, and solar.

Sounds like people who complain that mass transit and high speed rail cost too much, while acting as if hundreds of billions haven't been spent to build and maintain highways, and billions more for pipelines, refineries, oil transportation and gas stations. You also talk as if there wont be a huge cost to build biodiesel refineries to replace petrol-based fuels, or nuclear power plants to replace coal.

Windmills don't run all the time at maximum output, in real life they produce maybe 30% of their maximum rated output. So we don't need 2.3 TW of wind to replace what we need, we'd have to start with 3 times that, 7 TW.

Annnnd the inevitable baseload baloney. When your nuclear power plant goes down for planned - or worse, unplanned - maintenance, sometimes for years at a time, you have a megawatt+ sized hole in your grid. That means you need to either build more nuclear generating capacity as well, or use a pumped storage facility as backup. And if pumped storage is good enough for nuclear, it's good enough for wind and solar.

All of the FUD thrown at wind and solar can easily be answered with tech that has long been used for nuclear and coal, like the aforementioned pumped storage. An entire region isn't going to remain both windless and sunless for an extended period of time, but you can move power hundreds of miles via long distance power lines, like ND's Coal Creek Station that generates power for Minneapolis. This means a solar farm in Mexico could supply power to Los Angeles, New York City could be supplied by windmills in Canada, or Miami getting electricity from a pumped storage facility in the mountains of Cuba.

The future is nuclear power.

Nuclear power takes the cost argument, throws it in a dumpster, covers it in diesel fuel and sets it on fire. Finally, the dumpster is nuked from orbit.

Just to be sure.

Nuclear power is not just too risky and too time consuming to build, the cost makes it unjustifiable. Can't throw shade at a solar farm when it costs 20 billion and takes 20 years to bu

though actually you are also wrong there

Maybe not. A Seattle Times Op-ed counterpoint brings up issues with the study that seem worth considering:

Specifically, let’s look at all the workers who are simply left out of the analysis. By the UW team’s own admission, nearly 40 percent of the city’s low-wage workforce is excluded from the data: workers at multisite employers like Nordstrom, Starbucks, or even restaurants with a few locations like Dick’s. Even worse, any time a worker left a job with a single-site employer for one with a chain, that was treated as a “lost job” that was blamed on the minimum wage — and that likely happened a lot since the minimum wage was higher for those large employers.

Similarly, every time an employer raised its pay above $19 per hour — like Jimmy John’s did — it was counted not as a better job, but as a low-wage job lost as a result of the minimum wage.

That's an op-ed, of course, and not a study correcting perceived defects and presented in opposition. But that might not be necessary, per a Fortune Op-ed counterpoint:

It also stands in contrast to a massive trove of actually credible studies showing that raising the minimum wage is a boon for working class families and the communities they live in.

For instance, a team led by Michael Reich, an economics professor at University of California-Berkeley, looked at the impact of the Seattle wage increase on the food industry over the same period and found that wages did in fact go up for restaurant workers, and that employment wasn’t affected. These findings were, they claim, “in line with the lion’s share of results in previous credible minimum wage studies.”
[...]
Employers see big benefits, too. Workers stay on the job longer, reducing turnover and training costs. They’re also significantly more productive, according to researchers studying wage increases in the United Kingdom.

The op-ed continues with studies/references for other aspects of the increased min wage.

You are a very confused man, because I am talking about the fact that NYC has specifically eliminated driving jobs, not arguing about the minimum wage per se (though actually you are also wrong there).

Reality has a bias towards reality, not myth.

It sure does, which is why I post about reality, not the mythical fairyland your mind inhabits. I mean if you can't even distinguish between an abstract concept like minimum wage and a specific cap on a class of jobs - how can you seriously claim to be grounded in reality?

I'll let you have the last response as I can only do so much to try and introduce the deluded to reality, and I have given you as much help as is warranted. The rest is up to you, good luck!

There's a couple of things - First, Seattle PD was taken over a couple of years ago by the Feds because of how they were handing things specifically several high profile shootings.
Second - there's a huge difference between double parking and living in a broken down vehicle illegally parked on the street. The latter is where homeless people have caused fires that can result in damage to critical infrastructure:
https://www.seattletimes.com/s...
http://mynorthwest.com/1034801...

They just paid $287MM in taxes for Q1 2018, and over the last two years paid a little more than $2B in income taxes alone. They also paid about $250MM in State taxes (Washington does not have a business or individual income tax). Or do you mean they should pay a tax on their value, not their income?

Yeah, they pay no taxes (other than the $250 million annually with at least 20% of that going to the city...)! Bastards!

Seattle already spends more than a billion dollars on "solving the homeless crisis": https://www.bizjournals.com/se...

This is on an estimated homeless population of roughly 12,000 individuals: https://www.seattletimes.com/s...

This works out to around $88,000 a year per individual. Let that sink in for a second.

Their government is ineffective and inept, giving them more money to waste is not a practical solution.

+100 VERY INFORMATIVE

Seattle already spends more than a billion dollars on "solving the homeless crisis": https://www.bizjournals.com/se...
This is on an estimated homeless population of roughly 12,000 individuals: https://www.seattletimes.com/s...
This works out to around $88,000 a year per individual. Let that sink in for a second.
Their government is ineffective and inept, giving them more money to waste is not a practical solution.

it wasn't just corporations protesting this. Unions didn't like it either.

The median home price in Seattle is $722,000. I'd say, at the very least, it's a factor.

https://www.seattletimes.com/b...

Where I live (Montreal), you can get two homes for that price, 2 Bungalows with 3 bedrooms each, a living room, a furnished basement, and reasonably large front and back lawns to mow.

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/amazon/amazon-paid-250-million-in-washington-state-and-local-taxes-in-2017-source-says/

One of the major complaints about the head tax, beyond simply driving business away, is that it demonstrates the mayor's and city council's "Red Queen thinking": "Funding first, plan afterward!", and "Off with their heads!" if others don't agree. As this local editorial points out (quote below), the city has not been able to show that they are able to reduce homelessness with the resources they've applied so far, partly due to inept management. So they're demanding more money with no evidence that they are capable of using it effectively.

From the editorial:

... Seattle is just starting reforms based on a 2016 study that found its homeless programs suffer more from weak management and lax contracts than funding shortfalls. Now, before showing any reduction in homelessness, the council is more than doubling funding over 2016 levels by adding the head tax.

One of the major complaints about the head tax, beyond simply driving business away, is that it demonstrates the mayor's and city council's "Red Queen thinking": "Funding first, plan afterward!", and "Off with their heads!" if others don't agree. As this local editorial points out (quote below), the city has not been able to show that they are able to reduce homelessness with the resources they've applied so far, partly due to inept management. So they're demanding more money with no evidence that they are capable of using it effectively.

From the editorial:

... Seattle is just starting reforms based on a 2016 study that found its homeless programs suffer more from weak management and lax contracts than funding shortfalls. Now, before showing any reduction in homelessness, the council is more than doubling funding over 2016 levels by adding the head tax.