Slashdot Mirror
Clinton Tech Plan Reads Like Silicon Valley Wish List (usatoday.com)
theodp writes from a report via USA Today: "If there was any lingering doubt as to tech's favored presidential candidate," writes USA Today's Jon Swartz, "Hillary Clinton put an end to that Tuesday with a tech plan that reads like a Silicon Valley wish list. It calls for connecting every U.S. household to high-speed internet by 2020, reducing regulatory barriers and supporting Net neutrality rules, [which ban internet providers from blocking or slowing content.] It proposes investments in computer science and engineering education ("engage the private sector and nonprofits to train up to 50,000 computer science teachers in the next decade"), expansion of 5G mobile data, making inexpensive Wi-Fi available at more airports and train stations, and attaching a green card to the diplomas of foreign-born students earning STEM degrees." dcblogs shares with us a report from Computerworld that specifically discusses Clinton's support of green cards for foreign students who earn STEM degrees: As president, Hillary Clinton will support automatic green cards, or permanent residency, for foreign students who earn advanced STEM degrees. Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate, wants the U.S. to "staple" green cards on the diplomas of STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) masters and PhD graduates "from accredited institutions." Clinton outlined her plan in a broader tech policy agenda released today. Clinton's "staple" idea isn't new. It's what Mitt Romney, the GOP presidential candidate in 2012, supported. It has had bipartisan support in Congress. But the staple idea is controversial. Critics will say this provision will be hard to control, will foster age discrimination, and put pressure on IT wages.
To get Frist Psots as much as possible.
Potentially more abuse prone than the H1B visa. Diploma mills are already a reality in many parts of the world, adding a green card as an incentive and the potential for abuse is immense.
Hillary and the various silicon valley billionaires are tight. They get her elected and she will try to implement their agenda. And make no mistake, their agenda involves more money for them, less privacy for you and more control over you.
The green card idea is interesting, and I would enthusiastically support such a plan if it also included a dramatic reduction in the H1-B program.
... for all the basis in reality the plan will have once she gets elected in.
Wouldn't it be nice if politicians were legally oblidged to give realistic manifestos and if they failed to deliver on at least a given percentage of them then there would be a fine or reduction in tenure time or some other punative measure?
Well, we certainly wouldn't want to start fostering any age discrimination, that's for sure!
Because you can always believe what the Clinton's tell you right? I think we learned our lesson in the 90's with Bill. and i think Hillary is 100x worse about it. She is above the law(in her head anyways).
"If there was any lingering doubt as to tech's favored presidential candidate," writes USA Today's Jon Swartz, "Hillary Trump put an end to that Tuesday with a tech plan that reads like a Silicon Valley wish list. It calls for connecting every U.S. household to high-speed internet by 2020, reducing regulatory barriers and supporting Net neutrality rules, [which ban internet providers from blocking or slowing content.] It proposes investments in computer science and engineering education ("engage the private sector and nonprofits to train up to 50,000 computer science teachers in the next decade"), expansion of 5G mobile data, making inexpensive Wi-Fi available at more airports and train stations, and attaching a green trump to the diplomas of foreign-born students earning STEM degrees."
dcblogs shares with us a report from Computerworld that specifically discusses Trump's support of green cards for foreign students who earn STEM degrees:
As president, Hillary Trump will support automatic green cards, or permanent residency, for foreign students who earn advanced STEM degrees. Trump, the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate, wants the U.S. to "staple" green cards on the diplomas of STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) masters and PhD graduates "from accredited institutions." Trump outlined her plan in a broader tech policy agenda released today. Trump's "staple" idea isn't new. It's what Mitt Trump, the GOP presidential candidate in 2012, supported. It has had bipartisan support in Congress. But the staple idea is controversial. Critics will say this provision will be hard to control, will foster age discrimination, and put pressure on IT wages.
Nope. The office of the president doesn't have that sort of power, at all.
Might as well make a fine for each provably untrue thing said in a public speech.
Pay no salaries, pay no taxes, pay nothing. Why can't we just end this nonsense and start to treat these companies the way they deserve it? Boycott apple. All power to comcast. They protect their customers.
Jail them for fraud
Geology - it's not rocket science; it's rock science
She's just greasing the slope of Western civilization cultural genocide.
We get it Theodp: you are middle aged and worried that young educated people are going to take your jerb. Give it a rest. Young people need a future too
The funny thing about many young people is they think they will never get old.
Considering that Silicon Valley almost certainly came up with it to begin with. She always stay on script. Sigh
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Of course this has been quickly modded down to -1. Someone doesn't like the inherent biases being called out in the comments. But it's true, there's a big difference in the responses to the Brussels and Istanbul attacks.
... for all the basis in reality the plan will have once she gets elected in.
Wouldn't it be nice if politicians were legally oblidged to give realistic manifestos and if they failed to deliver on at least a given percentage of them then there would be a fine or reduction in tenure time or some other punative measure?
You'd have to define realistic, and you'd have to define delivery. That can be a bit hard, especially with say, the Contract with America. Arguably, Newt Gingrich could say he delivered on 100% of his promises.
Why? Because he only promised to bring them up for a vote. He didn't promise to do them.
In the US? How would you get around the obvious 1st amendment issues?
Wow, she was polling 19-26% ahead of Trump in CA on 2 June. Did she slip that much recently that she feels she needs to promise the sky?
...especially prior to elections! The promise mountains of gold... until the elections are over.
Potentially more abuse prone than the H1B visa. Diploma mills are already a reality in many parts of the world, adding a green card as an incentive and the potential for abuse is immense.
So you limit it to select accredited universities. Problem solved. If someone can graduate from MIT with an engineering degree and wants to stay in the USA, we're idiots to not help them do that. It only becomes a problem if we don't pay any attention to how it's done.
It sounds more like she has the vote of the tech company heads, not the much larger population of tech workers; why would they vote to depress their own wages? (in before: because of the alternative)
First Obamacare and now this? Hillary, you might be a nice person and all, but you're a republican.
I think anything which a politician says is considered puffery.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Politicians will say anything to get your vote. This is nothing new. They will say it in words so they are not actually lying. ...
Recently we have seen this with the UK politicians who were shocked themselves they won Brexit and have no idea how to get out of the shit. We have seen it with the 'closing' of Gunatanamo bay. We have seen it with any and all politicians. And I mean all of them. Right, left, communist,
As long as they are not accountable for their lies, nothing will change and to do that a serious reform would be needed. How to get to that reform? Vote for me, I will do it. I guarantee that these lies will stop.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
When ISIL detonated bombs in the Brussels airport, Slashdot posted a story within a few hours. The same thing happened in Istanbul and Slashdot still hasn't posted a story. If a white country in western or central Europe gets attacked, Slashdot is all over it. When it happens to Muslims and people of color, Slashdot doesn't care. It's racist, for sure.
Only because you want to complain, I'll tell you the deal. It's ugly but it's reality.
Muslims blowing up other Muslims is nothing unusual. The Shia and Sunnis (however it's spelt) have been doing this for a long time. That's not news. People of color shooting each other is nothing unusual. For young black men in the US it's the leading cause of non-natural death. Not getting shot by racist whites, but by other blacks usually over thug gangsta affairs.
It is news when this happens to a first world white nation because they tend to value law and order. When Muslims deal with their own extreme elements and the black community deals with its worship of criminals and its lack of fathers, what you are complaining about will change. Not until then.
As president, Hillary Clinton will support automatic green cards, or permanent residency, for foreign students who earn advanced STEM degrees. .... masters and PhD graduates "from accredited institutions."
So, all they need to do is stay in school longer and get to stay in the country,. In the meantime, it's going to flood the market with advanced degree holders and we'll see employers demanding graduate degrees for jobs that really only need an undergraduate degree because they want to weed people out - kind of like they do now in requiring BSCS degrees when one needs maybe a minor in CS or a CIS degree or even no degree at all. (It's happening all over the place. You need a college degree these days to be a receiving clerk.)
Then American kids will then have to stay in school longer - wracking up more debt and opportunity costs.
And of course, she is under the impression that the jobs will be there. And she's also under the erroneous impression that they are needed.
We've been seeing how companies are firing their American workers and either sending the IT/STEM work to cheap labor countries or replacing them with H1-bs. This policy, if enacted, will just make things worse for Americans.
As we see yet again, policy makers are behind the times and have no clue.
That's dumb as hell. All we have to do is stop reelecting them. Is that so difficult?
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
She is amazingly quick to tailor promises based on who she is talking to. The tech community should be aware of this.
Some big examples would be gay marriage, TPA, patriot act, Iraq War, etc.
Yes, I know all politicians lie. I am just annoyed that people believe things that Hillary say means something.
On a tech site, we are cheering someone's tech platform whose tech level is so low that her defenders say we should not expect Hillary to be able to manage two separate email accounts.
How can you propose a system to hold politicians accountable for failure to deliver on platform goals unless they have complete dictatorial control over implementation? "Well, then, they shouldn't promise anything .. " I hear you say. Well, sure, under such a system, politicians would be foolish to propose improving or changing anything. Would that make you happier? Life is a lot more complicated than you wish it was. In general, if *you* know that proposed plans are just plans, and *I* know proposed plans are just plans, then we can both make personal judgement on the feasibility and likelihood of a candidate being able (or willing) to deliver on them and vote accordingly. I think it's reasonable to assume that most people understand that a campaign promise isn't a legally binding blood pact.
"Old man yells at systemd"
The first amendment exists to protect the people from the government. Elected officials are acting as the government, not the people.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
I suspect that she is listing all this stuff to enable her to INCREASE the number of h1b . For somebody that speaks of supporting the middle class, she is looking to gut the jobs by offspring and increasing immigration.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Because fraud is isn't a first amendment issue. You'll see that the supreme court doesn't tend to uphold the first when lying is involved if said lying is causing harm.
The catch is, it will be under some level of government and corporate fascist control. You will agree to "conditions" that enable government to record and use the data as they see fit.
If someone can graduate from MIT with an engineering degree ....
I don't think graduating is a problem. Looking at MIT's online classes, it's almost identical to what I had.
What MIT and other top schools are good at and are able to do is get the best and smartest because they are top schools. Meaning, those students would excel anywhere - with or without a degree; as we see with so many Harvard dropouts who go on to become billionaire tech entrepreneurs.
And of course, as they just accept the best of the best, those people go on to be great successes and further boost the reputation of the institution.
That late 90s economy couldn't have existed as it did separate from it's aftermath.
Yeah, we got to hear the President play the sax on TV and benefit from the "bubble expanding" half of the boom/bust cycle (and also collect on the dividend of the end of all that Cold War spending, but I digress) but the hype fest couldn't go on indefinitely. VA Linux and the dot.bomb hype outfits needed to eventually produce something that could realize a profit (*ahem*)
Every single one of those items sounds like excellent policy.
Not that anybody in the current political debate in the U.S. gives a fuck about policy, instead of walls and BENGHAZI!
It sounds as if she would have to use executive orders to override DHS, Judicial, Congress and the FCC. I'm no legal expert, but it sounds like unless she plans on ignoring all her presidential duties to work 100% on what sounds like the tasks of a congressional member as opposed to executive, this isn't even a pipe dream.
So is there anyone out there that can break down these items with whether they are in her purview as president and how much time it would take with a hostile congressional opposition to accomplish?
Turkey, however, is not your stereotypical Muslim country/would-be caliphate. During the 20th Century, it tried very hard to be a secular country, and a lot of people aren't happy with its recent slide towards theocracy.
What makes it a target is that they are involved not only with opposing ISIS, which is practically on their doorstep (unlike Europe), but also a restive Kurd population who would very much like to secede into their own country even while themselves opposing ISIS.
When someone is running for office, they are just private individuals.
HAHAHA, I liked that one.
"...more HOT women in STEM..."
FTFY
So far Hillary's greatest seat in government has been as a selected official, not an elected official.
Sure, she put in a few years as an ineffective freshman senator, but that's about it. Everything else she has gotten by hanging around the right people.
A free e-mail server in every basement!
Now there's a platform I can support.
Hillary Clinton [has] a tech plan that reads like a Silicon Valley wish list. It calls for:
Oh, I can't wait to hear what it calls for.
connecting every U.S. household to high-speed internet by 2020
Sigh. I usually try to counter the diehard tech pessimists on Slashdot, but in this case I join them in saying: fuck you, political campaign. No chance of this happening, even after they redefine what "high" means, which of course they will: fuck them. Surely nobody is stupid enough to believe this, but fuck them for thinking we are. Fuck them double, and fuck me too, if they turn out to be right about how stupid we are, which they probably will: fuck everything.
reducing regulatory barriers and supporting Net neutrality rules, [which ban internet providers from blocking or slowing content.]
Replacing regulatory barriers, maybe, with new barriers that favor incumbent tech companies and make things even more difficult for new entrants to the marketplace. Actually, it's more likely that they'll just partially replace the old barriers, and even those few of the new regs that were intended to be a sop to the good-intentioned will turn out to have cancerous side-effects, because that's how regulation works.
It proposes investments in computer science and engineering education ("engage the private sector and nonprofits to train up to 50,000 computer science teachers in the next decade")
Translation: Schools will be coerced into prioritizing idiotic programming classes that are incompetently taught. And funding will be cut somewhere else, likely in math and science budgets, because hey, this introductory class in the latest illiterate Drag-N-Drop Programming Language means we're covered for STEM now.
expansion of 5G mobile data
I... guess? Wasn't this going to happen anyway?
making inexpensive Wi-Fi available at more airports and train stations
Short of draconian price controls, airports and... seriously, train stations?... will continue charge whatever the market will bear, which is frankly already unbearable, and will likely slowly get worse until the next oil crisis, when it will get worse more quickly.
and attaching a green card to the diplomas of foreign-born students earning STEM degrees.
Aha! Now we see the actual purpose of the bill: more H1Bs. The rest of it is just cover.
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 enabled the biggest telecom theft of public dollars in history:
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pu...
Essentially, we gave $200 Billion to the telecoms in exchange for fiber connectivity to every residence and business in America. The telecoms took the $200 Billion and gave us - nothing.
Guess who signed the Telecommunications Act? Yep, Hillary's husband - Bill Clinton.
Why should we believe that Clinton 45 will be any better at tech policy than Clinton 42?
cleverly innoculates himself against those bringing up his long record of cheating customers, stiffing suppliers, outsourcing product fabrication to China, giving hiring preference to foreigners, not paying any taxes, declaring bankruptcy over and over again, etc.
You're right, I used to be one of them. But now, I'm with you and I'm you're champion!
It's definitely true that some of the Clinton policies did directly contribute to the crash of 2008, chief among these being the tax incentives for executive pay that drove unprecedented income inequality, the repeal of Glass-Steagall, NAFTA, etc. The response from the GOP hasn't exactly been a reversal of these policies. If anything, they were extended and pushed forward. Policies favoring large companies resulted in consolidation and profit/expense min-maxing, not investment or job growth.
Since she's for more guest worker fraud, she's against her own country.
Then again, she's one of the globalists.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
This actually doesn't look so bad to me, it's surprisingly sane, actually. The US is pretty reliant on only a few major industries for exporting, mainly entertainment and food. They're farther ahead then any other country when it comes to the size of their tech industry, so I think we should be focusing on ensuring that the country doesn't needlessly fall behind, especially with people becoming seriously concerned about the state of our privacy laws. Investing and growing it is a smart move, and I don't oppose the green card idea if we require foreigners to graduate with a degree from an American university (or other accredited source). If they did all the work an American would do and passed the same classes, and they stuck around long enough to complete it (which is usually around 4 years for a college degree), I absolutely don't see why we don't give them a green card. She recognizes how important tech is, and although I don't agree with all her policies, she's definitely got the right idea here.
The major concern with her internet policy is that she implicitly supports the bulk data collection. She is leagues and leagues ahead of Donald Trump, who has advocated for cutting America's internet off from the rest of the world and would almost certainly outlaw encryption of any kind, but she's far inferior to Bernie Sanders who favors privacy much more. Factoring this into account, I can live with her policys, but it's frustrating for us all that very few politicians seem to grasp what this means or that is actually weakens security, because now we have to automate sorting through it all on account of how big the data is and machines are so laughably bad compared to people at spotting this sort of thing.
"Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
We all get old but we need to think of the younger generation too. Stop being so selfish
Presidents have very little control over our economy.
The 90s were because of tremendous tech innovations and Greenspan's head being filled with Ayn Rand's religion and keeping monetary policy loosie goosie.
Make it absolutely clear in the manifesto what is a promise - ie we WILL do it (short of a nuclear war or similar disaster) - and what we a hope to do if finances/time/law permits.
I think that would be fine. As long as you can show that you made a bona fide effort to do the things that your campaign promised, or that circumstances changed significantly such that a change of mind might be understandable, then you should get off. If, on the other hand, from day 1 you start doing the opposite of what you promised then that should be grounds for a prosecution for fraud (and would catch a lot of politicians).
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Clinton doesn't actually have a "tech plan". She was given one by her wealthy Silicon Valley donors. This is a woman who doesn't know how to use a fax machine, the idea that she even remotely understands net neutrality is a joke.
Do you have ESP?
Seriously.
Every politician on the hunt for a job has a slick, sexy "action plan" designed to grab a given constituency by the short and curlies and make them want to vote for that person.
The problem is, after the election is over and the candidate is firmly ensconced within their comfy office, said action plan and the promises contained within are forgotten faster than the name of a partner at a drunken one night stand...
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Net neutrality — whether you like it or not — can only be achieved by a regulatory barrier. The government is telling owners of cables, routers and switches, what they can and can not do with their own equipment and data passing through it.
Clearly, some regulation is more equal than others and Hillary Clinton is, once again, talking from multiple sides of her very experienced mouth.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
FTS: "train up to 50,000 computer science teachers in the next decade" and "attaching a green card to the diplomas of foreign-born students earning STEM degrees".
As Syndrome said in 'The Incredibles', "when everyone's super, no one will be". This is where labour markets inevitably end up, with lots of qualified and essentially interchangeable people driving down salaries. Silicon Valley is simply speeding up the process via their Hillary sock puppet.
I wonder if they've given any thought to what it will be like negotiating with a large, strong, unionized labour force. I also wonder why they're doing this when AI and automation seem poised to make redundant so many of the positions they're trying to create candidates for.
It also strikes me that we may be headed for the kind of extreme class stratification exemplified by India's caste system.
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
Ah, but you ignore the competition.
MARS NEEDS WOMEN. . .
I'm probably voting for Trump because I'm genuinely worried about his opponent (and her experience to actually get what she is saying done) and he pretty much has a snowball's chance in hell of doing anything he has promised on the campaign trail.
Clinton dropped the deficit all 8 years, which was 2 years of Dems. Otoh, W and the GOP ran massive deficits and destroyed the economy all 6 years .
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
A Green Card isn't a guest worker, though.
It's a permanent resident status, meaning there's nothing "Guest" about it. If you think that immigration is bad, then that's a bad thing, but if your concern is about temporary status workers being taken advantage of, to the detriment of normal workers (as well as themselves), then, giving permanent (no strings) status instead is a vast improvement.
" It calls for connecting every U.S. household to high-speed internet by 2020"
That's not a tech strategy, it's a social program. I suppose Hillary feels everyone has the right to have facebook and watch porn.
I suspect the who's-in-STEM-or-not issue will be a non-issue very shortly, as education planning, execution and employment cycles go. LDNLS systems will be doing serious design and software generation fairly soon. I think it's entirely possible that people currently in the educational system who are on, or plan to follow, STEM paths will find themselves coming out of school with the employability-equivalent of buggy-whip manufacturing skills.
That's without actual intelligence emerging. With it... same thing, but with social chaos as an added attraction.
Honestly, right now, the elephant in the room is the social safety net. We need to prepare something like basic income. If we don't get that set up and ready to go, socially speaking, I'm just about certain the sky is going to fall on us. Sure, it'll be fast-food workers and various pro drivers who become unemployed first, but there's no reason for it to stop there. Software generation is an extremely likely area for LDNLS to step into in a huge way. Chip design too. System design not too much longer after that, and that's going to put a very serious dent in the STEM job market.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
She's lied about everything else... who the fuck would trust her on this? It's just a dangling carrot that, and she'll probably end up eating it herself if she gets in.
"All we have to do is stop reelecting them. Is that so difficult?"
With the choices we're given, apparently it is.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Our universities put lots of women through STEM majors. But when they graduate they go back to China, where they can build big things.
People would rather watch The Donald Show than The Hillary Show. That's what it's come down to.
We make the choices. We don't have to take what is "given".
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Or, it's because it's offtopic, and offtopic is a -1 mod.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
How naive.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Best way to not be replaced by a young person with a fresher skill set? Don't let yours get stale.
If the skill set is equal, experience wins every time in fair hiring practices.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
To be fair, the State of New York voted for her to be a Senator twice. Once as a carpet bagger in 2000, and again in 2006.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Could you separate that apostrophe from the possessive pronoun? The aftermath is that you wrote "separate from it is aftermath"
I think that would be fine. As long as you can show that you made a bona fide effort to do the things that your campaign promised, or that circumstances changed significantly such that a change of mind might be understandable, then you should get off.
You're a bit short-sighted there. They could argue that they only promised (like I already said) to submit the bills for debate on the floor, rather than implement them, or that any number of things changed to make it different.
If, on the other hand, from day 1 you start doing the opposite of what you promised then that should be grounds for a prosecution for fraud (and would catch a lot of politicians).
Yeah, good luck with that one. Look, if you want to get politicians out of office, support a Recall Initiative if you wish, but criminal prosecutions for not doing what you expect, that's just opening a door to nowhere.
What, is somebody putting a gun to your head, telling you who to vote for? Sounds to me like you're just to lazy to make the effort and just want to blame everybody else for your own bad choices.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Clinton... wants the U.S. to "staple" green cards on the diplomas of STEM... masters and PhD graduates
Good. We need to balance out the culture of ignorance that is developing in this country. The people who mock learning and expertise aren't moving the country forward now, and they never will.
Plus, if these people have real green cards, they cannot be abused and underpaid the same way H1Bs are. That should stabilize the labor market a bit, especially if the program ultimately leads to a reduction in H1B issuance.
If American citizens have no interest in education, go ahead and allow *real* immigration. As long as the immigrants integrate culturally, the country will come out stronger like it always has.
---
According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
Whether a good thing or a bad thing I think there is plenty of case history that sets libel as being something not covered by the First Amendment. While libel is by definition telling lies about another person it wouldn't be much of a stretch to extend that concept to a lying to other people about ones own intentions to illicit a desired outcome (being voted into/maintaining office). This is already a crime in several forms, such as lying to the FBI to avoid prosecution of yourself or another (in theory, in practice lying itself is used as a crime much like "resisting arrest" with no reasoning for an arrest) or falsifying financial reports to make your companies outlook more appealing to investors. The problem is it will never happen, as was demonstrated recently (McDonnell vs US) the government has no intention on reigning in corruption no matter how egregious. Actions which would get your average person thrown into jail without question generally get well carved out exceptions, either via legislation or court decisions, for those with influence.
Seriously.
As there isn't any accountability for campaign promises, why would anyone ( who has lived through more than one election ) give any candidates promises any credibility at all ?
I put her promises in the same category as Trump.
( or any candidate for that matter )
Lots of fluffy talk tailored to whatever group they're trying to snuggle up to, never any follow-through and no consequences.
Our universities put lots of women through STEM majors. But when they graduate they go back to China, where they can build big things.
Or they don't give us many employment options outside of 'mad scientist,' 'evil overlord,' and 'teacher.' I'm currently teaching but I'm starting to think finding a project whose goal is to cause world peace (by killing everybody) may be more moral.
I think that's perfectly legit though - they brought up the things they said they would in the "Contract" in the first 100 (or so) days of that Congress. If the votes weren't there, the votes weren't there - anyone promising to pass legislation in a campaign is lying to you.
There are so many things that can derail a piece of legislation that it's amazing anything ever passes. People that hold a grudge hang poison pill amendments on it. The opposition party will try to amend it to nullify key points of it. Spending bills are like Christmas trees where everyone wants to hang their favorite ornament on it, ballooning the total to the point where the deficit hawks vote against it. And then there's just the regular partisan rancor, and the generally uneasy relationship between House and Senate where things get completely twisted in the other chamber, and have to get sorted out in a conference committee, and usually come out with the same name on the bill, but completely different substance.
If 'pro' is the opposite of 'con' then Congress is the opposite of Progress.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
She's not changing her tune for the audience, she's doing exactly what her funders are asking her to do. She is so bought and sold that only the NY Times could consider her a "good candidate" for anything other than a history lesson on corruption.
As it turns out, yes, that is difficult. When it comes to the Congress, everyone seems to think it is all the other Congressmen and Senators that are the problem - my representative / senator is awesome! It's the other 434 representatives / 98 senators that need to be shown the door!
Plus, when someone has been sent to Congress from a district / state two or three times in a row, it's hard to find anyone with a pulse to run against them, so you get weak shit candidates that can't hold a coherent message through the campaign, or some retread hack that already lost his position at the government trough and wants to try again against a seasoned sitting politician that tears them to pieces.
Thus the massively overwhelming statistics on incumbent re-election.
Example: Senate seat re-election in Ohio, where you have a sitting senator (Rob Portman-R) running against a guy who roundly lost his bid on re-elect as Governor to John Kasich (Ted Strickland). There's been practically zero campaining done by the sitting Senator, and Strickland has nothing to do BUT campaign, and every poll still has him down by one point, where he was up by as much as 9 in the spring. At the rate of this slide, he'll lose this thing 70/30 in November.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
We already discourage students from pursuing STEM degrees by allowing companies like Facebook and Microsoft to import cheap labor in the form of H1-B visas
You do realize that there is a LOT more to STEM fields than working for large IT firms right? I have an engineering degree and I work in manufacturing. (and manufacturing in the US is alive and well in spite of claims to the contrary) Most scientists, engineers and mathematicians don't work in Silicon Valley or Seattle. H1B visas are simply Not A Thing among engineers in my industry. They just aren't. I'm not saying they aren't a problem (they are) but they aren't as wide spread or severe a problem as is sometimes claimed. Frankly H1B visas are kind of small potatoes in the challenges presented by global competition.
are we now to add a further disincentive by saying that anybody who can slither under the wire to get accepted to a U.S. university (and graduate) is now your permanent competition inside the United States?
If they work here in the US under a Green Card they aren't going to be paid H1B wages. The company can't deport them and the worker has basically the same rights as a US citizen. Furthermore they are your competition whether or not they are here in the US. Plenty of software and technology is developed outside the US and they don't stop being smart, talented people just because they don't work inside the US. It's actually to your benefit to have as much talent here in the US doing useful things as possible. If they go elsewhere much of their economic benefit goes with them. If there are a lot of smart talented people here then the pool of jobs here grows. If they go elsewhere then they don't create value here and there ends up being fewer jobs. America is a country of immigrants. We only hurt ourselves when we forget that fact.
Policies like this are why the idiots in Britain voted to shoot their country (and themselves, directly) in the foot with a "Brexit" vote--because of the perception that their government serves "outsiders" ahead of them.
Spare me. Many British voters voted for Brexit in large part because of racism and xenophobia. And frankly given Britian's colonial past them complaining about outsiders is hugely ironic. It wasn't that long ago that Britain was a large empire based on screwing over foreigners in places like India.
I often vote for minor party candidates, and less often "write in." But in the real word, with all the built-in bias toward the two party system and which you're naively unfamiliar with, there's no chance of them winning.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
I'm in my 6th decade now, and have heard many empty "promises" by Presidential Candidates.
I'm certain that less then 10% of them will actually be implemented, if that much.
And I have little doubt that that of all the things Clinton says she'll do, using her own personal email server will be at the top of the list.
Were doomed to live in a complete surveillance state.
Shes a shill, just like Trump.
Explain to me exactly how it benefits you that foreign students should come and take up a slot in one of our universities and then take up a slot in one of our high-paying jobs?
First off, the number of slots in universities and the number of high paying jobs is not fixed. The more smart people we have here the more value they create and the number of jobs actually grows. Apparently you've forgotten that America is actually a country of immigrants. Just 3 generations ago my family members came to this country and you know what? It works out fine. They worked hard, created value and the size of the economic pie grew. We forget that fact at our peril. China and India have 4 people to every one of ours and they are just as smart as we are. We NEED those smart people over here if we want to remain competitive and relevant.
It there is no benefit to you over a US citizen taking up those slots.
First off you are wrong that they are taking a slot away from an American. Second it is very beneficial to me having smart people here creating technology, building businesses, growing our economy. I don't give a crap where they were born. I care what they do while they are here.
So why are you advocating something that's not in your interest?
I'm not. I actually understand what is in my interest. Especially the fact that country of birth has zero relevance to the discussion. If you try to protect what you have by keeping smart people who are willing to work here out you are just cutting your own throat in the long run. I want the smartest, most ambitious, most talented, most hard working people to be here in the US. That will hugely benefit both you and me. Keep them out at your own peril.
Actually I support Clinton's green card program because I'm worried other countries will "catch up" to the U.S. and become the major centers of innovation in the global economy, which would cause the aggregate standard of living in the U.S. to decrease. The U.S. currently benefits from "reverse brain drain". That is, more smart/productive people immigrate to the U.S. than emigrate from the U.S. If that trend ever reverses then the U.S. is well and truly screwed.
Accreditation has already been heavily compromised in order to suck up student loan money.
Is this only true of national accrediting agencies, such as the infamous ACICS (which the Department of Education will likely shut down), or also true of the regional accrediting agencies that oversee traditional universities?
How else is she going to pay back Facebook and Google for all of their campaign assistance? This is how politics works folks.
Assuming Hilary shares views with Bill, she will likely continue the trend of extending copyrights to infinity, which will adversely affect innovation.
Clinton 42, Signed the following into law:
Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) (1998)
Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA) of 1998
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA) (1994)
There is no bogeyman. The two party system is the voters choice. They are the "built in bias", and only they can fix it. It is strictly personal.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
I have talked to Hillary supporters who have said without any embarrassment: "Of course, she can't keep those promises and she has to lie. But it's vitally important that she get elected and she has to say things because American voters are stupid and she wouldn't get elected otherwise. Once she has been elected, she will just do what's good for the country."
Great, so she was elected by the people who brought us 9/11. Twice.
If network news isn't bad enough for its not so subtle bias, the fact that this is even masquerading as news is repulsive.
She didn't support it, until it turned out that a lot of voters supported it, so in 2013 she changed her position and supported it. It speaks to principles. Hers are "say what's popular."
In government by the people and for the people, since when is listening to the constituents that you represent a bad idea in general?
How about attaching a JOB to diplomas of US CITIZENS who obtain STEM degrees?
How may people here know of an MS program in computer science that was used as a revenue stream for a university, mainly milking parents of kids from Asia who could cough up $40,000/year? At Syracuse University, there was exactly one professor that actively looked for cheating, and despite the fact he had this reputation, he caught a huge portion of his students blatantly copying code. There wasn't much learning happening in the program. Nobody else gave a fuck. Administration didn't give a fuck - they got their money. Now I'm sure they're thinking: Ooo, if the government staples green cards to these bullshit degrees we issue, we should be charging $55,000/year! And this was Syracuse University, a place that has many totally legit programs and no trouble with accreditation. I'd hate to see the standards at worse universities with MS programs in CS.
No, the two party system is ingrained in the US legal and media systems. It was created by the parties to keep other parties from entering. It's deliberately set up as a Catch-22. To be on the ballot, you must have gotten X votes on the previous ballot. Not a single "third party" is qualified to be on the ballot in all states. The Libertarian Party is the largest, and only has ballot access in 33 states. (I'm talking about overall party qualification, not individual contest qualification - the Libertarians will likely be on the presidential ballot in all 50 states). Along with that is an intentional absence of media coverage. The last third party candidate in a presidential debate was Ross Perot in 1992. That's not the "voter's choice," it's a rigged system.
And the single vote system enforces that. A ranked voting system would help to level the field for minor party candidates, so the major parties will never allow it to happen. They like to tell people a vote for a minor candidate is a vote thrown away.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Bush 43 did a bad job economically, but the 2008 crash was entirely the fault of a Democratic Congress, which rejected all attempts to end frivolous lending. Do some reading about that human turd, Barney Frank.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
I'm concerned that this Clinton proposal will create small but irreparable holes in the diploma parchment. Couldn't we use a paper clip, or stuff them both in the same envelope or something?
I'm sure her biggest change will be to SMTP research for the case of transmission and reception of digitally encoded messages (sometimes known as e-mail). In particular with respect to the management of an independent system for such transmission and reception despite the legality of such system.
There: That could be the start of Hillary's first patent. You can't trust anything this tool says. Or any politician for that matter.
A few years ago I looked into becoming a CS teacher. I'm a software developer and have a BS in Computer Science, so I figured I would have to get a teaching certificate and a Master's in Education to meet the requirements.
But in my state (NY), CS isn't one of the majors that fulfills the prerequisite for pursuing a teaching certificate. Same goes for engineering majors.
These are the only "allowed" majors for NY teachers:
Arts: Art History, Dance, Music, Theatre, Visual Arts
English
Languages other than English (e.g., French, Spanish)
Mathematics
Natural Sciences: Biology, Chemistry, Geology, Physics
Social Sciences: Anthropology, Economics, Geography, History, Political Science
Social Sciences Interdisciplinary (Health & Human Services: Early Childhood Concentration only)
Source: http://gse.buffalo.edu/tei/requirements
So in NY, your kid's CS teacher might just be an anthropology major who took a 2-week CS training course.
That all sounds well and good as long as the h1b visa program is cut and this "It proposes investments in computer science and engineering education" provides no public funds via any method including tax breaks for this "attaching a green card to the diplomas of foreign-born students earning STEM degrees."
We don't have any real shortages in this country of STEM talent so we shouldn't be paying for the advanced education of immigrants especially since we don't even pay for the education of people born here. But if a student pays for a taught 100% in English by a unilingual US citizen teacher (important for establishing fluency in English and reading comprehension) education here or is worthwhile enough to convince penny pinching US companies to pay to educate them with after tax funds I see no reason we wouldn't want to put them on the fast track for a green card (assuming they pass background checks and such).
Stuffing our melting pot with intelligent people is a good thing. The key is to get the gems, anyone who has ever worked with international IT crowds knows that they are larger and stuffed with even more morons than you find in the field here and a degree/marks in school have very little relation to being able to apply information in new and novel ways. Teaching material tends to give hints that guide you toward the right answers for the testing and challenges that will be presented later that the real world doesn't. I've yet to find a consistent metric that picks out that guy who consistently finds novel and creative solutions like using the liquid foam system in shipping to craft lumbar support for his chair when management is too cheap to buy new ones. That's the guy you want more of no matter where he comes from.
... For A Second, I Believe Exactly What You Believe:
http://www.theonion.com/blogpo...
That's quite the conspiracy theory you have there.
Not a single "third party" is qualified to be on the ballot in all states.
Only because not enough people petition to put them on. Simple math. This year they are too distracted by the Trump charade. Best gimmick I've seen in a long time.
Sorry, all the "rigging" is done by the voters themselves, through complacency, apathy, antipathy, whatever. As much as you all want to, you can blame nobody else.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
"Only because not enough people petition to put them on."
We're done until you understand the rules, instead of making them up.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
You evidently don't know the process. Anyone is allowed to petition to be on the ballot. With enough signatures it will happen. No biggie if you don't want to learn. But you made it perfectly clear why we are in the predicament that we are. You built your own prison.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Keep telling yourself that. It wasn't my team's fault, it was their team's fault!
That's pretty fucking impressive, though, that a president and congress elected for 2008 could affect things that were happening in 2007!
It's a shame Hilariously Rotten Clinton lies through her teeth with every breath she takes, otherwise that would make her potential, impending presidency a pretty sweet deal for them.
How many times can someone sit quietly watching opinion polls, then say EXACTLY what the polls reveal would be the most popular thing for her to say, before you fucking retards GET IT?
SHE. IS. A. LIAR.
AS A CLINTON, SHE BELIEVES RULES AND LAWS DO NOT APPLY TO HER.
I can't spell this out for you any more simply. It doesn't matter what a liar promises when all she does is lies to your face.
Hey, allegedly savvy, techy people... this woman wants to have Edward Snowden killed. You know that, right? For telling the truth. What does that tell you about her?
Fuck. I'm going to have to move to France or some shit.
Johnson/Weld will be on ballots in all 50 states the year because of the petitioning process. Nobody petitions for the R-team and D-team to get on the ballot. Due to the way the rules work, they're automatically included. The petitioning process doesn't apply to the R and D team due to the catch-22 GP identified.
Your arrogant, willful ignorance is astounding. You're an authoritarian sack of shit who is completely blind to the machinations of the two party system, because you operate from the Just World Axiom.
Wow, bought and paid for. As a US software engineeer, I recognize this would be catastrophic for my wages. Given their stances on visa abuse and cheap labor importation in general, I would have been comfortable with Bernie or Trump, which means I am probably going for Trump at this point. A vote for Hillary is a vote for a knife in my own back. Clinton as president means that pretty much anything the Wise Masters of Silicon Valley can think up to screw us over, she will do for them.
Also, good luck with the CS grads thing. They've been leading that horse to water for years and it just isn't thirsty. You can gives someone a CS degree but you can't make them enjoy programming or have a natural talent for it.
On one hand, I admire a leader who listens to their constituents and adjusts their position according to the majority's view. That's democracy. On the other hand, something tells me that Hillary's definition of "constituents" and "majority" includes large sums of money donated to her campaign, and "unless it is against her self-interests". I know, I know, every politician is like that, you'll tell me. Bernie isn't though. And that's the sad part.
Then why would any American in their right mind (presuming such a thing exists) do STEM at an American university?
Foreigner + degree (often got for free, see Germany) gets STEM job (academia or industry) = Americans once more screwed.
It's like H1b but on steroids.
Is Hillary really that stupid, or that evil?
It doesn't even matter if they had a pathway for CS teachers.
The Universities do not want prospective CS majors or minors to have done CS at high school. They REQUIRE, Calculus (and to a much lesser extent Statistics), and Physics (and oddly enough Chemistry helps). That you have done AP or IB CS is irrelevant to them; you might get a semester credit at most, but that's not the same as being an entry requirement, or even recommendation.
It hasn't been about work for the citizens since at least as long ago as the 80's
It is all about globalisation, and in it's purest form Walmart-isation; where humans are widgets (unless they are in the 1%), disposable and replaceable more quickly than a Happy Meal.
Given the economies of scale of the World (circa 7 billion) vs USA, (circa 400 million) then there is zero reason for Americans to pursue STEM at all if this "amazing plan" comes to fruition. This is already being seen with the massive and systemic corruption of the H1b type of visa.
This ups the ante by giving foreigners an even more massive advantage over the locals.
Rick Roll for President! Hell, given the current state of this election, a Rick Roll President sounds like a good idea.
US gets "Rick Rolled" in the election and they loved it so much they won't even complain about his birth certificate from Hawaii.
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
If she says that she will beat up Comcast and ban Flash, even Sanderites will vote for her.
Under George W Bush they didn't extend them. They just used them and the spineless Democrats did nothing to stop them, the same under Clinton.
The economic down turn started with Clinton. Bush didn't have time to cause the recession in 2001. His biggest flub was the Iraq War and supplemental spending bills.
You might be on to something here.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
GP was probably referring to her support for amnesty for illegal aliens, as opposed to green card facilitation for anybody. The latter is legal, whereas the former is illegal, or at least condones illegal behavior
Sounds to me like you're just to lazy to make the effort
Like for example to spell this sentence correctly...
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
I thought Clinton said she didn't know how to use a computer to read email - reason for her personal server. Why would people be listening to her for tech policy....
Um, the Glass-Steagall act was repealed under Clinton, not in 2008.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Nobody petitions for the R-team and D-team to get on the ballot. Due to the way the rules work, they're automatically included.
So what? The petitioning process is good enough to get on the ballot. You are not limited to voting for republicans and democrats. That is one you place on yourself. Nobody is doing it to you. The world is as "just" as you want it to be. You make the choice, you live with it. Nobody is going to save you.
And your reaction is very revealing, very typical of an *authoritarian sack of shit* that gets angry when confronted with facts that conflict with their beliefs... Thank you for confirming.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
You get a server, you get a server and you get a server
Still I see no outside force compelling people to vote for the incumbent, only a lack of initiative in the search for alternatives. They wake up once every two years to mark a ballot that took very little part in forming, and then complain about the choices, and go back to sleep for two more years. Sorry, no sympathy from me. This prison is of their own construction. Only they can tear it down.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Despite the media's overwhelming call to get more people in STEM, there are already too many workers with STEM degrees to employ. We are over-supplied not under-supplied. Wages are stagnant and there is little to no growth to speak of. Why do we need more people in STEM? This makes absolutely no sense to me.
Four to eight more years of corporate worship.
Not good for the USA.
While I hope Trump doesn't win, I do hope he gives Mrs. C hell on visa and trade issues, which have been dictated by corporate elites for faaaar too long.
Make her squirm doing what you do best, Mr. Trump. Make it a close election to send a message.
Table-ized A.I.
wow.
First off, Do yourself a favor and look at Unemployement Rate and GDP for America. This shows that the great recession started in 2007. It was declared official once the GDP by ALL economists, not just most, when GPD was negative and not just in freefall. However, the fact that unemployment started rising in 2007, says it all.
Secondly, causes of it is many. You like to list just a few minor ones while ignoring what REAL ECONOMISTS have to say. I am guessing that you have a political science or even just tech background and have not really had any economics and refuse to even accept what the professionals have to say, unless it agrees with you.
Regardless, I am a registered Libertarian and am on the sidelines of the fucking mess that you and the dems make. However, it is easy for me to look at your mess and honestly point out the fuck-ups that your 2 political parties have been.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Increase green cards for stem students? Good to know hitlery wants to continue ruining the it industry. Why is having a worse education from a almost 3rd world country make it easier to find a job. Maybe i should change my name to habeeb..
There are 2 different downturns.
The normal recession that occurred in 2001, which was the internet bubble bursting. W, GOP, Dems, CLinton, etc had NOTHING to do with that. It was simply happening because the market had overdone the internet companies. Then you have the mini recession that occurred after 9/11. Technically, you can blame W for it, but, I would not. I would say that the economy was still weak and it was simply prolonged by 9/11.
The great recession of 2007 has MANY causes, of which a lot was the policies that W/GOP pushed. Some of it WAS from CLinton since he signed in bills from both GOP and Dems that allowed their friends to have carte blanche with banking. Of course, I find it interesting that the GOP is opposed to re-installing even some of those that was put in place from the 30s due to the great depression.
And W's biggest screw-up would be difficult to figure out. He allowed AQ/Talibahn to continue controlling Afghanistan and left it a REAL mess.
Iraq was certainly a huge one.
His allowing corporations to take earnings out of the nation and not be taxed is equally BS.
His inability to get OBL spoke volume about his ineptness.
His lies about Iraq to allow invasion.
His screw up with NASA and Constellation.
It goes on and on and on. And it explains why he is in the bottom 10 for presidencies.
Of course, he DID do one thing smart, which was heavily subsidizing oil/nat gas drilling to get it going. Now, we just need to roll those back, OR roll them over to geo-thermal.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Hillary will just wipe away their green card with a towel.
You and this talk show host should get together. She has a plan that once implemented, will negate 'all bad things' from happening.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LChGfJMur5o
cue up to 2:24 and hear how world peace can be achieved, if first we accept extreme punishments for all transgressions, and then the followup of hugs and a system guaranteed to prevent all bad things. That will happen anyway. Because we are human. And some loonies, but mainly just regular humans. Who will irritate each other on occasion- anyway. Despite best efforts. Lest you live in a closed garden of your own choosing.
It's definitely true that some of the Clinton policies did directly contribute to the crash of 2008
I'm pretty sure the GP is referring to the dot-com bubble, and the subsequent burst in late 2000, early 2001. The argument is that a big part of the "successful Clinton economy" during the 90s was due to riding the formation of the bubble. George Bush, for all his many (many) faults, did get left holding the bag when it finally burst while Clinton is remembered for the honeymoon.
But of course you're also right about Clinton's role in 2008.
"What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
/)
Film at 11.
Every election cycle the political consultants in their ever-more-optimized plans to manipulate the public and micro-target every niche interest group launch these 100% dishonest pandering campaigns.
Just how did all the George W Bush "10 point plans" and "priority lists" work out?
How about Obama's far more detailed plans?
NO politician EVER follows through on these outreach-to-the-stupid-and-gullible plans.
In 2007 Obama promised public school teachers that he would de-fund NASA for 5 years and transfer all that funding to the schools - the teachers voted for him in huge numbers (the consultants checked the box on THAT pander success).
In 2008 Obama promised the employees of NASA in Florida that he would protect their jobs by speeding-up the replacement for the Space Shuttle, and "close the gap" in US manned launches - they voted for him. (the consultants checked the box on THAT pander success).
In his actual budgets, Obama eliminated the program to replace the Shuttle, and fired thousands of those workers he had promised to protect (the congress overrode him and restored a mutant version of the program) and rather than transferring the saved money to the school teachers, the cash from the shuttle program was split between to mutant replacement program, global warming studies and sats to study global warming, and some funds for commercial crew. Whether you love or hate what Obama actually did, it was completely untethered to what he promised on the campaign trail. Neither the teachers nor the shuttle workers got what they were promised, and they could not get a re-do on their votes.
How's that new "smart grid" for power distribution, and universal high speed internet access you were previously promised working out for you? How do you like your high speed rail lines? your universal "affordable" healthcare? Still have your fascist-art style "Hope" posters?
Politicians in BOTH parties, aided by completely unprincipled hired-gun consultants make all sorts of deceitful promises in campaigns. Do yourself a favor: grow a couple of brain cells and do not fall for it. The reason we put a human being into the presidency is to deal with the stuff we cannot anticipate, and which requires human judgement. Pick the person you think is better suited to to deal with those situations (admittedly a nearly impossible task in THIS cycle, but we have the candidates we do this time precisely because so many have voted for the wrong reasons in previous cycles and in the primaries of this cycle).
Any by "Tech's canidate" they mean tech company CEO's canidate.
Lets pretend the tech workers do not exist here. Hillary Clinton doesn't know shit about tech, and doesn't care, she just knows what the CEOs of tech companies want. Thats all technology is to her.
Say what you want, but hillary can't get an email server setup correctly, ever last one of bernie sander's emails I got on the campaign had DKIM setup correctly.
You won't even have it in a closed garden. Besides the ever present threat of internal self implosion, the assholes if the world will see your walled garden and for many many different reasons, will come take it from you. Because they can. Because they're assholes.
He could fix whatever he wanted if Slashdot had a freaking modern post editor instead of this quality 90s bullshit we're using now.
You know that in other countries there is an equal value on every persons vote right? That everyone can vote on all the presidential candidates available, no matter where they are on the country, and their vote will count to the total vote count (instead of being discarded because of the neighborhood).
I think there is nothing wrong in expecting that all parties follow the same rules, instead of certain parties having privileges. Decent/honest people should expect that (same rules), specially because it favors smaller parties, even if they dislike their views.
While I do agree with you that it is the Americans fault that you have this rigged system, you shouldn't act like it is "good enough", and that people complaining about it are wrong to complain. Systems change because people complain. Also, that is not the choice he made (as you claim it is), it is the choice his shitty neighbors made. Yes, they will not save him, as they are happy to suppress his vote, his candidates, and even his complains.
Trump has been willing to say all sorts of stuff that has the multinational corporations and Wall St bankers in complete freak-out mode, and he's got all the social justice warriors crying for safe spaces too.
Even the elites at the top of his own party are going totally bonkers over his rejection of the demands of the Chamber of Commerce, and they keep trying to find some magical way to get rid of him and substitute a typical owned-by-corporate-America hack in his place.
Anybody who is always fussing about big business controlling politics finally has a realistic alternative in what may be a once-in-a-lifetime chance: Trump. If Trump goes down in November, there will not be another anti-globalist-corporations candidate for decades - the message will have been sent that such a candidate cannot win.
Bernie is no alternative; he will be supporting Hillary. All that stuff he said about Wall St was just talk.
Elizabeth Warren is no alternative; she did not care to run herself, and is now all-in for Hillary and her Wall St banker paymasters.
If Trump was a typical corporate tool Republican, the people in the top levels of his own party would not be so publicly at war against him and risking their own political self-immolation with their take-no-prisoners denunciation of him.
They could argue that they only promised (like I already said) to submit the bills for debate on the floor, rather than implement them, or that any number of things changed to make it different.
That's fine. I don't expect to elect a dictator. If they submitted a bill that looks like their promise and they voted for it, then that's about as much as they can do. If anyone who promised something similar voted against it then their constituents should be able to sue for fraud, but if my constituency elects a candidate that wants to do something that 60% of the country doesn't want to do then nothing that they can do will make it pass.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
you shouldn't act like it is "good enough", and that people complaining about it are wrong to complain.
It's "good enough" to prove my point that anybody can get on the ballot. Which is all I'm saying. I didn't say anything about it being easy, though it can be if people want. And people are perfectly welcome to complain all they wish, but unless it is followed up by their vote, it all means nothing, and makes them look dumb. Only they can change the rules. They either have to participate fully, or take what's coming to them. What I will never accept is this crap about the "system", as if it is separate from us. It is nothing but an attempt to evade responsibility for their own choices. We are the ones making the rules, either passively or actively, consciously or subconsciously. People just have to be more friendly with their neighbors and work together. The antipathy they share towards each other and the rest of the world is a big part of the problem.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Practically speaking, she was appointed as senator more than elected. However, selected officials are still acting as government, not private citizens.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
The system wasn't deliberately set up to mandate two major powers, but it was set up that way nonetheless.
The first step towards viable third parties would be ranked-choice voting, so people could vote first for the party they like and then the major party that they don't dislike as much as the other. If, in 2000 Florida, Nader voters had been able to vote "I want Nader, and I don't want Bush", it would probably have given the election to Gore, so lots of people are dissuaded from voting third party lest someone they really dislike get in.
The next would be to change the selection of President to be plurality of popular vote, rather than majority of electoral votes. If there's three relatively equal parties, the Presidential election will doubtless be thrown into the House, and since the House will likely not agree with a majority the Vice President will become President. The current rules work reasonably well with a two-party system, but a third party would trash it.
A more major change could be allocating Representatives by party. Right now, if your party has a steady 20% support all through your state, you get no representation in Congress. If we had at-large elections of party slates, third parties would have a better chance of getting into Congress.
The "rigged system" is not the fault of the voters. It's a result of decisions made in the late 1700s.
By following the current rules, we wind up with two major parties. The rules are the same for all parties, but the major ones are qualitatively different due to emergent properties of the system.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
This is at least something that can be changed without a Constitutional amendment. It's largely based on the House and Senate rules. Basically, lawmakers get more power with greater seniority (as well as more skill and connections), so throwing out a three-term Senator means a significant loss in effective Senate representation.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
The stapled green cards will increase the supply of STEM employees and lower wages. But those employees will have a full right to stay in the US that is not contingent on employment and therefore be able to negotiate wages and benefits from a normal position. In contrast, H1B holders are at the mercy of their employers and have no leverage; they can't leave their job or take a new one because they will lose their right to stay in the US. So it's a net improvement.