Who do you think pays corporate taxes when they do pay?
Corporations just past the costs along, or they have lower profits for their shareholders (think 401k's and pension funds among the biggest investors), or workers will make less. Or maybe they won't expand the business.
I was doing DBA work for Vertica database systems through a consulting company. We had a phone interview with one potential client and it turned pretty quickly to them wanting to solve some very specific issues over the phone for them for free.
I fell back to something like "these problems are very complicated. We've done this type of work in the past. I'd have to look at the specifics of your case." I gave them a good outline of the approach I would take.
They became irritated, in my opinion, and kept pushing.
I am convinced they ran into a problem and wanted me to work for free. Best case scenario, they ran into a problem and wanted absolutely no doubt we could help them. Regardless, I wasn't comfortable actually doing the work I was interviewing for in the interview. Proof I know what I'm doing is different.
Another less famous player died in the same manner, but I believe he left a note saying to study his brain. Since this was in the same manner, it was believed Seau was trying to say the same thing.
14% in a 1% environment does seem like a high interest rate. Instead of a loan, assuming we had to help which I don't, the government should have taken an equity stake like it did with GM.
You need cholesterol to live. Why are you complaining about high cholesterol? You must be for zero cholesterol in the blood stream. Stop complaining about being force fed Big Macs. It's the price of living.
I work in NYC with a number of immigrants. I think we are under the misconception that, on the macro level, there is a finite amount of work to be done. There isn't.
Supply can create its own demand. And having a number of foreign engineers and comp sci people is a good thing which benefits us as a whole.
I'm not sure where the limits to that is, when we can only absorb so many people at a time.
I was talking about their business model instead of focusing on their competencies instead of particular product per se, but that's tied up into what business model you pursue.
Company that was focused on copying Sony and then turned to copying Google is now trying to copy Apple. If Chipotle captivates the stock market again, they'll start making burritos. Or maybe they'll start making coffee if Dunkin Donuts goes into a growth phase.
Political donations are often considered bribes. That's very often the wrong understanding.
Much of the time they are donations to people who agree with you, but we just presume corruption.
But when corruption does exist, it's usually an extortion payment and the cost of doing business. We complain about businesses, but in reality if the government wants to crush a corporation or an individual that person or group of people are toast.
If you want to get the money out of politics, get the politics out of money.
The barrier to entry for a competitor is just a click or browser home page away. In regards to search, there isn't the lock-in like we saw with Windows.
So even if they had 95% marketshare, I don't see why the Feds would need to get involved. And that's ignoring Facebook and Twitter as non-search engine competitors.
Having worked at Comcast previously, my guess is their main motivation is to save bandwidth and being able to digitize every single channel. (Analog channels take up more bandwidth.)
Just do your own thing and find your own niche. That's essentially what Apple and Google did. I'm not saying either of those two companies never used another idea from outside the company (internet search, Android, iPod, etc.). But they were in their own space and did their thing.
Microsoft is trying to be Apple after trying to be Google and prior to that who knows what else. Maybe they feel their model is crumbling and this is the way forward. My guess is that they look at their top competitor and try to ape them.
Slashdot Mirror
$1.2 trillion federal + state + local == anarchy?
Who do you think pays corporate taxes when they do pay?
Corporations just past the costs along, or they have lower profits for their shareholders (think 401k's and pension funds among the biggest investors), or workers will make less. Or maybe they won't expand the business.
I think the reason is that you can't trademark Sci-Fi.
And they lost $15 billion last year. So they would still be $10 billion in the hole per year.
I was doing DBA work for Vertica database systems through a consulting company. We had a phone interview with one potential client and it turned pretty quickly to them wanting to solve some very specific issues over the phone for them for free.
I fell back to something like "these problems are very complicated. We've done this type of work in the past. I'd have to look at the specifics of your case." I gave them a good outline of the approach I would take.
They became irritated, in my opinion, and kept pushing.
I am convinced they ran into a problem and wanted me to work for free. Best case scenario, they ran into a problem and wanted absolutely no doubt we could help them. Regardless, I wasn't comfortable actually doing the work I was interviewing for in the interview. Proof I know what I'm doing is different.
Another less famous player died in the same manner, but I believe he left a note saying to study his brain. Since this was in the same manner, it was believed Seau was trying to say the same thing.
14% in a 1% environment does seem like a high interest rate. Instead of a loan, assuming we had to help which I don't, the government should have taken an equity stake like it did with GM.
And didn't help lead to the downfall of Rome as well? I believe they had a lot of lead in their wine containers.
No, actually.
This type of argument is very telling.
You need cholesterol to live. Why are you complaining about high cholesterol? You must be for zero cholesterol in the blood stream. Stop complaining about being force fed Big Macs. It's the price of living.
If I had mod points I would rate this post funny since you think there's actually going to be money for Social Security or Medicare when I retire.
Right, like pension funds.
And show us how awesome they would be if they were run the way unions think they should be run.
I work in NYC with a number of immigrants. I think we are under the misconception that, on the macro level, there is a finite amount of work to be done. There isn't.
Supply can create its own demand. And having a number of foreign engineers and comp sci people is a good thing which benefits us as a whole.
I'm not sure where the limits to that is, when we can only absorb so many people at a time.
I was talking about their business model instead of focusing on their competencies instead of particular product per se, but that's tied up into what business model you pursue.
Company that was focused on copying Sony and then turned to copying Google is now trying to copy Apple. If Chipotle captivates the stock market again, they'll start making burritos. Or maybe they'll start making coffee if Dunkin Donuts goes into a growth phase.
While I was there, there were just starting to investigate switching channels dynamically. I wonder if that's what that's about.
Political donations are often considered bribes. That's very often the wrong understanding.
Much of the time they are donations to people who agree with you, but we just presume corruption.
But when corruption does exist, it's usually an extortion payment and the cost of doing business. We complain about businesses, but in reality if the government wants to crush a corporation or an individual that person or group of people are toast.
If you want to get the money out of politics, get the politics out of money.
People have known the Earth wasn't flat for a long, long time. (The Earth casts a shadow on the moon sometime.)
I just find it amusing that while trying to make fun of their alleged ignorance, you got that huge detail wrong.
The barrier to entry for a competitor is just a click or browser home page away. In regards to search, there isn't the lock-in like we saw with Windows.
So even if they had 95% marketshare, I don't see why the Feds would need to get involved. And that's ignoring Facebook and Twitter as non-search engine competitors.
Having worked at Comcast previously, my guess is their main motivation is to save bandwidth and being able to digitize every single channel. (Analog channels take up more bandwidth.)
My guess is that the mainline Chinese already know all about it. I wouldn't sweat it.
Just do your own thing and find your own niche. That's essentially what Apple and Google did. I'm not saying either of those two companies never used another idea from outside the company (internet search, Android, iPod, etc.). But they were in their own space and did their thing.
Microsoft is trying to be Apple after trying to be Google and prior to that who knows what else. Maybe they feel their model is crumbling and this is the way forward. My guess is that they look at their top competitor and try to ape them.
Cashiers use applied math too. The level of education varies depending on what you're trying to do.
and extremely pissed off about your experiment.
http://afternoonsnoozebutton.com/post/9395842065/breaking-news-schrodingers-cat-is-alive-and