No, it actually isn't that much of a stretch. We have visas that tie residency to a certain company sponsoring the visa.
It isn't that much different from the garbage we have now, but it's very different from the past. Companies were expressly forbidden from offering jobs to people who weren't already residents because it was understood that that would simply be a tactic to drive down wages. Apparently many people these days don't understand that, or think it's acceptable.
you can't drive down a street in Manhattan without a gang of 200 violent motorcyclists... I will agree though, the OP was wrong to compare SF to those other places.
Both NYC and LA have lower crime rates than SF for murder, overall violent crimes, robbery, property crimes and burglary.
NYC is also safer than Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Las Vegas, Oklahoma City, St. Louis, and Wichita to name but a few. It may be the big bad city, but it's a lot safer than the stereotypes.
People say that every time someone who isn't considered "tough on crime" gets elected, but the statistics often tell a different story. People say Giuliani did a great job of reducing crime, but the precipitious drop actually started under Dinkins (who also started a lot of the "broken windows" policies). The steep decline continued after Giuliani appointed Bratton PC, but then started to decrease after 2 years when Giuliani fired Bratton. Note that the LA crime rate started dropping faster after Bratton became PC there. Later Giuliani appointed Kerik the crook as PC, despite almost all advice being against it.
Giuliani, like all politicians, takes credit for everything good during his administration, and denies responsibility for anything bad. If you want to know what led to NYC's decline in crime during that era, the objective evidence says it had little to do Giuliani. Rather the tree big factors are. 1. Overall national drop in crime rate (the reasons for which are a major debate). 2. Bratton 3. Dinkins
I may be safe since there's nobody there anymore. However, I was referring to the other three major cities mentioned, and national statistics, rather than Detroit. There are always exceptions.
Of course. Never mind that she was probably a great mom. In this day and age she'd probably be sent to prison (possibly with a reduced sentence because she's a women) and CPS would have abducted you and your brother. Be grateful you weren't born later.
What kind of pron is it? A girl of 17 years, 364 days, looking "provocative"? I better check the pics on my computer. Somewhere I probably have one of my young daughter eating a pickle or something. Those perverts get off on anything. Does it matter if the pickle is half sour or full sour?
I don't know if it was designed for that purpose, but in practice Tor is a honeypot. Encryption too? (though not by design). Maybe it's time to consider steganography more, though it has its limits in terms of bandwidth, and if encryption isn't widely used, steganography certainly won't be.
This triple package theory does not explain why, despite being endowed with the triple package in the dyed in wool pristine form, India and Nigeria are so corrupt and so mired in poverty.
Shhh... you'll cause cognitive dissonance amongst the neo-eugenicists.
The lasting damage of 19th/20th century colonialism would be my immediate assumption.
Japan was leveled in WWII, and yet they came back. Neither India nor Nigeria were leveled. While I condemn colonialism, the British occupation actually left them with some pretty good infrastructure, like the railroads. There were also quite a few elite who'd been educated at top universities (e.g. Gandhi). Post-WWII India started off in better shape than Japan.
Apparently American parents are too easy on kids while over scheduling and overworking them. They spend too little time with their kids while helicoptering over them. They do not care about school while bothering teachers with questions about little Johny every other day. They are not careful enough and tend to hurt their self esteem while making their kids to have too much self esteem. They helicopter and do not allow their toddlers to fall in play and thus do not allow them to naturally learn, But OMG, that toddler has bruise, no one caught his fall!!! Child neglect call CPS!!!
As an American parent I can tell you that the only way to feel that you're not a bad parent is doublethink. Unfortunately I seem to have some temperamental difficulty with it.
When was the last time the Jews feel like they are the "mainstream" anywhere but in Israel?
Today, and going back decades at the least. My family is Jewish. I grew up in a religiously mixed neighborhood. Nobody though anything of it. To find a time when they didn't feel mainstream, you have to go back to at least before WWII, and probably earlier.
I seriously question your ability to recognize objective reality over political correctness.
That's ok, I seriously question your ability to consider possibilities beyond whatever confirms your biases. Analogously, I question your ability to see anything in writing beyond what confirms your biases and kneejerk reactions, as I did not outright reject the idea. I simply expressed skepticism (a useful thing when taking a scientific view). Moreover, the main reason for my skepticism is the difficulty of studying such questions objectively, particularly when many of the "researchers" are so absorbed in their own preconceived notions (people such as yourself).
Despite generations of discrimination, most Jews and Chinese...
My family is Jewish. The level of discrimination experienced by Jews is far less than what many other groups experienced. Yes, I know about "gentleman's agreements" and the "Jewish quota", but as bad as they were, they were minor compared to what many other groups experienced. At one point anti-Catholic sentiment was stronger than anti-Jewish sentiment. Every synagogue in America has a copy of George Washington's letter welcoming the first Jewish community to America. Contrast that with the fact that the man was a slave owner.
Another factor is that at the time most Jews came to this country, the family farm was already waning due to increases in productivity. The supply of people who knew how to farm exceeded the demand. Trades people, certain types of craftsmen, and so forth were better tickets to prosperity. Jews were concentrated in that work, and few were farmers, because in much of Europe they couldn't own land, and had to move from one country to another from time to time. The timing for their arrival in America was fortuitous.
As for Chinese, there was at one time strong prejudices against them, although largely concentrated in the West Coast and not as bad as against black people, for example. The prejudice also waned earlier (WWII prejudice was against Japanese, and China was out ally). Moreover, the majority of people of Chinese descent in America are from people that arrived here much more recently. Our prejudicial immigration policy only ended in 1965, and then for some decades thereafter it wasn't easy to emigrate from China. Hence they arrived at a time when not only was there little or no anti-Chinese prejudice, but at a time when they were being promoted as the "model minority". Lastly, most Chinese immigrants are people who are middle class or better. They are generally not some ill-educated farmers from the still very poor hinterlands. The same is true of Indian immigrants.
I also note that you switched from talking about Chinese to talking about Asians (presumably East Asians, unless you include say, Tajiks). Obviously China is not all of East Asia, but you tout East Asian cultures in general. So how do you account for the fact that the Vietnamese are not a particularly successful immigrant group?
I don't know the relative importance of the various factors I mentioned and, given the difficulties and fog of bias surrounding such studies, I question who does. My main point is that the issues go way, way beyond your "there are mostly Asian kids in my Scratch class". Or are you going to stick to that observation as your "objective" view?
For making a comment like that in response to a factual correction, which contained not a whiff of prejudice, you deserve Slashdot's "Ass of the Year" award.
Doesn't using the phrase "an immigrant would be required to 'live and work' in Detroit for an undetermined length of time" sound a lot like an indentured labour program?
Yes. This whole idea is completely contrary to the American ideal of immigration. A permanent resident visa should is, should be, and always has been, for the entire country. You should no more be able to stop immigrants from moving anywhere in the country they want, than you should citizens. Something about the Constitution making this a united country, and the federal government controlling immigration.
With the possible exception of infrastructure, you obviously don't know jack about LA, NYC or SF. In case your name is Rip van Winkle, crime rates have been steadily declining for the last 20 years. Maybe you're worried about hippies too. Sorry, but none have been seen in the wild since the 1970's (and they were passe then).
Mod parent +5. I was going to ask the same thing. I don't have the stomach to read this book, so I ask anyone who has. Is there even a pretense of science, or is it just the author blowing smoke out of her ass?
Negative prejudice is looked down upon these days, but positive prejudice is accepted. Why? I remember a time when we were traveling through Nevada, and my brother commented that one thing you have to give the Mormons is that they take good care of their children. I'm sure that's true, but it raises an obvious question: which groups don't take good care of their children? Every positive prejudice is the flip side of a negative prejudice. I'm not saying that there are no cultural differences, or that they make no difference, but you have to be very careful when examining them. Blowing smoke out of you ass is obviously not a good approach, but even supposedly scientific approaches are fraught with problems. With the right study design, you can prove anything you want. It reminds me too much of the supposedly scientific racial theories of a hundred years ago.
I seriously question the cultural superiority of the Jews or any other particular group. However, one thing I've always admired about the Jews is that as a people they are the ultimate survivors. They are, and always have been, a small group. They've endured the Egyptian exodus, the Babylonian conquest and diaspora, the Roman diaspora, numerous pogroms, attempts to destroy them and blaming them for everything including the Great Plague, their expulsion after the Reconquista, the Inquisitions (both Roman and Spanish) and of course most importantly, the Nazi Holocaust.They're still here. To anyone who wants to destroy the Jews, I say give up. You have better odds of creating a perpetual motion machine.
War with some less developed enemy. No matter what it is, technology will beat it. New gear will optimize minimum losses to none.
That's what they said about Vietnam.
Fighting a real enemy, developed and armed nations fighting among themselves. Losses on both sides.... Shouldn't there be a development of a fighter that can be produced by mostly untrained workers in barely lit caves from commodity materials in minimum time?
Einstein addressed that issue:
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.
Pierre Spray, the lead designer of the F16 and of the A10
Sprey was not the chief designer, despite his claims. As a member of the fighter mafia in the 1960's, he did have some influence on their design. Even the influence of the fighter mafia as a whole has been exaggerated. John Boyd's work on OODA hand E-M in the 1950's and early '60's was excellent and highly influential. However, when he created the informal fighter mafia group in the 1960's, along with Christie, Riccioni, Hillaker and Sprey, they emphasized dogfighting above all else, as though these newfangled radars and missiles would never be of any value. Their cause got a boost from the problems with the original F-4, without a gun and with poor maneuverability. However, they were far from the only people that noticed that there was a problem. These days Sprey spends his time "analyzing" military equipment as though nothing had changed in the last 40+ years, and exaggerating his own role in the past.
Slashdot Mirror
No, it actually isn't that much of a stretch. We have visas that tie residency to a certain company sponsoring the visa.
It isn't that much different from the garbage we have now, but it's very different from the past. Companies were expressly forbidden from offering jobs to people who weren't already residents because it was understood that that would simply be a tactic to drive down wages. Apparently many people these days don't understand that, or think it's acceptable.
you can't drive down a street in Manhattan without a gang of 200 violent motorcyclists ... I will agree though, the OP was wrong to compare SF to those other places.
Both NYC and LA have lower crime rates than SF for murder, overall violent crimes, robbery, property crimes and burglary.
NYC is also safer than Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Las Vegas, Oklahoma City, St. Louis, and Wichita to name but a few. It may be the big bad city, but it's a lot safer than the stereotypes.
Source.
People say that every time someone who isn't considered "tough on crime" gets elected, but the statistics often tell a different story. People say Giuliani did a great job of reducing crime, but the precipitious drop actually started under Dinkins (who also started a lot of the "broken windows" policies). The steep decline continued after Giuliani appointed Bratton PC, but then started to decrease after 2 years when Giuliani fired Bratton. Note that the LA crime rate started dropping faster after Bratton became PC there. Later Giuliani appointed Kerik the crook as PC, despite almost all advice being against it.
Giuliani, like all politicians, takes credit for everything good during his administration, and denies responsibility for anything bad. If you want to know what led to NYC's decline in crime during that era, the objective evidence says it had little to do Giuliani. Rather the tree big factors are.
1. Overall national drop in crime rate (the reasons for which are a major debate).
2. Bratton
3. Dinkins
I may be safe since there's nobody there anymore. However, I was referring to the other three major cities mentioned, and national statistics, rather than Detroit. There are always exceptions.
I was making hipster jokes before they were cool.
The term hipster dates to the 1940's. Were you using the term during or after WWII?
P.S. Obviously kids today don't know no history, nor english neither.
You're right, which is why I said nothing about it.
Of course. Never mind that she was probably a great mom. In this day and age she'd probably be sent to prison (possibly with a reduced sentence because she's a women) and CPS would have abducted you and your brother. Be grateful you weren't born later.
What kind of pron is it? A girl of 17 years, 364 days, looking "provocative"? I better check the pics on my computer. Somewhere I probably have one of my young daughter eating a pickle or something. Those perverts get off on anything. Does it matter if the pickle is half sour or full sour?
I don't know if it was designed for that purpose, but in practice Tor is a honeypot. Encryption too? (though not by design). Maybe it's time to consider steganography more, though it has its limits in terms of bandwidth, and if encryption isn't widely used, steganography certainly won't be.
Another assumption. I said my family (wife and kids) are Jewish. I'm not.
This triple package theory does not explain why, despite being endowed with the triple package in the dyed in wool pristine form, India and Nigeria are so corrupt and so mired in poverty.
Shhh ... you'll cause cognitive dissonance amongst the neo-eugenicists.
The lasting damage of 19th/20th century colonialism would be my immediate assumption.
Japan was leveled in WWII, and yet they came back. Neither India nor Nigeria were leveled. While I condemn colonialism, the British occupation actually left them with some pretty good infrastructure, like the railroads. There were also quite a few elite who'd been educated at top universities (e.g. Gandhi). Post-WWII India started off in better shape than Japan.
Apparently American parents are too easy on kids while over scheduling and overworking them. They spend too little time with their kids while helicoptering over them. They do not care about school while bothering teachers with questions about little Johny every other day. They are not careful enough and tend to hurt their self esteem while making their kids to have too much self esteem. They helicopter and do not allow their toddlers to fall in play and thus do not allow them to naturally learn, But OMG, that toddler has bruise, no one caught his fall!!! Child neglect call CPS!!!
As an American parent I can tell you that the only way to feel that you're not a bad parent is doublethink. Unfortunately I seem to have some temperamental difficulty with it.
When was the last time the Jews feel like they are the "mainstream" anywhere but in Israel?
Today, and going back decades at the least. My family is Jewish. I grew up in a religiously mixed neighborhood. Nobody though anything of it. To find a time when they didn't feel mainstream, you have to go back to at least before WWII, and probably earlier.
I seriously question your ability to recognize objective reality over political correctness.
That's ok, I seriously question your ability to consider possibilities beyond whatever confirms your biases. Analogously, I question your ability to see anything in writing beyond what confirms your biases and kneejerk reactions, as I did not outright reject the idea. I simply expressed skepticism (a useful thing when taking a scientific view). Moreover, the main reason for my skepticism is the difficulty of studying such questions objectively, particularly when many of the "researchers" are so absorbed in their own preconceived notions (people such as yourself).
Despite generations of discrimination, most Jews and Chinese ...
My family is Jewish. The level of discrimination experienced by Jews is far less than what many other groups experienced. Yes, I know about "gentleman's agreements" and the "Jewish quota", but as bad as they were, they were minor compared to what many other groups experienced. At one point anti-Catholic sentiment was stronger than anti-Jewish sentiment. Every synagogue in America has a copy of George Washington's letter welcoming the first Jewish community to America. Contrast that with the fact that the man was a slave owner.
Another factor is that at the time most Jews came to this country, the family farm was already waning due to increases in productivity. The supply of people who knew how to farm exceeded the demand. Trades people, certain types of craftsmen, and so forth were better tickets to prosperity. Jews were concentrated in that work, and few were farmers, because in much of Europe they couldn't own land, and had to move from one country to another from time to time. The timing for their arrival in America was fortuitous.
As for Chinese, there was at one time strong prejudices against them, although largely concentrated in the West Coast and not as bad as against black people, for example. The prejudice also waned earlier (WWII prejudice was against Japanese, and China was out ally). Moreover, the majority of people of Chinese descent in America are from people that arrived here much more recently. Our prejudicial immigration policy only ended in 1965, and then for some decades thereafter it wasn't easy to emigrate from China. Hence they arrived at a time when not only was there little or no anti-Chinese prejudice, but at a time when they were being promoted as the "model minority". Lastly, most Chinese immigrants are people who are middle class or better. They are generally not some ill-educated farmers from the still very poor hinterlands. The same is true of Indian immigrants.
I also note that you switched from talking about Chinese to talking about Asians (presumably East Asians, unless you include say, Tajiks). Obviously China is not all of East Asia, but you tout East Asian cultures in general. So how do you account for the fact that the Vietnamese are not a particularly successful immigrant group?
I don't know the relative importance of the various factors I mentioned and, given the difficulties and fog of bias surrounding such studies, I question who does. My main point is that the issues go way, way beyond your "there are mostly Asian kids in my Scratch class". Or are you going to stick to that observation as your "objective" view?
For making a comment like that in response to a factual correction, which contained not a whiff of prejudice, you deserve Slashdot's "Ass of the Year" award.
Doesn't using the phrase "an immigrant would be required to 'live and work' in Detroit for an undetermined length of time" sound a lot like an indentured labour program?
Yes. This whole idea is completely contrary to the American ideal of immigration. A permanent resident visa should is, should be, and always has been, for the entire country. You should no more be able to stop immigrants from moving anywhere in the country they want, than you should citizens. Something about the Constitution making this a united country, and the federal government controlling immigration.
So just like LA, NYC, SF, etc...
With the possible exception of infrastructure, you obviously don't know jack about LA, NYC or SF. In case your name is Rip van Winkle, crime rates have been steadily declining for the last 20 years. Maybe you're worried about hippies too. Sorry, but none have been seen in the wild since the 1970's (and they were passe then).
Mod parent +5. I was going to ask the same thing. I don't have the stomach to read this book, so I ask anyone who has. Is there even a pretense of science, or is it just the author blowing smoke out of her ass?
Negative prejudice is looked down upon these days, but positive prejudice is accepted. Why? I remember a time when we were traveling through Nevada, and my brother commented that one thing you have to give the Mormons is that they take good care of their children. I'm sure that's true, but it raises an obvious question: which groups don't take good care of their children? Every positive prejudice is the flip side of a negative prejudice. I'm not saying that there are no cultural differences, or that they make no difference, but you have to be very careful when examining them. Blowing smoke out of you ass is obviously not a good approach, but even supposedly scientific approaches are fraught with problems. With the right study design, you can prove anything you want. It reminds me too much of the supposedly scientific racial theories of a hundred years ago.
I seriously question the cultural superiority of the Jews or any other particular group. However, one thing I've always admired about the Jews is that as a people they are the ultimate survivors. They are, and always have been, a small group. They've endured the Egyptian exodus, the Babylonian conquest and diaspora, the Roman diaspora, numerous pogroms, attempts to destroy them and blaming them for everything including the Great Plague, their expulsion after the Reconquista, the Inquisitions (both Roman and Spanish) and of course most importantly, the Nazi Holocaust.They're still here. To anyone who wants to destroy the Jews, I say give up. You have better odds of creating a perpetual motion machine.
War with some less developed enemy. No matter what it is, technology will beat it. New gear will optimize minimum losses to none.
That's what they said about Vietnam.
Fighting a real enemy, developed and armed nations fighting among themselves. Losses on both sides. ... Shouldn't there be a development of a fighter that can be produced by mostly untrained workers in barely lit caves from commodity materials in minimum time?
Einstein addressed that issue:
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.
Pierre Spray, the lead designer of the F16 and of the A10
Sprey was not the chief designer, despite his claims. As a member of the fighter mafia in the 1960's, he did have some influence on their design. Even the influence of the fighter mafia as a whole has been exaggerated. John Boyd's work on OODA hand E-M in the 1950's and early '60's was excellent and highly influential. However, when he created the informal fighter mafia group in the 1960's, along with Christie, Riccioni, Hillaker and Sprey, they emphasized dogfighting above all else, as though these newfangled radars and missiles would never be of any value. Their cause got a boost from the problems with the original F-4, without a gun and with poor maneuverability. However, they were far from the only people that noticed that there was a problem. These days Sprey spends his time "analyzing" military equipment as though nothing had changed in the last 40+ years, and exaggerating his own role in the past.
I've heard that it's possible, but in the US English is an especially useful language.
Heretic!
Europe has the same shortage of tech workers as does the US
You mean they don't have a shortage either?
another week for Asian culture
No wonder our schools are terrible if they only spend a week on such a broad and important topic.