Used to work at Target as Security. Best shit-paying job in the place. And paid a dollar more than ringing or stocking shelves. For their corporate policies I hate Walmart. Dislike Target too. I think Costco is great.
This was about a year ago, haven't been doing that work since. I couldn't tell you the brands because I never had much time to find out, what with the guest waiting and all. It was at a Target store built only two years ago using Checkpoint equipment.
You'd better hope that someone in the camera room doesn't spot you taking the bag, or else perhaps:
1) They'll follow you with rotating cameras outfitted with 1200mm zoom lenses. 2) He or she will radio the plainclothes guard of your location and description. 3) You'll be stealthily followed as you put the game in the bag 4) A uniformed guard at the entrance/exit will step just outside the doors out of sight while waiting for a "go" signal over his radio. 5) As you're leaving, the guard steps out and blocks your exit while the plainclothes person runs up and asks you to come back inside to "talk" 6) If you run or refuse, or maybe even if you co-operate, you will be handcuffed, this is a citizens arrest.
To my incredible surprize, I have actually walked a few cell phones through the anti-theft pillars and they set off the alarm - Even after running them over the deactivating pad at a checkstand.
The 5 regular customers have nowhere else to go. More importantly, it's more like 1 per day, or 1 per every 4 or 5 days.
Catching a shoplifter could be $20 per guard per day. An plainclothes guard catches the big thieves, and could catch several hundred to two thousand dollars per month. In California, if the thief was trying to take more than $400, they get charged with a felony.
You also have no idea how incompetant the cashiers can be. They let all kinds of stuff slip by, often in the back corners of shopping carts. Now they're getting paid shit wages, so I can understand, but the guards at the door can help recover the potential losses.
Finally, the security is a deterant. You probably have no idea how much merchandise would vanish if there were no guards. Teens and young adults are known for shoplifting because they do it more often, not just that they get caught more often.
These teens stuff CDs and video games in the waistband of their pants and cover with a shirt. Some of them just run out to elude the guards. Others cut open the packages and take the discs to avoid the alarms. It isn't just for personal use either. For videogames, guys will try to steal five at a time and sell them to gamestop.
Meanwhile professionals will try to fill up opaque tote boxes with merchandise, then put large objects on top. At the register, they try to get the cashier to use the hand-held gun to scan the sticker on the tote and large object without having the lid of the tote opened.
Doesn't that cut both ways? The MPAA could lie and say the real movie files are fake. But for the comment to show, they had to offer the real file for download. Now they can offer a fake file.
Seems like the next step in P2P is to have users mark other users as "bad". Users trade lists as they download. The MPAA's machines get flagged as bad, and nobody downloads from them. When the MPAA starts changing IPs, the users mark narrowly defined ranges as bad.
Perhaps because boycotting/. isn't as effective as using up bandwidth without viewing ads. If enough people complain about the lousy stories, maybe the editors will have to care more.
How do you figure? Subconsciously many people will think "3" as in PS3, is better than "2" as in xbox 2. "360" makes it equal or better than just "3". As for calling it xbox next or nextbox, that's where marketing surveys come in. I assure you the marketing department was intensely interested in which name had the most appeal.
I thought the Fed changed the interest rates to speed up or slow down the expansion rate of the economy.
When the government raises taxes it can take the money without having to pay it back. Since the money does go right back into the economy though, what's the difference besides the national debt not increasing from deficit spending?
Wow, this is awesome. Don't suppose you'd care to say where you lean on the political spectrum?
The quizes on the net I have taken agree with my self-assesment that I'm liberal, but not not all that far left. Being against race-based affirmative action but for it when it's socio-economic. I get libertarian and liberal points for being pro legal, regulated, pot and prostitution. More liberal points for believing people have no business owning personal machine guns. But back towards the center because I'm pro concealed-weapons permits so long as there are background checks and no saturday-night-specials.
I'm actually conditionally in favor of no minimum wage. That condition is that there are safety nets and support structures to provide a minimum quality of life for people working those jobs. After all, the most common argument for the minimum wage is so people make enough to get by. Yes I know these are supposed to be starter jobs, not living wages, and I don't think they should pay as if they were.
I've heard how people earning minimum wage should live with family or friends, and of course they generally do since they don't make enough to live on their own. But there will always be sad cases of people who don't have family or friends, they died in a fire, or the person was a drug addict or homeless for a decade. If there aren't social supports for these people, they get trapped in minimum wage jobs for the rest of their life. See the garment and factory workers in south east Asia. There's teenagers and 40-somethings there because they're stuck.
In the USA, if we abolish the minimum wage, I would only support it if community college was free for qualifying minimum wage earners. They would have to work 40 hours, but get free bus passes and classes. Also they'd qualify for food stamps if they don't already. There would most certainly have to be housing services available. Getting screwed because a roommate lost his job and ending up on the street or moving to another apartment mid-semester is not acceptable. I am adamantly against any part of a system where people get stuck at the bottom through no fault of their own.
If this is the post I remember, someone responded with good evidence of Hong Kong's prosperity, including the "lower classes", despite (because of?) the lack of the government setting the minimum wage.
Then I replied pointing out the failings of that argument.
Socialism is on the end with communism. The two words are really interchangable.
So Western Europe is communist? No, their countries have safety nets and support structures to help the people while overall allowing businesses to own the means of production. They're socialist and it's a big difference.
Now Canada's supply management systems are pretty far out there. But they've allowed chicken farmers to have stable prices and stay in business instead of being bought out by Tyson.
As long as "these people" making this determination are on the board of directors of that company. It is really no one else's business.
I'm going to make a leap here and guess you're one of those "personal liberty is paramount" kinda folks. Someone who thinks all people have the right to screw up things for future generations because the individual is more important than the group?
the people
No I agree with Madison that government exists to serve the voters it governs.
Do you realize that at 1/3rd of a trillion dollars each year, in 21 years we'll have paid the entire debt just in interest? In about 40 years we'll have paid just in interest, what it would have cost to pay off the debt and interest. Now granted in 40 years 7 trillion won't have the same buying power, but that's because of the sham the government does making the dollar's value decrease by 3% each year. It doesn't have to.
I'm not going to search for sources for an AC, but the Reagan budgets were at least as much his fault as the democrats. He certainly took credit for their effect on the economy.
Electronic registers, robots and other high tech (read: foreign) tech is slowly replacing all those $5.50/hr jobs at Walmart.
Now what?
The jobless have a revolution? The jobless are allowed to die off in unpleasant ways? Countries decide to be humane and use socialism to provide a minimum of food and water to keep them alive. Maybe even free education and job training to make them productive members of the country again?
Isaac Asimov and Roger MacBride Allen collaborated in the 1990s producing the Caliban, Inferno, Utopia trillogy. 10,000 years in the future on another planet, humans no longer worked unless they wanted to, and those that did were considered a little bit peculiar. Everybody else had robots wait on them hand and foot. I'm not suggesting we go that far, because the books clearly show some undesirable effects of such a place. But when we do have robots capable of stocking shelves, serving food, and cleaning hotel rooms, all those people are going to need new jobs. And they won't find them building the robots, because other robots will build each other. Even mining metal and processing it for robots could be done by other robots.
Yes there will be new jobs to maintain and design robots, but not enough for all of Walmart's millions.
Perhaps governments and the wealthy might chose to pay for all these people to become artists and entertainers?
Starting from my original post I think I've done a pretty good job pointing out that unchecked capitalism has worse negative results for the lower classes, such as in Hong Kong. If pure capitalism is at one end of the economic spectrum, and communism is at the other end, socialism falls in the middle. Socialism is the moderate approach, while the other two are extreme, and I would say, bad.
So because government exists for the people, and the people don't want to work in bad conditions, there are regulations. So if the people think CEOs shouldn't get to collude with the board members and give themselves unchecked raises and bonuses because that's money that could have gone to the factory workers, fine.
What will outsourcing companies do if Asia, South America, and Africa ever stop fighting and develop? When labor costs rise in China, then Brazil, then Somalia? When labor costs finally make everything more expensive for everyone? Then the developed nations will no longer have any countries to exploit for cheap labor. That shows working in a sweatshop should have been worth more all along, but presently we exploit the misfortune of others by paying them less than they deserve, only because we can.
There were plenty of jobs in the 50s and 60s, we made our own levis and TVs. Of course we helped rebuild Europe and sold plenty overseas. Now the jobs are leaving, and being replaced with $5.50/hr at Walmart. Remove the minimum wage and jobs return. You say the whiners should just find another job, but what if there's a lot more whiners than better jobs? What if Walmart cuts pay to $2.50 an hour and working 50 hours a week leaves no time and money to go to community college for that better job?
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, seen those many-a-time. Mostly inside jewel cases. Never investigated how it inducts though.
More like 2"x2" but yeah.
Used to work at Target as Security. Best shit-paying job in the place. And paid a dollar more than ringing or stocking shelves. For their corporate policies I hate Walmart. Dislike Target too. I think Costco is great.
1200mm refers to the focal length, which as in telescopes can be far longer than the lens casing.
This was about a year ago, haven't been doing that work since. I couldn't tell you the brands because I never had much time to find out, what with the guest waiting and all. It was at a Target store built only two years ago using Checkpoint equipment.
Depends on the guard. If it's a plainclothes who followed the person around the store, it's a citizen's arrest.
You'd better hope that someone in the camera room doesn't spot you taking the bag, or else perhaps:
1) They'll follow you with rotating cameras outfitted with 1200mm zoom lenses.
2) He or she will radio the plainclothes guard of your location and description.
3) You'll be stealthily followed as you put the game in the bag
4) A uniformed guard at the entrance/exit will step just outside the doors out of sight while waiting for a "go" signal over his radio.
5) As you're leaving, the guard steps out and blocks your exit while the plainclothes person runs up and asks you to come back inside to "talk"
6) If you run or refuse, or maybe even if you co-operate, you will be handcuffed, this is a citizens arrest.
Stores use different freqencies in their systems, but some use the same ones. So some merchandise will set off the system, but other stuff won't.
To my incredible surprize, I have actually walked a few cell phones through the anti-theft pillars and they set off the alarm - Even after running them over the deactivating pad at a checkstand.
Your numbers are all wrong.
The 5 regular customers have nowhere else to go. More importantly, it's more like 1 per day, or 1 per every 4 or 5 days.
Catching a shoplifter could be $20 per guard per day. An plainclothes guard catches the big thieves, and could catch several hundred to two thousand dollars per month. In California, if the thief was trying to take more than $400, they get charged with a felony.
You also have no idea how incompetant the cashiers can be. They let all kinds of stuff slip by, often in the back corners of shopping carts. Now they're getting paid shit wages, so I can understand, but the guards at the door can help recover the potential losses.
Finally, the security is a deterant. You probably have no idea how much merchandise would vanish if there were no guards. Teens and young adults are known for shoplifting because they do it more often, not just that they get caught more often.
These teens stuff CDs and video games in the waistband of their pants and cover with a shirt. Some of them just run out to elude the guards. Others cut open the packages and take the discs to avoid the alarms. It isn't just for personal use either. For videogames, guys will try to steal five at a time and sell them to gamestop.
Meanwhile professionals will try to fill up opaque tote boxes with merchandise, then put large objects on top. At the register, they try to get the cashier to use the hand-held gun to scan the sticker on the tote and large object without having the lid of the tote opened.
Doesn't that cut both ways? The MPAA could lie and say the real movie files are fake. But for the comment to show, they had to offer the real file for download. Now they can offer a fake file.
Seems like the next step in P2P is to have users mark other users as "bad". Users trade lists as they download. The MPAA's machines get flagged as bad, and nobody downloads from them. When the MPAA starts changing IPs, the users mark narrowly defined ranges as bad.
What happened after that?
Buy online and you won't even have to leave the house.
Perhaps because boycotting /. isn't as effective as using up bandwidth without viewing ads. If enough people complain about the lousy stories, maybe the editors will have to care more.
How do you figure? Subconsciously many people will think "3" as in PS3, is better than "2" as in xbox 2. "360" makes it equal or better than just "3". As for calling it xbox next or nextbox, that's where marketing surveys come in. I assure you the marketing department was intensely interested in which name had the most appeal.
I thought the Fed changed the interest rates to speed up or slow down the expansion rate of the economy.
When the government raises taxes it can take the money without having to pay it back. Since the money does go right back into the economy though, what's the difference besides the national debt not increasing from deficit spending?
I agree with you completely. Bill Gates' father would also agree with you, and he's only a multi-millionaire, unlike his son.
Wow, this is awesome. Don't suppose you'd care to say where you lean on the political spectrum?
The quizes on the net I have taken agree with my self-assesment that I'm liberal, but not not all that far left. Being against race-based affirmative action but for it when it's socio-economic. I get libertarian and liberal points for being pro legal, regulated, pot and prostitution. More liberal points for believing people have no business owning personal machine guns. But back towards the center because I'm pro concealed-weapons permits so long as there are background checks and no saturday-night-specials.
I'm actually conditionally in favor of no minimum wage. That condition is that there are safety nets and support structures to provide a minimum quality of life for people working those jobs. After all, the most common argument for the minimum wage is so people make enough to get by. Yes I know these are supposed to be starter jobs, not living wages, and I don't think they should pay as if they were.
I've heard how people earning minimum wage should live with family or friends, and of course they generally do since they don't make enough to live on their own. But there will always be sad cases of people who don't have family or friends, they died in a fire, or the person was a drug addict or homeless for a decade. If there aren't social supports for these people, they get trapped in minimum wage jobs for the rest of their life. See the garment and factory workers in south east Asia. There's teenagers and 40-somethings there because they're stuck.
In the USA, if we abolish the minimum wage, I would only support it if community college was free for qualifying minimum wage earners. They would have to work 40 hours, but get free bus passes and classes. Also they'd qualify for food stamps if they don't already. There would most certainly have to be housing services available. Getting screwed because a roommate lost his job and ending up on the street or moving to another apartment mid-semester is not acceptable. I am adamantly against any part of a system where people get stuck at the bottom through no fault of their own.
Yes back on the topic, why is setting a maximum wage more ridiculous than setting a minimum wage?
A small jump from there is saying the highest pay can be no more than 10 or 20 or whatever times the lowest paid person gets per hour.
If this is the post I remember, someone responded with good evidence of Hong Kong's prosperity, including the "lower classes", despite (because of?) the lack of the government setting the minimum wage.
Then I replied pointing out the failings of that argument.
Socialism is on the end with communism. The two words are really interchangable.
So Western Europe is communist? No, their countries have safety nets and support structures to help the people while overall allowing businesses to own the means of production. They're socialist and it's a big difference.
Now Canada's supply management systems are pretty far out there. But they've allowed chicken farmers to have stable prices and stay in business instead of being bought out by Tyson.
As long as "these people" making this determination are on the board of directors of that company. It is really no one else's business.
I'm going to make a leap here and guess you're one of those "personal liberty is paramount" kinda folks. Someone who thinks all people have the right to screw up things for future generations because the individual is more important than the group?
the people
No I agree with Madison that government exists to serve the voters it governs.
Do you realize that at 1/3rd of a trillion dollars each year, in 21 years we'll have paid the entire debt just in interest? In about 40 years we'll have paid just in interest, what it would have cost to pay off the debt and interest. Now granted in 40 years 7 trillion won't have the same buying power, but that's because of the sham the government does making the dollar's value decrease by 3% each year. It doesn't have to.
I'm not going to search for sources for an AC, but the Reagan budgets were at least as much his fault as the democrats. He certainly took credit for their effect on the economy.
Electronic registers, robots and other high tech (read: foreign) tech is slowly replacing all those $5.50/hr jobs at Walmart.
Now what?
The jobless have a revolution?
The jobless are allowed to die off in unpleasant ways?
Countries decide to be humane and use socialism to provide a minimum of food and water to keep them alive. Maybe even free education and job training to make them productive members of the country again?
Isaac Asimov and Roger MacBride Allen collaborated in the 1990s producing the Caliban, Inferno, Utopia trillogy. 10,000 years in the future on another planet, humans no longer worked unless they wanted to, and those that did were considered a little bit peculiar. Everybody else had robots wait on them hand and foot. I'm not suggesting we go that far, because the books clearly show some undesirable effects of such a place. But when we do have robots capable of stocking shelves, serving food, and cleaning hotel rooms, all those people are going to need new jobs. And they won't find them building the robots, because other robots will build each other. Even mining metal and processing it for robots could be done by other robots.
Yes there will be new jobs to maintain and design robots, but not enough for all of Walmart's millions.
Perhaps governments and the wealthy might chose to pay for all these people to become artists and entertainers?
Starting from my original post I think I've done a pretty good job pointing out that unchecked capitalism has worse negative results for the lower classes, such as in Hong Kong. If pure capitalism is at one end of the economic spectrum, and communism is at the other end, socialism falls in the middle. Socialism is the moderate approach, while the other two are extreme, and I would say, bad.
So because government exists for the people, and the people don't want to work in bad conditions, there are regulations. So if the people think CEOs shouldn't get to collude with the board members and give themselves unchecked raises and bonuses because that's money that could have gone to the factory workers, fine.
What will outsourcing companies do if Asia, South America, and Africa ever stop fighting and develop? When labor costs rise in China, then Brazil, then Somalia? When labor costs finally make everything more expensive for everyone? Then the developed nations will no longer have any countries to exploit for cheap labor. That shows working in a sweatshop should have been worth more all along, but presently we exploit the misfortune of others by paying them less than they deserve, only because we can.
There were plenty of jobs in the 50s and 60s, we made our own levis and TVs. Of course we helped rebuild Europe and sold plenty overseas. Now the jobs are leaving, and being replaced with $5.50/hr at Walmart. Remove the minimum wage and jobs return. You say the whiners should just find another job, but what if there's a lot more whiners than better jobs? What if Walmart cuts pay to $2.50 an hour and working 50 hours a week leaves no time and money to go to community college for that better job?