Because flat tax is stupid: you either won't be able to finance the government because you're not getting enough money, or you'll tax low-income people to death and they'll revolt.
You sound like you'd be happier living in Somalia. Why don't you go there and see how your idiotic libertarian ideas work out?
They do that because, for W-2 employees, your employer is paying part of those taxes for you (specifically, half of your FICA taxes, plus payroll taxes too). When you're self-employed, you don't have an employer chipping that stuff in, so you have to pay it yourself.
If you don't like it, you should lobby the government to take the entire FICA deduction out of your paycheck.
but I really don't get the zealotry behind all the MS hate - they are, right now, no better or worse than any of the big IT corporations
I'm guessing much of it has to do with exposure: how many home users, including Slashdotters, use Oracle, Peoplesoft, etc. on their personal systems?
Even if you use something else at home, for almost all jobs with computers it's pretty hard to avoid using Microsoft software (typically Win/Office and frequently also Outlook). And even if you do have to use some other big-IT software, you may only use it a fraction of the time, whereas you're stuck using MS-ware all day long.
The EULA for Windows specifically disclaims any warranty. You use it at your own risk. So no, there's no legal precedent at all. If you're not happy with the quality of Windows and you're not happy with the level of service and support from MS when you complain, then find a better vendor.
This isn't like car airbags because Windows is not safety-critical. Your life is not threatened if your Windows PC stops working. For a better car analogy, some car brands use poor-quality materials for their interiors, or poor-quality paint for their bodies, so that these cars look worn-out and beat-up after a short time, with pockmarked paint or interior pieces falling off. Do you think you're going to get very far complaining about this stuff to the automaker or the government? Of course not; if you're not happy with it, find another brand.
Bad comparison. McDonald's coffee *is* gourmet. I'm not a coffee-drinker, but far too many people have told me now that McDonald's gourmet coffee is much better than Starbucks coffee, which they all say is burnt. So unless you're trying to raise the bar of "gourmet coffee" to be higher than Starbucks' $5 drinks, which much of the population seems to think counts as "gourmet", I think McD's coffee counts too.
Don't be ridiculous; they're nothing "psychotic" about Microsoft's behavior lately. They are acting quite rationally, and quite intelligently I might add.
The thing people simply cannot get through their thick skulls is that Microsoft is doing things that are in *their* best interest (for greater profitability), rather than *your* best interest. For some reason, many people seem to think that MS has some kind of obligation to work in the best interest of the end-user, or perhaps even to strongly consider what the end-user needs or wants. I have absolutely no idea where they got this crazy idea from.
Everything MS has done has made perfect sense. Laying off the QA department, for instance, makes perfect sense: it just costs a lot of money in salaries, and does nothing to improve sales or customer retention. People are going to use Windows no matter how well or poorly it works, so why bother paying for better QA? Adding advertising to the OS start menu makes sense: MS can charge advertisers for this. Adding spyware to the OS makes sense: they can snoop on users and see what they're doing, and figure out more ways of making more money from them. What's the downside to any of this? There is none!
Stop questioning the sanity and intelligence of MS's executives; they're quite sane, and very intelligent, and everything they've been doing lately has been extremely sensible. The people whose sanity and intelligence you should be questioning are the people who willingly use Microsoft Windows.
To be fair, it's possible he just missed typing the 'a' key hard enough (on today's shitty, mushy keyboards with no tactile feedback) and didn't notice before hitting "submit", and this stupid site won't allow quick edits after submission like some other sites do. I'd rather give him the benefit of the doubt, unlike all the morons who write about using the "breaks" in their cars to slow down, or the idiots who can't get "there" and "their" (or worse, "they're") straight, or the fools who think "rediculous" is a word.
Trump seems to have missed the memo where these people generate wealth and jobs.
Trump is simply doing what he promised he'd do, and he's doing what his voters wanted him to do. His voters don't want these people here, even though his voters also complain a lot about how bad the job situation is for them. Make of that what you will.
You're forgetting property taxes, which can be huge in many areas (esp. the northeast US states)).
Also, there's sales tax and gas taxes, plus things like car taxes/car registration fees.
Finally, I thought FICA taxes maxed out somewhere a little over 100k of income, so instead of looking at $10M/year income, look at $110k perhaps: there, you get the full brunt of FICA taxes, plus sales and gas taxes will be a far more significant portion of your income.
Also, if someone is self-employed, they have additional self-employment taxes.
Qualified workers need to be attracted to the industry by higher wages. So if there seems to be a shortage, the industry only has itself to blame. They need to be raising salaries, just like in any market where supply-and-demand works, and let the market work.
Maybe you should get a fucking clue. Take an economics class like I told you before. Until then, shut the fuck up.
I had one of those drive-around-the-block tests too, back in the 90s. When was your test? I've been told that tests are a lot more rigorous these days, but that's just what I've been told.
However, what they test for and what they teach are two different things, and were when I got my license too. While the driving test was almost trivial, there was still a written test based on the driving manual, which teaches those rules that I mentioned earlier. Also, when I was in high school they had driver's ed classes which taught this stuff too.
Yep, but two points: 1) The bikers always claim that it's for "safety"; the car-modders never claim this, so at least they're honest. 2) Disabling mufflers on cars, or putting loud fart-can mufflers on them, seems to have mostly died out, having hit a peak in the 1990s I believe with compacts, and probably 70s/80s for domestic muscle cars. But loud Harleys are just as popular as ever. More stringently-enforced noise codes might have something to do with this, but somehow these laws are almost never enforced against bikers.
You're obviously an idiot if you think Hondas and Suzukis make the kind of noise that Harleys do. I've never in my life seen a Japanese cruiser modified to make the kind of noise that Harleys almost always are, and it's easy to tell the difference just from the noise because of the Harley's distinctive rhythm.
How is that any different than someone going in for an interview, and demanding $10 million as the salary. The company refuses. Are they now allowed to claim that they can't find anyone?
The company should never be allowed to claim they can't find anyone. If they can't pay the market price, they simply can't afford the service, and their business is not viable. One guy asking for $10M is not indicative of the market price BTW, but if all the similarly-qualified candidates are already working for nearly that much, then it is.
That is not a definition of labor shortage that any practical person applies to anything, or is even useful in any way.
There is no such thing as a labor shortage, no matter how much you want to believe there is. You just don't want to pay what it takes to get qualified people to work for you. Stop being intellectually dishonest.
The big problem is that in much of the US, driver education doesn't teach new drivers how to share the road with motorcyclists.
Oh please, more fanciful crap. Here in the US, driver education teaches drivers to have 2-second following distances, to signal lane changes, to not drive aggressively, etc. Do people actually follow this advice? Hell no. What makes you think they're going to follow any teaching about sharing the road with motorcyclists? They don't even share the road with other cars.
Also car drivers need to open their eyes and see motorcyclists.
Oh please, that's some fanciful thinking. It'll happen about the time that voters open their eyes and start electing good politicians, or the time that computer owners open their eyes and stop using a spyware-laden OS.
Inattentive and stupid and reckless car drivers are a given; it's never going to change, at least until mandatory automated driving becomes the norm.
Personally, I think motorcycles should be discriminated against: they can only get in the HOV lane after getting into a box and revving their engine. If the microphones in the box detect the engine is too loud, they can't use the road. Or maybe it should just be based on brand: BMWs and Hondas are welcome, Harleys are not. Quiet motorcycles are fine with me, I just hate the stupid loud ones. If motorcycles weren't so dangerous, I'd ride one myself (likely a Honda), but I really hate those fucking Harleys.
Let's go back to Bugattis: there are X people who want a $1M Bugatti for $20K, and there are 0 Bugattis available for $20k. 0 By increasing the price/wage for a job you don't get more people able doing that job. The amount of people able to do that job stays constant.
This is just plain stupid. If you increase the price, you get more people interested in making themselves qualified for the job. Offer peanuts for years on end and don't be surprised when no one's interested in going to school for that. On top of that, if you can't find someone qualified right now, you can pay to train someone!! What about that concept? But if you're too cheap for that, oh well, you obviously can't afford to sustain your business model.
Seriously, go take an economics course; this stuff isn't that hard.
You seem to have a fundamental inability to grasp basic economics.
Yes, they need to hire a developer away from some other company. This is good for the developer and the economy, because he was being underpaid in his previous position. Now the old company needs to pay more to fill that position, or they need to just go out of business because they're obviously not economically viable if they can't afford the market rate. Yes, some other company is at the losing end: the one that isn't profitable enough to compete for the limited supply of highly skilled developers. That's how it goes in business: the ones that can't compete go under.
To prevent labourer shortages you need to plan education better, as a country/ministry of education. Does the US even have a 'ministry of education'.
No, you also need to provide jobs that pay enough to attract people to that field. Obviously, Canada is failing at that. The US seems to be doing much better. And yes, we do have a Department of Education, which is the same thing, even though the person running it now is a complete moron (but that's only been going on for a few months, not nearly long enough to see major negative effects from).
That's like saying most people can afford to buy whatever they want by simply spending all the money they have. That's now how it works.
No, you're misstating the problem entirely.
I want a Bugatti supercar, but they won't sell one to me for $20K, and instead they demand $1M for one. Does that mean there's a shortage of Bugattis? No, it means that I simply can't afford one and I need to stop complaining and get something within my budget.
Similarly, it makes no sense to offer more than what the employee is worth to them as a business.
If they're offering and no one's biting, that means that they're offering too low. If that's all they can afford, then they need to do something different, or go out of business, not complain that they can't find anyone. They're lying, and lying is wrong.
Exactly 100% correct. I keep pointing this out every time this topic comes up, and people act like I have three heads or something. They keep whining about how MS is "treating customers poorly", about how bad the update process is, etc., but any time I suggest changing vendors if they're unhappy with how they're being treated, they act like I'm insane, and that somehow MS has a duty to treat customers better and provide a better experience. They don't, and why should they? Customers will keep coming back for more, no matter how badly MS treats them, so MS might as well soak them for as much as they can. I sure don't feel any sympathy for them any more.
and then get super humid with a zillion bugs the rest of the time.
We need to work on genetically engineering dragonflies so there's a lot more of them and they're more resistant to whatever things in the environment are hurting their reproduction. Dragonflies are great for eating biting insects.
This simply is not true. There is no labor shortage, and in fact the very idea of a "labor shortage" is pure lunacy; it cannot exist. The only thing that can exist is a shortage of labor willing to work for the wages offered.
Despite very high salaries and benefits,
Wrong. Canada is infamous for paying peanuts for tech jobs. That's why so many Canadian tech workers move south of the border to work in the US, despite a much worse social safety net and much higher healthcare costs. Those worse conditions are much more than made up for when you can get double or triple the salary in the US than in Canada.
Ive talked with numerous factory managers that are looking to robotize, not to lower cost, but because they just cant find employees, regardless of compensation.
Again, that's bullshit. These employers aren't offering enough money, plain and simple. If they offer $10M per year, I guarantee they'll find someone. They just don't want to pay what it takes to find qualified people.
Maybe the other car-based companies should be excluded from this silly law then too. If transportation for wheelchair-bound people (who don't have their own car for some reason) is a problem, I think it'd be a lot cheaper for the city to just supply their own special wheelchair vans, on call just for these people, than to require ever car-based private business to cater to them.
What about black cars? Are limo companies required to also cater to wheelchair users? I don't think so. I've never seen a limo or a town car that was set up for wheelchairs. So why should Uber be different? Uber is really, fundamentally, an app company that coordinates black-car livery service; the cab companies are just mad because they got the cost of black-car service *below* the cost of cabs. But part of that can be blamed on the government and its onerous regulation, such as requiring wheelchair service, and also limiting the number of cabs artificially. Get rid of that stuff and the costs will come down. And for the wheelchair users, just provide them special government-provided van service either for free or for no more than bus fare. That's supposed to be the whole job of government here, after all: to provide for people who fall through the cracks. You can even pay for this service with a special tax on transportation, so that both Uber/Lyft and the cab companies and the other black-car and limo livery companies ALL have to chip in and pay for it, rather than requiring them to mess around with buying their own vans and dealing with that.
Also the top-scoring group in: suicide rate, work-related deadly accidents, homelessness , incarceration rates.
What? That's complete bullshit. Black males dominate in incarceration rates, and it's well-known. White people lead in absolute incarceration numbers, yes, but that's just because they're a majority of the population, but the per-capita rate of incarceration is easily led by black males.
As for the rest, citation needed (except for suicide rates, I'm pretty sure that one is well-known). You're probably again confusing per-capita rates with absolute numbers. Of course white people lead in many categories, it's just because they're a majority of the population. You're probably still right about work-related fatal accidents and homelessness, but probably not as much as you think you are.
It's no big wonder when a group that dominates the absolute population numbers also dominates many categories. It's concerning when a group's per-capita rate differs greatly from their portion of representation in the overall population, because that usually shows some kind of injustice where that group is either being treated preferentially or being discriminated against.
Slashdot Mirror
Because flat tax is stupid: you either won't be able to finance the government because you're not getting enough money, or you'll tax low-income people to death and they'll revolt.
You sound like you'd be happier living in Somalia. Why don't you go there and see how your idiotic libertarian ideas work out?
They do that because, for W-2 employees, your employer is paying part of those taxes for you (specifically, half of your FICA taxes, plus payroll taxes too). When you're self-employed, you don't have an employer chipping that stuff in, so you have to pay it yourself.
If you don't like it, you should lobby the government to take the entire FICA deduction out of your paycheck.
but I really don't get the zealotry behind all the MS hate - they are, right now, no better or worse than any of the big IT corporations
I'm guessing much of it has to do with exposure: how many home users, including Slashdotters, use Oracle, Peoplesoft, etc. on their personal systems?
Even if you use something else at home, for almost all jobs with computers it's pretty hard to avoid using Microsoft software (typically Win/Office and frequently also Outlook). And even if you do have to use some other big-IT software, you may only use it a fraction of the time, whereas you're stuck using MS-ware all day long.
The EULA for Windows specifically disclaims any warranty. You use it at your own risk. So no, there's no legal precedent at all. If you're not happy with the quality of Windows and you're not happy with the level of service and support from MS when you complain, then find a better vendor.
This isn't like car airbags because Windows is not safety-critical. Your life is not threatened if your Windows PC stops working. For a better car analogy, some car brands use poor-quality materials for their interiors, or poor-quality paint for their bodies, so that these cars look worn-out and beat-up after a short time, with pockmarked paint or interior pieces falling off. Do you think you're going to get very far complaining about this stuff to the automaker or the government? Of course not; if you're not happy with it, find another brand.
Yes, that's true, but shouldn't I expect bug fixes for my one time payment? They sold me a broken product!
No product is perfect. If you're not happy with the level of service and quality they're providing, then stop supporting that vendor.
There's plenty of companies out there that do a poor job of handling warranty claims by customers.
Bad comparison. McDonald's coffee *is* gourmet. I'm not a coffee-drinker, but far too many people have told me now that McDonald's gourmet coffee is much better than Starbucks coffee, which they all say is burnt. So unless you're trying to raise the bar of "gourmet coffee" to be higher than Starbucks' $5 drinks, which much of the population seems to think counts as "gourmet", I think McD's coffee counts too.
Don't be ridiculous; they're nothing "psychotic" about Microsoft's behavior lately. They are acting quite rationally, and quite intelligently I might add.
The thing people simply cannot get through their thick skulls is that Microsoft is doing things that are in *their* best interest (for greater profitability), rather than *your* best interest. For some reason, many people seem to think that MS has some kind of obligation to work in the best interest of the end-user, or perhaps even to strongly consider what the end-user needs or wants. I have absolutely no idea where they got this crazy idea from.
Everything MS has done has made perfect sense. Laying off the QA department, for instance, makes perfect sense: it just costs a lot of money in salaries, and does nothing to improve sales or customer retention. People are going to use Windows no matter how well or poorly it works, so why bother paying for better QA? Adding advertising to the OS start menu makes sense: MS can charge advertisers for this. Adding spyware to the OS makes sense: they can snoop on users and see what they're doing, and figure out more ways of making more money from them. What's the downside to any of this? There is none!
Stop questioning the sanity and intelligence of MS's executives; they're quite sane, and very intelligent, and everything they've been doing lately has been extremely sensible. The people whose sanity and intelligence you should be questioning are the people who willingly use Microsoft Windows.
To be fair, it's possible he just missed typing the 'a' key hard enough (on today's shitty, mushy keyboards with no tactile feedback) and didn't notice before hitting "submit", and this stupid site won't allow quick edits after submission like some other sites do. I'd rather give him the benefit of the doubt, unlike all the morons who write about using the "breaks" in their cars to slow down, or the idiots who can't get "there" and "their" (or worse, "they're") straight, or the fools who think "rediculous" is a word.
Trump seems to have missed the memo where these people generate wealth and jobs.
Trump is simply doing what he promised he'd do, and he's doing what his voters wanted him to do. His voters don't want these people here, even though his voters also complain a lot about how bad the job situation is for them. Make of that what you will.
You're forgetting property taxes, which can be huge in many areas (esp. the northeast US states)).
Also, there's sales tax and gas taxes, plus things like car taxes/car registration fees.
Finally, I thought FICA taxes maxed out somewhere a little over 100k of income, so instead of looking at $10M/year income, look at $110k perhaps: there, you get the full brunt of FICA taxes, plus sales and gas taxes will be a far more significant portion of your income.
Also, if someone is self-employed, they have additional self-employment taxes.
Qualified workers need to be attracted to the industry by higher wages. So if there seems to be a shortage, the industry only has itself to blame. They need to be raising salaries, just like in any market where supply-and-demand works, and let the market work.
Maybe you should get a fucking clue. Take an economics class like I told you before. Until then, shut the fuck up.
I had one of those drive-around-the-block tests too, back in the 90s. When was your test? I've been told that tests are a lot more rigorous these days, but that's just what I've been told.
However, what they test for and what they teach are two different things, and were when I got my license too. While the driving test was almost trivial, there was still a written test based on the driving manual, which teaches those rules that I mentioned earlier. Also, when I was in high school they had driver's ed classes which taught this stuff too.
Yep, but two points:
1) The bikers always claim that it's for "safety"; the car-modders never claim this, so at least they're honest.
2) Disabling mufflers on cars, or putting loud fart-can mufflers on them, seems to have mostly died out, having hit a peak in the 1990s I believe with compacts, and probably 70s/80s for domestic muscle cars. But loud Harleys are just as popular as ever. More stringently-enforced noise codes might have something to do with this, but somehow these laws are almost never enforced against bikers.
You're obviously an idiot if you think Hondas and Suzukis make the kind of noise that Harleys do. I've never in my life seen a Japanese cruiser modified to make the kind of noise that Harleys almost always are, and it's easy to tell the difference just from the noise because of the Harley's distinctive rhythm.
How is that any different than someone going in for an interview, and demanding $10 million as the salary. The company refuses. Are they now allowed to claim that they can't find anyone?
The company should never be allowed to claim they can't find anyone. If they can't pay the market price, they simply can't afford the service, and their business is not viable. One guy asking for $10M is not indicative of the market price BTW, but if all the similarly-qualified candidates are already working for nearly that much, then it is.
That is not a definition of labor shortage that any practical person applies to anything, or is even useful in any way.
There is no such thing as a labor shortage, no matter how much you want to believe there is. You just don't want to pay what it takes to get qualified people to work for you. Stop being intellectually dishonest.
The big problem is that in much of the US, driver education doesn't teach new drivers how to share the road with motorcyclists.
Oh please, more fanciful crap. Here in the US, driver education teaches drivers to have 2-second following distances, to signal lane changes, to not drive aggressively, etc. Do people actually follow this advice? Hell no. What makes you think they're going to follow any teaching about sharing the road with motorcyclists? They don't even share the road with other cars.
Also car drivers need to open their eyes and see motorcyclists.
Oh please, that's some fanciful thinking. It'll happen about the time that voters open their eyes and start electing good politicians, or the time that computer owners open their eyes and stop using a spyware-laden OS.
Inattentive and stupid and reckless car drivers are a given; it's never going to change, at least until mandatory automated driving becomes the norm.
Personally, I think motorcycles should be discriminated against: they can only get in the HOV lane after getting into a box and revving their engine. If the microphones in the box detect the engine is too loud, they can't use the road. Or maybe it should just be based on brand: BMWs and Hondas are welcome, Harleys are not. Quiet motorcycles are fine with me, I just hate the stupid loud ones. If motorcycles weren't so dangerous, I'd ride one myself (likely a Honda), but I really hate those fucking Harleys.
Wow, you sound really stupid.
Let's go back to Bugattis: there are X people who want a $1M Bugatti for $20K, and there are 0 Bugattis available for $20k. 0 By increasing the price/wage for a job you don't get more people able doing that job. The amount of people able to do that job stays constant.
This is just plain stupid. If you increase the price, you get more people interested in making themselves qualified for the job. Offer peanuts for years on end and don't be surprised when no one's interested in going to school for that. On top of that, if you can't find someone qualified right now, you can pay to train someone!! What about that concept? But if you're too cheap for that, oh well, you obviously can't afford to sustain your business model.
Seriously, go take an economics course; this stuff isn't that hard.
You seem to have a fundamental inability to grasp basic economics.
Yes, they need to hire a developer away from some other company. This is good for the developer and the economy, because he was being underpaid in his previous position. Now the old company needs to pay more to fill that position, or they need to just go out of business because they're obviously not economically viable if they can't afford the market rate. Yes, some other company is at the losing end: the one that isn't profitable enough to compete for the limited supply of highly skilled developers. That's how it goes in business: the ones that can't compete go under.
To prevent labourer shortages you need to plan education better, as a country/ministry of education. Does the US even have a 'ministry of education'.
No, you also need to provide jobs that pay enough to attract people to that field. Obviously, Canada is failing at that. The US seems to be doing much better. And yes, we do have a Department of Education, which is the same thing, even though the person running it now is a complete moron (but that's only been going on for a few months, not nearly long enough to see major negative effects from).
That's like saying most people can afford to buy whatever they want by simply spending all the money they have. That's now how it works.
No, you're misstating the problem entirely.
I want a Bugatti supercar, but they won't sell one to me for $20K, and instead they demand $1M for one. Does that mean there's a shortage of Bugattis? No, it means that I simply can't afford one and I need to stop complaining and get something within my budget.
Similarly, it makes no sense to offer more than what the employee is worth to them as a business.
If they're offering and no one's biting, that means that they're offering too low. If that's all they can afford, then they need to do something different, or go out of business, not complain that they can't find anyone. They're lying, and lying is wrong.
Exactly 100% correct. I keep pointing this out every time this topic comes up, and people act like I have three heads or something. They keep whining about how MS is "treating customers poorly", about how bad the update process is, etc., but any time I suggest changing vendors if they're unhappy with how they're being treated, they act like I'm insane, and that somehow MS has a duty to treat customers better and provide a better experience. They don't, and why should they? Customers will keep coming back for more, no matter how badly MS treats them, so MS might as well soak them for as much as they can. I sure don't feel any sympathy for them any more.
and then get super humid with a zillion bugs the rest of the time.
We need to work on genetically engineering dragonflies so there's a lot more of them and they're more resistant to whatever things in the environment are hurting their reproduction. Dragonflies are great for eating biting insects.
This simply is not true. There is no labor shortage, and in fact the very idea of a "labor shortage" is pure lunacy; it cannot exist. The only thing that can exist is a shortage of labor willing to work for the wages offered.
Despite very high salaries and benefits,
Wrong. Canada is infamous for paying peanuts for tech jobs. That's why so many Canadian tech workers move south of the border to work in the US, despite a much worse social safety net and much higher healthcare costs. Those worse conditions are much more than made up for when you can get double or triple the salary in the US than in Canada.
Ive talked with numerous factory managers that are looking to robotize, not to lower cost, but because they just cant find employees, regardless of compensation.
Again, that's bullshit. These employers aren't offering enough money, plain and simple. If they offer $10M per year, I guarantee they'll find someone. They just don't want to pay what it takes to find qualified people.
Maybe the other car-based companies should be excluded from this silly law then too. If transportation for wheelchair-bound people (who don't have their own car for some reason) is a problem, I think it'd be a lot cheaper for the city to just supply their own special wheelchair vans, on call just for these people, than to require ever car-based private business to cater to them.
What about black cars? Are limo companies required to also cater to wheelchair users? I don't think so. I've never seen a limo or a town car that was set up for wheelchairs. So why should Uber be different? Uber is really, fundamentally, an app company that coordinates black-car livery service; the cab companies are just mad because they got the cost of black-car service *below* the cost of cabs. But part of that can be blamed on the government and its onerous regulation, such as requiring wheelchair service, and also limiting the number of cabs artificially. Get rid of that stuff and the costs will come down. And for the wheelchair users, just provide them special government-provided van service either for free or for no more than bus fare. That's supposed to be the whole job of government here, after all: to provide for people who fall through the cracks. You can even pay for this service with a special tax on transportation, so that both Uber/Lyft and the cab companies and the other black-car and limo livery companies ALL have to chip in and pay for it, rather than requiring them to mess around with buying their own vans and dealing with that.
Also the top-scoring group in: suicide rate, work-related deadly accidents, homelessness , incarceration rates.
What? That's complete bullshit. Black males dominate in incarceration rates, and it's well-known. White people lead in absolute incarceration numbers, yes, but that's just because they're a majority of the population, but the per-capita rate of incarceration is easily led by black males.
As for the rest, citation needed (except for suicide rates, I'm pretty sure that one is well-known). You're probably again confusing per-capita rates with absolute numbers. Of course white people lead in many categories, it's just because they're a majority of the population. You're probably still right about work-related fatal accidents and homelessness, but probably not as much as you think you are.
It's no big wonder when a group that dominates the absolute population numbers also dominates many categories. It's concerning when a group's per-capita rate differs greatly from their portion of representation in the overall population, because that usually shows some kind of injustice where that group is either being treated preferentially or being discriminated against.