What we're talking about, is that the jobs us Americans are working, for $75,000 would pay over $100,000. Except rather than pay what the market demands, the companies import workers on H1B visas. They claim, they can't find the talent. Utter BS, often they replaced trained with untrained workers, and have the trained workers train their replacements.
But you see, if you can hire imported workers for $60K-$70K, then you never have to pay the market value. And you can force Americans into lower pay. It's basic economics of supply and demand.
And GUESS WHY that pay average is around $60K-$70K, because that was the $110K of yesteryear. That was the amount that if the salary exceeded, they never get investigated for wage sinking. And guess what, $60K in 1990 when H1B visas went into effect, if adjusted for inflation would now be $110K. So all Ted Cruz is asking for is the originally minimum salary cap being put back in effect. All laws passed should be inflation adjusted, if so, then it would already be $110K
Oh here's the rub... so for the past few years I have averaged around 5-7 gigs a month on my Unlimited plan. Recently, AT&T upped the throttling cap to 22gigs. And suddenly, this past month I received a warning that I was approaching my 22gig cap.
My average for the year prior was 8 gigs. And that is higher than my long standing average with an increase the last few months before AT&T announced the change. My average since the change 14gigs, with last month at 18gigs.
Mind you, there has been no change in my usage. In fact, I'd say recent months have involved significantly less usage. So I find it quite bizarre to have averaged around 5-8 gigs for years. And now that AT&T has announced a new 22gig cap, my usage since September has been 9/15 = 16gb, 10/15=12gb, 11/15=18gb, and here it is with 2 weeks till my next billing date and I am already at 12gb. Which means 12/15 ~= 24gbs.
Hey AT&T, can you explain why suddenly, when use my phone less. My new data usage is reporting 2-4x my prior data usage. It's almost like, my data usage was right at the cap before. And now there is a new cap....and well, I am right at the cap again. But I haven't changed?????
***
Reminiscent of Comcast not being able to stream HD or 3D Netflix. Despite a 50mb connection. Yet, once the deal was done with Netflix. I was able to stream 3D the following day on my 3mb connection.
I CALL BS ON THE TELCOS.....LYING BASTARDS ARE THEY ALL!
I think the number of rolls were totally adequate, but the number of dice involved. I would want a 100 of each dice from each manufacturer. Each pulled from separate stores and production runs before I would argue one brand is better than another.
That they'll do some random tests of all makes and manufacturers, and discover a few other cheaters.
To be honest, VW stock could be a fortune maker if you buy it when it's on a drop due to threats of fines, and then one or two other makers are caught cheating on emissions. VW stock will bounce back up.
Man, do you guys NOT understand anti-trust laws at all.
There is NOTHING that mandates a retailer must sell a competitors product. How in the world would that be an anti-trust law. If so, does Verizon have to sell AT&T phones and contracts? Are Ford dealers required to sell Chevy's?
Goodness gracious the stupidity on Slashdot is enormous today. They're not even trolls, they're more like ignorant orcs.
This video entails a company that bought an Apple TV. Then took it apart, and put it back together. So that they could show how to repair it. No NDA involved at all.
This seems odd. Netflix runs on Amazon. They're Amazon Prime's biggest competition. AppleTV/ChromeCast are streaming devices.
Here is what I am thinking. Perhaps the new ChromeCast and AppleTV don't provide Amazon Prime streaming, or have not worked out an agreement for it. And Amazon is actually refusing to sell any streaming device that won't stream it's own Prime service.
I wager, this does NOT mean you won't be able to buy those items via Amazon's 3rd party sellers and fulfillment. Just that Amazon.com won't sell them directly.
In a capitalist society, anyone could make and sell this drug. This is NOT capitalism, but neo-fascist economics. Fascism is an economic structure in which industry and government are tightly knit. It is a two class system, oligarchy and workers. Neo-fascism is simply a reversal where the corporations have the more dominant influence than the government.
Fascism not equal Nazi death camps. There were many fascist nations that did NOT murder their people. And many democracies that have. FDRs policies were very fascist. Government control of industry, two class system, control of wealth (gold/silver), etc. The fact that FDR had hundreds of thousands of innocent Americans put into concentration camps merely he acts of a tyrant. The fact that the most famous fascist regime, was led by a homicidal tyrant has blurred the understanding and shifted the term.
Google fascism and you get: "an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization."
But this is adamantly not the truth historically. Fascist government were not right-wing. They weren't die-hard capitalist-anarchists. They were almost ALL socialist democratic regimes. Most of the crap of right-wing, totalitarian, dictatorships was all added after World War II. Prior to that, many fascist nations were viewed as progressive. An alternative to communism. One of the fundamentals being a mixed-economic
Hmm...sounds like the U.S. economy, doesn't it? How many Americans realize we live in a fascist nation? "In general the mixed economy is characterised by the private ownership of the means of production, the dominance of markets for economic coordination, with profit-seeking enterprise and the accumulation of capital remaining the fundamental driving force behind economic activity. But unlike a free-market economy, the government would wield indirect macroeconomic influence over the economy through fiscal and monetary policies designed to counteract economic downturns and capitalism's tendency toward financial crises and unemployment, along with playing a role in interventions that promote social welfare.[2] " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The Italian term fascismo derives from fascio meaning a bundle of hay, ultimately from the Latin word fasces.[15] This was the name given to political organizations in Italy known as fasci, groups similar to guilds or syndicates and at first applied mainly to organisations on the Left. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The other big aspect of fascism was nationalism and a protection mindset. This too is extremely common in America btw.In truth, fascism is less left or right, and very much so dogmatic center.
Benito Mussolini in 1919 described fascism as a movement that would strike "against the backwardness of the right and the destructiveness of the left".[43][44]
Fascism in many ways "sought an authoritarian corporatist state"
there are only two classes in society, "the governing" (the organized minority) and "the governed" - hmm also sounds like America, doesn't it?
A really good way to consider fascism, is that Marxism (socialism as purported a century ago) advocated for the elimination of nationalism, elimination of states. Fascism share a very large portion of common views. However, fascist held to the state and nationalism.
This is the two class system, relegated by the oligarchy. Does this sound eerily familiar to any of my fellow U.S. citizens? "in which the Italian employers' association Confindustria and Fascist trade unions agreed to recognize each other as the sole representatives of Italy's employers and employees, excluding non-Fascist trade unions"
The problem is, you go to jail for drug dealing....because YOU are not an authorized prescriber of drugs. Then all research said company did, is voided because the said acquisition of the drug was illegal.
Actually, the gun owners are usually dragging the NRA kicking and screaming. Number one complaint you hear from gun owners, is that the NRA is too compromising.
The idea behind the 2nd amendment was that 'the militia' (which back in the day meant thing like local law enforcement)
a) it did not mean anything of the sort. It meant the "people".
b) regulated meant trained/equipped..
In fact, standing army soldiers were often referred to as "regulars". Essentially, the 2nd Amendment is stating that the militia formed of the people needs to be of similar capability to any standing regular army.
Chemical/Biological weapons are not arms. And they are prohibited to nations as well. Thus, the U.S. army is not supposed to have chemical or biological weapons. This would in fact be a case, where the logic of US vs MILLER actually applies.
If you look into it. You'll realize that ships were in many ways considered to be small villages. This is why ship captains had such rights and authority enact marriage, etc. and had near absolute rule.
They were essentially Lords of a tiny village. Most ordinance/artillery was owned by towns or landed lords.
Slashdot Mirror
ACTUALLY, YOU'RE ALL WRONG. It depends on whether they are considered resident or non-resident aliens.
That's not what we're talking about silly H1-B.
What we're talking about, is that the jobs us Americans are working, for $75,000 would pay over $100,000. Except rather than pay what the market demands, the companies import workers on H1B visas. They claim, they can't find the talent. Utter BS, often they replaced trained with untrained workers, and have the trained workers train their replacements.
But you see, if you can hire imported workers for $60K-$70K, then you never have to pay the market value. And you can force Americans into lower pay. It's basic economics of supply and demand.
And GUESS WHY that pay average is around $60K-$70K, because that was the $110K of yesteryear. That was the amount that if the salary exceeded, they never get investigated for wage sinking. And guess what, $60K in 1990 when H1B visas went into effect, if adjusted for inflation would now be $110K. So all Ted Cruz is asking for is the originally minimum salary cap being put back in effect. All laws passed should be inflation adjusted, if so, then it would already be $110K
Increased data cap prior to throttling?
Oh here's the rub... so for the past few years I have averaged around 5-7 gigs a month on my Unlimited plan. Recently, AT&T upped the throttling cap to 22gigs. And suddenly, this past month I received a warning that I was approaching my 22gig cap.
My average for the year prior was 8 gigs. And that is higher than my long standing average with an increase the last few months before AT&T announced the change. My average since the change 14gigs, with last month at 18gigs.
Mind you, there has been no change in my usage. In fact, I'd say recent months have involved significantly less usage. So I find it quite bizarre to have averaged around 5-8 gigs for years. And now that AT&T has announced a new 22gig cap, my usage since September has been 9/15 = 16gb, 10/15=12gb, 11/15=18gb, and here it is with 2 weeks till my next billing date and I am already at 12gb. Which means 12/15 ~= 24gbs.
Hey AT&T, can you explain why suddenly, when use my phone less. My new data usage is reporting 2-4x my prior data usage. It's almost like, my data usage was right at the cap before. And now there is a new cap....and well, I am right at the cap again. But I haven't changed?????
***
Reminiscent of Comcast not being able to stream HD or 3D Netflix. Despite a 50mb connection. Yet, once the deal was done with Netflix. I was able to stream 3D the following day on my 3mb connection.
I CALL BS ON THE TELCOS.....LYING BASTARDS ARE THEY ALL!
I think the number of rolls were totally adequate, but the number of dice involved. I would want a 100 of each dice from each manufacturer. Each pulled from separate stores and production runs before I would argue one brand is better than another.
I mean, honestly....if we randomly selected 2 Americans to server as President and VP, we couldn't do much worse than present options.
A pound of gold or a pound of feathers?
But I can now say, I was there in Baltimore "when the balloon went up”...
Gee and I thought only WWII survivors could ever quote that.
As clearly, it was not powered nor tethered....
I think should call it an "blump"
That they'll do some random tests of all makes and manufacturers, and discover a few other cheaters.
To be honest, VW stock could be a fortune maker if you buy it when it's on a drop due to threats of fines, and then one or two other makers are caught cheating on emissions. VW stock will bounce back up.
Am confused?
Self-destructive air delivery vehicles. Sure sounds like a Cruise Missile to me...
Man, do you guys NOT understand anti-trust laws at all.
There is NOTHING that mandates a retailer must sell a competitors product. How in the world would that be an anti-trust law. If so, does Verizon have to sell AT&T phones and contracts? Are Ford dealers required to sell Chevy's?
Goodness gracious the stupidity on Slashdot is enormous today. They're not even trolls, they're more like ignorant orcs.
Amazon Firestick is a lot nicer than my Chromecast in many ways. Sadly, my kids lost my remote.
No, nothing requires Amazon to sell a competitors device. That would be like requiring Verizon to sell AT&T phones and contracts.
No NDA...
This video entails a company that bought an Apple TV. Then took it apart, and put it back together. So that they could show how to repair it. No NDA involved at all.
This seems odd. Netflix runs on Amazon. They're Amazon Prime's biggest competition. AppleTV/ChromeCast are streaming devices.
Here is what I am thinking. Perhaps the new ChromeCast and AppleTV don't provide Amazon Prime streaming, or have not worked out an agreement for it. And Amazon is actually refusing to sell any streaming device that won't stream it's own Prime service.
I wager, this does NOT mean you won't be able to buy those items via Amazon's 3rd party sellers and fulfillment. Just that Amazon.com won't sell them directly.
THIS IS BEING ENABLED BY THE FDA
In a capitalist society, anyone could make and sell this drug. This is NOT capitalism, but neo-fascist economics. Fascism is an economic structure in which industry and government are tightly knit. It is a two class system, oligarchy and workers. Neo-fascism is simply a reversal where the corporations have the more dominant influence than the government.
Fascism not equal Nazi death camps. There were many fascist nations that did NOT murder their people. And many democracies that have. FDRs policies were very fascist. Government control of industry, two class system, control of wealth (gold/silver), etc. The fact that FDR had hundreds of thousands of innocent Americans put into concentration camps merely he acts of a tyrant. The fact that the most famous fascist regime, was led by a homicidal tyrant has blurred the understanding and shifted the term.
Google fascism and you get: "an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization."
But this is adamantly not the truth historically. Fascist government were not right-wing. They weren't die-hard capitalist-anarchists. They were almost ALL socialist democratic regimes. Most of the crap of right-wing, totalitarian, dictatorships was all added after World War II. Prior to that, many fascist nations were viewed as progressive. An alternative to communism. One of the fundamentals being a mixed-economic
Hmm...sounds like the U.S. economy, doesn't it? How many Americans realize we live in a fascist nation?
"In general the mixed economy is characterised by the private ownership of the means of production, the dominance of markets for economic coordination, with profit-seeking enterprise and the accumulation of capital remaining the fundamental driving force behind economic activity. But unlike a free-market economy, the government would wield indirect macroeconomic influence over the economy through fiscal and monetary policies designed to counteract economic downturns and capitalism's tendency toward financial crises and unemployment, along with playing a role in interventions that promote social welfare.[2] "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The Italian term fascismo derives from fascio meaning a bundle of hay, ultimately from the Latin word fasces.[15] This was the name given to political organizations in Italy known as fasci, groups similar to guilds or syndicates and at first applied mainly to organisations on the Left.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The other big aspect of fascism was nationalism and a protection mindset. This too is extremely common in America btw.In truth, fascism is less left or right, and very much so dogmatic center.
Benito Mussolini in 1919 described fascism as a movement that would strike "against the backwardness of the right and the destructiveness of the left".[43][44]
Fascism in many ways "sought an authoritarian corporatist state"
there are only two classes in society, "the governing" (the organized minority) and "the governed" - hmm also sounds like America, doesn't it?
A really good way to consider fascism, is that Marxism (socialism as purported a century ago) advocated for the elimination of nationalism, elimination of states. Fascism share a very large portion of common views. However, fascist held to the state and nationalism.
This is the two class system, relegated by the oligarchy. Does this sound eerily familiar to any of my fellow U.S. citizens?
"in which the Italian employers' association Confindustria and Fascist trade unions agreed to recognize each other as the sole representatives of Italy's employers and employees, excluding non-Fascist trade unions"
The problem is, you go to jail for drug dealing....because YOU are not an authorized prescriber of drugs. Then all research said company did, is voided because the said acquisition of the drug was illegal.
This is how it works...
Oh....suddenly, this idea isn't acceptable to women now?
I mean, denigrated men to a single part of their body.
1. It had a expandable memory slot.
2. Had not tried to lock it into an Amazon ecosystem.
Torpedoes, bombs and tanks are ordinance and artillery. Not included.
Actually, the gun owners are usually dragging the NRA kicking and screaming. Number one complaint you hear from gun owners, is that the NRA is too compromising.
The idea behind the 2nd amendment was that 'the militia' (which back in the day meant thing like local law enforcement)
a) it did not mean anything of the sort. It meant the "people".
b) regulated meant trained/equipped..
In fact, standing army soldiers were often referred to as "regulars". Essentially, the 2nd Amendment is stating that the militia formed of the people needs to be of similar capability to any standing regular army.
Chemical/Biological weapons are not arms. And they are prohibited to nations as well. Thus, the U.S. army is not supposed to have chemical or biological weapons. This would in fact be a case, where the logic of US vs MILLER actually applies.
"If the 2nd Amendment is a civil right, what purpose do arms serve the citizen"
Remaining citizens rather than slaves....
Whatever small arms the U.S. military has access to, the U.S. citizen is supposed to have access to.
If you look into it. You'll realize that ships were in many ways considered to be small villages. This is why ship captains had such rights and authority enact marriage, etc. and had near absolute rule.
They were essentially Lords of a tiny village. Most ordinance/artillery was owned by towns or landed lords.