I agree. Let's spend other people's money to make all the problems disappear. That seems like the obvious solution.
aside from maybe looking at why the NHS can't live in the existing budget, and tinkering with existing perverse incentives. You know, like the lack of cost for someone to go in for hangnail, or a mild headache. Thinks a nominal £10 co-pay might prevent.
I know all the pundits believe that the 5C was supposed to open up China, but that doesn't mean it is what Apple intended. As pointed out elsewhere in this thread, this is just the same strategy of taking last year's hot phone and bumping it down to the peons -- but ensuring they maintain their margin. about 20% of the cost to build the 5 was in the machining and assembly, not to mention the press they got on how easily scratched anodized aluminum was. So instead of a Iphone 5 with an aluminum back that's $100 less than last year's price, you have the 5c which probably adds $20-30 back into the margin for Apple and avoids some of those pesky customer complaints.
Apple (even if currently reviled) is not stupid. If they want to compete on the low end in China, it won't be with the 5c at twice the price of a HTC android. Maybe it'll be a 4c at a slight premium to HTC with a similarly high margin.
You could argue the exact opposite. Life extension would just as likely mean folks making the decisions impacting climate and environment now have to live with the consequences.
And if you hadn't noticed, birth rates are dropping precipitously in those countries where poverty rates fall -- China and India are showing this today, just as many of the asian tiger countries did 20 years ago. So much so that we're going to be having real problems in 20-30 years in the developed world, because (aside from the US) we don't have replacement workers coming into the market to replace the ones retiring and dying. We will level off around 10B.
Consultant. Best skill is biting my tongue.
Seriously though, most of these 4000 are in the valley, which is seeing a tech boom. They have a name brand on their resume. They're in a hot space. Any talent at all is not going to be going hungry.
Having come in for some consulting with them, like most firms they could cut > 10% and not feel it, because any large firm ends up with a high amount of cruft.
The trick is figuring out who the cruft is (hint, if you have more than 1 PM per project, look there) and who is actually effective.
Um... SF has a city-specific payroll tax based on the number of people your company has working in the city limits. Why would any potentially fast-growing company purposefully inflict additional taxes on themselves, in addition to some of the highest cost commercial rents in the area, when they can can just move 10 miles out and get the same staff?
You mean all that money they made overseas, and are parking overseas, to be used overseas? That money?
Kind of like how Uncle Sam wants a slice of the income I make while working as an expatriate overseas? Despite the fact that no other country in the world wants to tax income not made on their soil?
| If this was done close to Earth, it just might shatter and not be deflected – sort of being hit with a shotgun blast instead of a bullet.
But wouldn't the fragments have a higher likelihood of burning up in re-entry? Yes that will add tons of vaporized debris to the atmosphere and a lot of friction heat, but the Earth's a pretty big place - wouldn't that just be noise by comparison with a large multiton single block of rock/iron/ice hitting us and not being burnt up?
vs losing fearful customers who percieve a competitor is more secure and hence more safe? Really all the Federal government had to do was call for minimum guidelines and allow the airports and carriers to implement, as they had done successfully for 40+ years prior to 9/11. Instead we get a new goat rodeo that makes plenty of congressional staff rich (thank you insider information re: scanners etc) while stripping the rest of the populace of their fourth amendment rights.
"the last thing I'm going to do is tell him that I'll just have to stop doing the highest-priority work that I have. I'd be fired that day."
And there you have the difference between public and private sectors in a nutshell. One's "entitled" to your business, regardless of quality, and fuck you if you don't like it. The other will do what it can to make sure it retains you.
Re:Collateralized vs Non-Collateralized Loans
on
Let Them Eat Teslas
·
· Score: 1
You're kidding, right? How much do you think school superintendents make vs school teachers in primary and secondary education?
Re:Collateralized vs Non-Collateralized Loans
on
Let Them Eat Teslas
·
· Score: 1
"I'm happy to pay taxes to educate children and young adults in basic skills such as writing and mathematics."
I'm right there with you, but I'd really like to see some transparency on how effective our tax spending here is. We spend $11k/student in the US for elementary and secondary education -- more than any other country (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/figures/figure-ifn-1.asp). Yet we're consistently ranked among the midrange or lower for scientific and mathematic literacy (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/figures/figure-msl-1.asp).
That tells me that we're both not getting value for the money being spent, and that the priorities for education (or maybe the cultural priorities of the students) are not aligned with the US's needs.
Seems we should take advantage of the situation, using funds from low-to-zero interest treasury bills sold to the Chinese to buy these below-cost panels from the Chinese. That way we get the Chinese government to doubly fund our efforts to get away from dirty energy imports.
MP3 players were already poised to be displaced by smartphones. Apple made the wise decision to be the one to do it, rather than have someone else eat their lunch.
That your answer to the RIAA and ASCAP's actions too? I mean, yeah I can see why it's "unreasonable" to allow other competitive business models have a chance to succeed. Hooray for crony capitalism and the autocracy of the ancien regime.
Jackass.
Ditto with Microsoft. and I know folks who did the same thing with utilities for some of IBM's app servers. It's the risk you take in trying to capitalize on someone else's market share (Facebook population, Apple captive app audience, Microsoft flaws..er..gaps).
Slashdot Mirror
Vs digging deeper and honestly assessing the situation. I'm sure you're right.
I agree. Let's spend other people's money to make all the problems disappear. That seems like the obvious solution.
aside from maybe looking at why the NHS can't live in the existing budget, and tinkering with existing perverse incentives. You know, like the lack of cost for someone to go in for hangnail, or a mild headache. Thinks a nominal £10 co-pay might prevent.
Or raise retirement age requirements to reflect the reality of longer, more functional life spans.
I know all the pundits believe that the 5C was supposed to open up China, but that doesn't mean it is what Apple intended. As pointed out elsewhere in this thread, this is just the same strategy of taking last year's hot phone and bumping it down to the peons -- but ensuring they maintain their margin. about 20% of the cost to build the 5 was in the machining and assembly, not to mention the press they got on how easily scratched anodized aluminum was. So instead of a Iphone 5 with an aluminum back that's $100 less than last year's price, you have the 5c which probably adds $20-30 back into the margin for Apple and avoids some of those pesky customer complaints.
Apple (even if currently reviled) is not stupid. If they want to compete on the low end in China, it won't be with the 5c at twice the price of a HTC android. Maybe it'll be a 4c at a slight premium to HTC with a similarly high margin.
No, he is pointing out you have an assertion, not an argument. They're different, and neither are compelling absent supporting facts.
You could argue the exact opposite. Life extension would just as likely mean folks making the decisions impacting climate and environment now have to live with the consequences.
And if you hadn't noticed, birth rates are dropping precipitously in those countries where poverty rates fall -- China and India are showing this today, just as many of the asian tiger countries did 20 years ago. So much so that we're going to be having real problems in 20-30 years in the developed world, because (aside from the US) we don't have replacement workers coming into the market to replace the ones retiring and dying. We will level off around 10B.
AC is American, and assumes all others are.
Consultant. Best skill is biting my tongue. Seriously though, most of these 4000 are in the valley, which is seeing a tech boom. They have a name brand on their resume. They're in a hot space. Any talent at all is not going to be going hungry.
If the guys I was working with are any indication, you could fire 90% of them and still not get all the deadwood.
Having come in for some consulting with them, like most firms they could cut > 10% and not feel it, because any large firm ends up with a high amount of cruft. The trick is figuring out who the cruft is (hint, if you have more than 1 PM per project, look there) and who is actually effective.
Um... SF has a city-specific payroll tax based on the number of people your company has working in the city limits. Why would any potentially fast-growing company purposefully inflict additional taxes on themselves, in addition to some of the highest cost commercial rents in the area, when they can can just move 10 miles out and get the same staff?
Apparently some are more equal than others.
You mean all that money they made overseas, and are parking overseas, to be used overseas? That money? Kind of like how Uncle Sam wants a slice of the income I make while working as an expatriate overseas? Despite the fact that no other country in the world wants to tax income not made on their soil?
Keep in mind, our elected legislators specifically exempted themselves from the program. Nothing to see here, citizen, move along.
Irrelevant. Doesn't put apple in a bad light, therefore no play with the /r/slashdot crowd on this story.
Damn you Jones! How the hell am I supposed to keep up with that!
| If this was done close to Earth, it just might shatter and not be deflected – sort of being hit with a shotgun blast instead of a bullet. But wouldn't the fragments have a higher likelihood of burning up in re-entry? Yes that will add tons of vaporized debris to the atmosphere and a lot of friction heat, but the Earth's a pretty big place - wouldn't that just be noise by comparison with a large multiton single block of rock/iron/ice hitting us and not being burnt up?
vs losing fearful customers who percieve a competitor is more secure and hence more safe? Really all the Federal government had to do was call for minimum guidelines and allow the airports and carriers to implement, as they had done successfully for 40+ years prior to 9/11. Instead we get a new goat rodeo that makes plenty of congressional staff rich (thank you insider information re: scanners etc) while stripping the rest of the populace of their fourth amendment rights.
And there you have the difference between public and private sectors in a nutshell. One's "entitled" to your business, regardless of quality, and fuck you if you don't like it. The other will do what it can to make sure it retains you.
You're kidding, right? How much do you think school superintendents make vs school teachers in primary and secondary education?
"I'm happy to pay taxes to educate children and young adults in basic skills such as writing and mathematics." I'm right there with you, but I'd really like to see some transparency on how effective our tax spending here is. We spend $11k/student in the US for elementary and secondary education -- more than any other country (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/figures/figure-ifn-1.asp). Yet we're consistently ranked among the midrange or lower for scientific and mathematic literacy (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/figures/figure-msl-1.asp). That tells me that we're both not getting value for the money being spent, and that the priorities for education (or maybe the cultural priorities of the students) are not aligned with the US's needs.
Seems we should take advantage of the situation, using funds from low-to-zero interest treasury bills sold to the Chinese to buy these below-cost panels from the Chinese. That way we get the Chinese government to doubly fund our efforts to get away from dirty energy imports.
MP3 players were already poised to be displaced by smartphones. Apple made the wise decision to be the one to do it, rather than have someone else eat their lunch.
That your answer to the RIAA and ASCAP's actions too? I mean, yeah I can see why it's "unreasonable" to allow other competitive business models have a chance to succeed. Hooray for crony capitalism and the autocracy of the ancien regime. Jackass.
Ditto with Microsoft. and I know folks who did the same thing with utilities for some of IBM's app servers. It's the risk you take in trying to capitalize on someone else's market share (Facebook population, Apple captive app audience, Microsoft flaws..er..gaps).