H-1B visa admissions should be tied to what we are lacking in talent in the US. At my company we are required to post applications along with salary info publicly for any position we are looking at H-1B candidates. We have developer positions, read non-management, that pay 150k to 180k. I interpret this as we are in short supply of this type of talent.
For those that have not used Newsguard its a useful tool. Newsguard has done significant research and offers a comprehensive profile and a reason to believe/not believe the news source. If they come up with strikes against a news outlet they give that outlet the opportunity to refute their findings before the integrate the information into the their app.
Companies invest when they are optimistic about the future health and potential revenue growth of their organization. Take Amazon, Netflix for example. The majority of Comcast's corporate portfolio are in shrinking industries.
Government funded research should be used ONLY to fill the void left behind after the private sector chooses not to invest in a specific line of research. For example, drug research where the group of individuals afflicted by a disease might not be enough to justify privately funded research that is able to recoup the R&D cost.Fields of study that are in their infancy, or subject matters that do not have a clear line of sight to being profitable at some point down the line.
The different political parties can be put on a simple line, on one end you have anarchy(right), on the other you have total government control (left). A democratic socialist is just further to the left on that spectrum than a democrat. Fortune ran a article that estimated Bernie's policy proposals would cost 19 trillion dollars over 10 years (google "estimating Bernie sanders policy cost") in addition to our current budget which is running at a deficit already. What he is proposing sounds great to a lot of people but it seems disingenuous to campaign giving away a bunch of free stuff to people that will not get the bill for it. On another point he proposes that the top tax rate should be 90%, even that this rate he would not bring in enough extra revenue to pay for his 19T in extra spending. Taxing the rich sounds great if you are not rich but its not the panacea to cure all our budgetary ills.
And he lost a debate to a inmate, then he would need to figure out how to self fund his education going forward. Talk about embarrassing. Whats next inmates earning extra cash writing college papers?
Demanding more money = making automation more cost effective = fewer jobs for those demanding more money
be careful what you wish for if your intention is higher wages for lower skilled workers
Bubbles by definition expand very quickly then pop. Today’s NASDAQ has been a steady move higher over the last few years built on solid company earnings. Just look at the heavyweights in the index, Google, Apple, Microsoft, Cisco, Amazon, Sun Micro to name a few. Most of the names have a historical decade plus track record to look back upon and judge them by.
There will always be high-flyers but these hardly are representative of the index. In 2000 everyone knew that the internet and tech was the next new thing and this understanding caused people to believe that any company in this new sector was bound to succeed. We are, and by we, I mean tech investors are far more discerning now days then before primarily because we know what it was like to get burned in the past.
We might make the same mistake we did in 2000 in the future but today aint it. Anyone claiming it is does not understand fundamentals or is just trying to grab headlines like CNN.
The core of the argument here is understanding who Tim Cook is and his background. At the heart he is a operations guy. He has done good things for the stock since Jobs passed but he has not introduced any earth shattering products during his tenure. The success of Apple Pay might fall into this category at some point but that is yet to be seen. Apple needs a visionary in its executive ranks on par with Jobs and Musk is someone that fits that bill, then after a few years you make Musk CEO. The question here is, does Apple want to have the impact it has had over the last 30 year in the next 30 years. If so it needs to get someone on board with the vision to see what that path might look like.
Apple has roughly 175 billion in cash and Tesla's current market cap is around 35B. If Apple wants to get into the car business might as well jump in feet first. Not to mention you get one of the greatest CEO visionaries Elon Musk, since Steve Jobs. The Wall Street Journal is reporting today that Apple is building its one electric vehicle that resembles a minivan.
Slashdot Mirror
H-1B visa admissions should be tied to what we are lacking in talent in the US. At my company we are required to post applications along with salary info publicly for any position we are looking at H-1B candidates. We have developer positions, read non-management, that pay 150k to 180k. I interpret this as we are in short supply of this type of talent.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wants to hold Twitch town-halls. So I say go for it
For those that have not used Newsguard its a useful tool. Newsguard has done significant research and offers a comprehensive profile and a reason to believe/not believe the news source. If they come up with strikes against a news outlet they give that outlet the opportunity to refute their findings before the integrate the information into the their app.
Companies invest when they are optimistic about the future health and potential revenue growth of their organization. Take Amazon, Netflix for example. The majority of Comcast's corporate portfolio are in shrinking industries.
I would drop as well. I would rather they increase their fees by another few bucks, or better yet just offer a close to free option with commercials
Government funded research should be used ONLY to fill the void left behind after the private sector chooses not to invest in a specific line of research. For example, drug research where the group of individuals afflicted by a disease might not be enough to justify privately funded research that is able to recoup the R&D cost.Fields of study that are in their infancy, or subject matters that do not have a clear line of sight to being profitable at some point down the line.
The different political parties can be put on a simple line, on one end you have anarchy(right), on the other you have total government control (left). A democratic socialist is just further to the left on that spectrum than a democrat. Fortune ran a article that estimated Bernie's policy proposals would cost 19 trillion dollars over 10 years (google "estimating Bernie sanders policy cost") in addition to our current budget which is running at a deficit already. What he is proposing sounds great to a lot of people but it seems disingenuous to campaign giving away a bunch of free stuff to people that will not get the bill for it. On another point he proposes that the top tax rate should be 90%, even that this rate he would not bring in enough extra revenue to pay for his 19T in extra spending. Taxing the rich sounds great if you are not rich but its not the panacea to cure all our budgetary ills.
And he lost a debate to a inmate, then he would need to figure out how to self fund his education going forward. Talk about embarrassing. Whats next inmates earning extra cash writing college papers?
Another animated GIF i can steal and put up on my animated GIF geocities website! Aha, i miss the 90's
Demanding more money = making automation more cost effective = fewer jobs for those demanding more money be careful what you wish for if your intention is higher wages for lower skilled workers
Bubbles by definition expand very quickly then pop. Today’s NASDAQ has been a steady move higher over the last few years built on solid company earnings. Just look at the heavyweights in the index, Google, Apple, Microsoft, Cisco, Amazon, Sun Micro to name a few. Most of the names have a historical decade plus track record to look back upon and judge them by. There will always be high-flyers but these hardly are representative of the index. In 2000 everyone knew that the internet and tech was the next new thing and this understanding caused people to believe that any company in this new sector was bound to succeed. We are, and by we, I mean tech investors are far more discerning now days then before primarily because we know what it was like to get burned in the past. We might make the same mistake we did in 2000 in the future but today aint it. Anyone claiming it is does not understand fundamentals or is just trying to grab headlines like CNN.
The core of the argument here is understanding who Tim Cook is and his background. At the heart he is a operations guy. He has done good things for the stock since Jobs passed but he has not introduced any earth shattering products during his tenure. The success of Apple Pay might fall into this category at some point but that is yet to be seen. Apple needs a visionary in its executive ranks on par with Jobs and Musk is someone that fits that bill, then after a few years you make Musk CEO. The question here is, does Apple want to have the impact it has had over the last 30 year in the next 30 years. If so it needs to get someone on board with the vision to see what that path might look like.
Apple has roughly 175 billion in cash and Tesla's current market cap is around 35B. If Apple wants to get into the car business might as well jump in feet first. Not to mention you get one of the greatest CEO visionaries Elon Musk, since Steve Jobs. The Wall Street Journal is reporting today that Apple is building its one electric vehicle that resembles a minivan.