Bizarrely wrong. No, it's the Army's business who they take, unless they're somehow violating civil rights, in which case I'm sure there would be legal recourse. This has absolutely nothing to do with any election.
Who serves in the military is very much a political decision; there is no constitutional right to serve in the military. Furthermore, the military isn't a private employer, so even laws for private employers don't apply (unwise as many such laws are).
The discrimination is very real, and yes, it's quite well understood that your first defense is to deny that the problem exists in the first place, and attack the persons complaining.
To the contrary: private job discrimination is common. I don't have a problem with a private employer not hiring me because I'm queer: I don't want to work for someone who disapproves of my lifestyle.
The morality of this situation may escape you; it does not escape others.
The morality of this situation clearly escapes you if you think it is acceptable to threaten people with violence for refusing to hire people they don't like. And it isn't just immoral, it also simply doesn't work.
The so-called "job creators" are sitting on all the money, which prevents anyone from using that money to pay employees.
Almost all "money" that people "sit on" is in the form of investments. Investments are exactly the mechanism by which jobs get created and employees get paid.
If they won't spend it of their own accord, it's going to have to be taken away from them, or the system will crash and it will serve no one.
A century of experience with communism, fascism, and socialism (what you advocate) shows that such an approach causes economic collapse, totalitarian rule, and massive violence. Communists and socialist states killed about 100 million people in the last century, and you can add the victims of fascism on top of that.
This is really not that complicated.
You're right: it isn't complicated: you're profoundly ignorant and evil.
Except that kids whose parents have higher incomes get a disproportionate percentage of the paid internships. Has nothing to do with ability
Higher income in parents correlates with higher IQ in parents, better early childhood, and better education. All of those statistically predict higher ability for the children. So, children of high income parents get a disproportionate percentage of paid internships because such children actually have higher ability.
The deeper issue is that companies should not be permitted to "hire" unpaid interns [...] If a business can't function without paying people for their time, then it doesn't deserve a business license.
The business can function just fine without unpaid interns. Unpaid internships are simply a way to expand the recruiting pool to candidates that would otherwise be too risky. That is, if you force businesses to pay interns, say, $15/h, they only hire people who they know are worth $15/h.
If we institute a functional MGI then businesses should be free to collect unpaid interns like pokemon cards, but until then, that should be illegal.
In different words, MGI is a crony capitalist system by which tax payers pay for workers so that companies can get them for free. Thanks for at least admitting that much.
The problem with that, and it's pointed out in the article, is that people who take unpaid internships end up not just with lower future earnings, but also are more likely to end up in a field other than their chosen one.
This may come as a shock to you, but people are not guaranteed to be able to work in their chosen field, let alone command a competitive salary.
The fact that people face future lower earnings, are forced to take unpaid internships, or are forced to leave a field has one simple, common cause: they aren't as good at their chosen field as the people they are competing against. It's something many adults come to grips with sooner or later. Welcome to the real world.
Students are being ripped off twice - once by the university, which charges for the time they're working for free, and the second time by the business they're working for free at.
Well, and those students made two mistakes: they chose to work for free for the university, and then they chose to work for free in an internship.
So you're not working for free - you're paying to work. At least slaves got fed on their master's dime.
Your comparison is not just wrong, it's offensive. Slaves were compelled by the force of law to work for their master; being a student or taking an unpaid internship is a choice a legally competent adult makes for their own life. If that choice doesn't work out, the legally competent adult has only themselves to blame.
Almost every graduate taking an unpaid internship can expect to be worse off three years later than if they had gone straight into work.
Well, yes, the population of people who are forced to take unpaid internships is less skilled and has fewer choices than those who have the option of taking a paid job right away.
Slashdot reader BarbaraHudson warns unpaid internships are also "a possible indicator of a large oversupply of workers to jobs available and downward pressure on pay."
No, it's just an indicator of a large oversupply of people with useless degrees, the result of government subsidies of such useless degrees.
Ah but then you'd have to cut regulations which ultimately made our healthcare this expensive in the first place.;)
You'd also have to reduce the massive profits for pharmaceutical companies, lawyers, and doctors, all big Democratic donors. That's why it's not going to happen.
I'm simply pointing out that Democrats are lying when they are saying that they want a European-style welfare state.
Most C libraries in Python exist in order to interface with existing APIs, also written in C. Adding Rust to the mix merely complicates things without any significant improvement in runtime safety.
People TALK about cutting spending, but it never seems to happen.
One might add here that if Medicare/Medicaid cut per patient spending to what European systems spend, we would have single-payer healthcare in the US with no tax increases and without touching the private health insurance system at all.
Oh, it's clear why people here wouldn't like this: this is just the income bracket for progressive Silicon valley techies and nerds. But to put this into perspective: this is small potatoes to what Democrats would have given us. Democrats want a European-style welfare state, and that requires large tax increases on the middle class; it's the only way it can be financed. In European welfare states, the average tax bill for people making more than $50000 is 35% (compared to our 25%), and sales taxes are 2-3x higher.
I base this entirely on what I'm seeing people do... these sites censor people, they filter information, they shadow ban... and everyone stays there locked into their echo chambers.
All true, but even censored and manipulated, Facebook and Twitter are a lot more diverse than a small number of billionaire publishers and their paid lackeys. Furthermore, people can write longer, uncensored blog posts and simply point to them from Facebook and Twitter.
Medium term, there are a lot of efforts building a truly decentralized, censorship-resistant Internet. I think they have a good chance of succeeding.
They're mouth pieces for billionaires. Which is nothing new really, these things were always owned or controlled by some old family or other of the city or town.
They used to be a necessary evil: someone needed to put the infrastructure in place to help disseminate information. These days, however, the Internet means that we can drop the "necessary" part: we don't need publishers anymore to publish.
Collusion between the media, politicians, and certain corporations resulted in a lot of power and wealth for a select group of people. These people are now screaming bloody murder and are trying to impose all sorts of controls on speech and content in order to be able to hold on to their old privileges and power.
Another US billionaire using their money to manipulate public opinion and push their political views. This one didn't even earn their billions, they married into them.
Also, you apparently didn't know the right to a jury trial extends only to the more serious criminal charges.
Yes, like the "felony rioting" and "75 year sentences" we are talking about here.
I don't believe you.
Well, on top of your ignorant, knee-jerk anti-Americanism you obviously also have a problem with reality.
Why don't you come clean about where you are actually from? Of course, you might simply be an American leftists: they are some of the most ignorant people about the US and how much nicer a place is that pretty much anywhere else on the planet.
For some major publishers, such as Elsevier, more than 97% of their catalog of journal articles is being stored on Sci-Hub's servers -- meaning they can be accessed there for free.
john McCain is a republican. That is the same party that is messing with health care.
Well, a couple of years ago, it was the other party messing with healthcare and doing a piss poor job at it.
He just had a dramatic surgery followed by being informed that he will have to battle a very deadly cancer. McCain has no problems getting top quality care.
And he's going to be just as dead in two years.
In other words there are times when top notch medical care by the best doctors is the only hope. The problem is getting that top notch care to every single person.
So you want the top 10% of the doctors ("best doctors") to handle everybody's medical needs while the remaining 90% of the doctors do... what? Do you even think about what you're saying or do the platitudes just tumble out of your mouth?
Hard working people who can barely stay alive surrounded by other others who are excessively wealthy is not an acceptable situation.
And one that's easily fixed by people voluntarily moving into areas where their income matches their needs.
We are seeing how capitalism can become a sick disaster.
I prefer living as a poor person in a capitalist country than as anybody anywhere else.
Welp,I'm convinced; slavery is a much better system.
If you're a Democrat or progressive, that's no surprise: for as long as that party has existed, and to this day, it thrives on exploiting and oppressing African Americans.
I bet you even believe every defendant has competent legal council, and no prosecutor ever managed to turn a few ambiguous, possibly misleading clues into an overwhelming certainty of guilt.
A jury of 12 citizens is still a better and more impartial means than the alternatives.
I wonder how some Europeans can be so stupid and yet manage not to drown from looking up when it rains.
Slashdot Mirror
Who serves in the military is very much a political decision; there is no constitutional right to serve in the military. Furthermore, the military isn't a private employer, so even laws for private employers don't apply (unwise as many such laws are).
To the contrary: private job discrimination is common. I don't have a problem with a private employer not hiring me because I'm queer: I don't want to work for someone who disapproves of my lifestyle.
The morality of this situation clearly escapes you if you think it is acceptable to threaten people with violence for refusing to hire people they don't like. And it isn't just immoral, it also simply doesn't work.
Almost all "money" that people "sit on" is in the form of investments. Investments are exactly the mechanism by which jobs get created and employees get paid.
A century of experience with communism, fascism, and socialism (what you advocate) shows that such an approach causes economic collapse, totalitarian rule, and massive violence. Communists and socialist states killed about 100 million people in the last century, and you can add the victims of fascism on top of that.
You're right: it isn't complicated: you're profoundly ignorant and evil.
That's what "what they are worth" means: expected utility.
Higher income in parents correlates with higher IQ in parents, better early childhood, and better education. All of those statistically predict higher ability for the children. So, children of high income parents get a disproportionate percentage of paid internships because such children actually have higher ability.
The business can function just fine without unpaid interns. Unpaid internships are simply a way to expand the recruiting pool to candidates that would otherwise be too risky. That is, if you force businesses to pay interns, say, $15/h, they only hire people who they know are worth $15/h.
In different words, MGI is a crony capitalist system by which tax payers pay for workers so that companies can get them for free. Thanks for at least admitting that much.
This may come as a shock to you, but people are not guaranteed to be able to work in their chosen field, let alone command a competitive salary.
The fact that people face future lower earnings, are forced to take unpaid internships, or are forced to leave a field has one simple, common cause: they aren't as good at their chosen field as the people they are competing against. It's something many adults come to grips with sooner or later. Welcome to the real world.
Well, and those students made two mistakes: they chose to work for free for the university, and then they chose to work for free in an internship.
Your comparison is not just wrong, it's offensive. Slaves were compelled by the force of law to work for their master; being a student or taking an unpaid internship is a choice a legally competent adult makes for their own life. If that choice doesn't work out, the legally competent adult has only themselves to blame.
If you need fast Internet access, don't move to Saguache.
Well, yes, the population of people who are forced to take unpaid internships is less skilled and has fewer choices than those who have the option of taking a paid job right away.
No, it's just an indicator of a large oversupply of people with useless degrees, the result of government subsidies of such useless degrees.
You'd also have to reduce the massive profits for pharmaceutical companies, lawyers, and doctors, all big Democratic donors. That's why it's not going to happen.
I'm simply pointing out that Democrats are lying when they are saying that they want a European-style welfare state.
Most C libraries in Python exist in order to interface with existing APIs, also written in C. Adding Rust to the mix merely complicates things without any significant improvement in runtime safety.
One might add here that if Medicare/Medicaid cut per patient spending to what European systems spend, we would have single-payer healthcare in the US with no tax increases and without touching the private health insurance system at all.
Oh, it's clear why people here wouldn't like this: this is just the income bracket for progressive Silicon valley techies and nerds. But to put this into perspective: this is small potatoes to what Democrats would have given us. Democrats want a European-style welfare state, and that requires large tax increases on the middle class; it's the only way it can be financed. In European welfare states, the average tax bill for people making more than $50000 is 35% (compared to our 25%), and sales taxes are 2-3x higher.
All true, but even censored and manipulated, Facebook and Twitter are a lot more diverse than a small number of billionaire publishers and their paid lackeys. Furthermore, people can write longer, uncensored blog posts and simply point to them from Facebook and Twitter.
Medium term, there are a lot of efforts building a truly decentralized, censorship-resistant Internet. I think they have a good chance of succeeding.
They used to be a necessary evil: someone needed to put the infrastructure in place to help disseminate information. These days, however, the Internet means that we can drop the "necessary" part: we don't need publishers anymore to publish.
Collusion between the media, politicians, and certain corporations resulted in a lot of power and wealth for a select group of people. These people are now screaming bloody murder and are trying to impose all sorts of controls on speech and content in order to be able to hold on to their old privileges and power.
Fortunately, it's not going to work.
Another US billionaire using their money to manipulate public opinion and push their political views. This one didn't even earn their billions, they married into them.
That also works for "nicer"...
Yes, like the "felony rioting" and "75 year sentences" we are talking about here.
Well, on top of your ignorant, knee-jerk anti-Americanism you obviously also have a problem with reality.
Why don't you come clean about where you are actually from? Of course, you might simply be an American leftists: they are some of the most ignorant people about the US and how much nicer a place is that pretty much anywhere else on the planet.
Couldn't have happened to a nicer publisher.
We don't reproach people for having 3 kids, we reproach people for having 3 kids and then complaining that they don't have enough money to raise them.
Well, a couple of years ago, it was the other party messing with healthcare and doing a piss poor job at it.
And he's going to be just as dead in two years.
So you want the top 10% of the doctors ("best doctors") to handle everybody's medical needs while the remaining 90% of the doctors do... what? Do you even think about what you're saying or do the platitudes just tumble out of your mouth?
And one that's easily fixed by people voluntarily moving into areas where their income matches their needs.
I prefer living as a poor person in a capitalist country than as anybody anywhere else.
I'm not speaking hypothetically here
Well, that's easy to fix: Facebook could move their facilities to Fresno, Stockton, or Detroit for that matter.
So, instead of saving $10000/year, the government forces you to pay $20000/year into a government fund to give you the same rate of return. Brilliant!
If you're a Democrat or progressive, that's no surprise: for as long as that party has existed, and to this day, it thrives on exploiting and oppressing African Americans.
No, I merely believe that Americans have a right to a jury trial.
But I am, which is why I recognize your brand of bigotry, whether it is first and or (as you claim) second hand.
A jury of 12 citizens is still a better and more impartial means than the alternatives.
FTFY.