So instead, when those events that raise demand happen, you just can't find a cab instead
Really? That needs a massive [citation needed].
Same deal with tickets for events and expos. Instead of just raising prices, they make everyone spam their browsers for hours to try to get tickest (and if that fails, then scalpers do the "surge pricing" instead. Awesome!).
Go full Singapore and make it a royal PITA to transfer tickets in resale scenarios. That might not translate well to the "we're a taxi service when we want to be, a political interest when we don't" services like Uber, but it answers well to ticketing.
With a (redacted) marketshare we need to (redacted). Putting up more barriers will just have them ignore the US entirely.
It wouldn't be that bad of a disaster, as not all companies could afford to leave. Others would find themselves on the painfully wrong end of some products delivered by more US-friendly peers.
By leaving the US, they would be signing their own death warrants. Embracing the US and her citizens would preserve their existence and remove any reason for hostility.
Just kill the variability model altogether. People want a ride, not the hassle of auctioneering-speak
Taxis do much better than either your model or Uber's existing surge model by providing a consistent price structure. In addition, they provide service regardless of rating.
Zil Lanes, like those implemented in car-hostile Atlanta, they're a function of government policy catering to hippies. In the case of the "not a taxi service" Uber, they only survive by intimidating places like New York City, which should have taken the wiser route of Paris.
Riders don't want it, drivers don't really want it, and it doesn't map well to events where surge pricing isn't meant to exist (disasters, large events where cars aren't wanted).
It's still 60% white. White doesn't count anymore?
They detract from diversity candidate quotas, and thus must be reduced to some token number. They would rather have the non-diverse whites on a permatemp track that leads nowhere - or not employed at all.
It doesn't work that way. To address and preempt your lines of argument:
Skilled immigrating workers may bring capabilities that are not available in the native workforce
Realistically, they're not. Unless culturally-developed attitudes of non-objecting servitude is a capability, they're only bringing in warm bodies with a lack of citizenship status. Why else would a need exist to train them on non-trivial concepts, a la California Edison & Disney?
...immigration of young employable people tends to expand the economy by more than the number of jobs they take, creating net employment for the pre-existing workforce.
This needs a large [citation needed], since the only "extra" jobs relate to
Legal services that only exist to defend the status quo, which is to replace citizens with non-citizens
Jobs given to individuals closely related to said H1-b individuals.
Statistically-generated "gains" that exist largely on paper.
Remove those and you will see a net loss on citizens and a net gain on non-citizen (guest worker) labor. The "net gain" jobs you (and other non-citizen labor force) suggest just simply doesn't exist.
They bring skills that couldn't be acquired by hiring an American into the company and cause that company to be more productive
Would skills include a culturally-developed high tolerance for indentured servitude? That's about the only thing they bring to the table, since US citizens cannot and will not acquire such willingness.
Never mind that the replacement and promotion rate is effectively nil, since US citizens are considered a problem in business.
There is no need for government regulation here. The market will fix this.
The market isn't going to fix a practice that will be adopted by the other identical companies. If anything, it will increase in adoption despite consumer action.
Then make it strictly optional for someone to work for a third party, or for anything less than a full-time working arrangement, as a condition of accepting work.
Are people being shadow banned for being involved in unpopular sub-reddits?
Yes, but that's the least of it. The site has gone from open discussions to a history-revised narrative - favored subreddit groups (ShitRedditSays) get immunity from enforcement while everyone else gets the deaf ear when reporting abuse.
About the only thing that would save it would be for Reddit (or its parent) to be bought up, the staff given its own purge, a purge of the social justice warriors, and a clearing of all bans (user, subreddit, shadow).
This doesn't work. It artificially inflates the price of labor, and we've seen what happens when local labor is expensive. Never mind that creating a two (three) tiered society of Citizens and (il)legal Immigrants is the Kuwaiti system. You don't get to vote yourself into the aristocracy.
Make it even more expensive to not use in-country labor, including the vigorous prosecution of individuals contracting or employing illegals as well as individual aiding or abetting them.
Besides, you can argue that "stability" is bad for both employer and employee. Without ties to a particular job, it's much easier for an employee to shop his skills around and find a better job
Really? For the greater part of humanity, including those of us in the modern Roman Empire (the United States), stability is a good thing. It allows long-term planning, a chance to gain the skills that impart flexibility in any economy, and otherwise provide for a mutual benefit.
I thought the American way was to reward ambitious self-motivated people and let starve the ones too lazy to care for themselves.
Wrong century. That might have been true for history up to the mid-20th, but it is not true today (despite attempts to return to the darker days).
Make it hard to not hire someone legally present in that country and very painful to hire anyone with any less-than-legal status..
Even better yet, remove any ability to require a person to associate with any third party or on any non-FTE basis as a condition of working with any entity. Granted, that does include unions, but it also hits the benefit-dodging contract firms - hard. It also discourages the benefit-dodging forms of casualization of labor, as non-FTE labor would have to outcompete FTE labor.
That, and it makes quitting that much easier when even the least competent have a chance to find good work and improve.
The Camaro? No, even if you ask for the V6. The only problem I have is that there's no sub-$25k 4-door equivalent in GM's lineup. It's either 2 doors and a good V6, or straight to $30k+ land.
The ATS? Definitely, since you're paying for more bling and less engine. For their existing price points, I'd rather see V6/Turbo V6/V8.
In truth, black and white gets us no-where and in order to be successful companies will need to leverage whip-smart contract labor,
Given permatemping, there's just the whip and no real smarts beyond devising something that no person should be able to meet to get a regular job.
Precarious work needs to DIAF.
while building capable internal teams to support their efforts after they have been sent off to their next world-building exercise.
In other words, people that managed to be the token few that weren't permatemped.
Maybe the 'stability' from 1950 to 1980 was the real 'aberration' and the constant changes driven by an influx of new workers is the real American norm
Then do whatever it takes litigatively/legislatively/extrajudicially to bring back stability and make it a epic, royal, and complete PITA to dodge it. After that, make it hard to not hire citizens by making it worth more to hire any citizen FTE's by default.
Slashdot Mirror
So instead, when those events that raise demand happen, you just can't find a cab instead
Really? That needs a massive [citation needed].
Same deal with tickets for events and expos. Instead of just raising prices, they make everyone spam their browsers for hours to try to get tickest (and if that fails, then scalpers do the "surge pricing" instead. Awesome!).
Go full Singapore and make it a royal PITA to transfer tickets in resale scenarios. That might not translate well to the "we're a taxi service when we want to be, a political interest when we don't" services like Uber, but it answers well to ticketing.
Perhaps it might have been a bit too hasty to kill off the Shuttle & friends since it means we have to hitch a ride with the Russians.
At least it would make sense instead of waiting for a dressed up Apollo II craft.
For those eager to remove jobs with AI/tech, consider that all the bread, circuses, and such will not stop a critical mass of displaced individuals.
The result will be a large reversal of technological progress, most of which would have been avoided by reintegrating displaced individuals.
With a (redacted) marketshare we need to (redacted). Putting up more barriers will just have them ignore the US entirely.
It wouldn't be that bad of a disaster, as not all companies could afford to leave. Others would find themselves on the painfully wrong end of some products delivered by more US-friendly peers.
By leaving the US, they would be signing their own death warrants. Embracing the US and her citizens would preserve their existence and remove any reason for hostility.
[redacted econo-speak]
Just kill the variability model altogether. People want a ride, not the hassle of auctioneering-speak
Taxis do much better than either your model or Uber's existing surge model by providing a consistent price structure. In addition, they provide service regardless of rating.
[bromide on surge pricing]
Zil Lanes, like those implemented in car-hostile Atlanta, they're a function of government policy catering to hippies. In the case of the "not a taxi service" Uber, they only survive by intimidating places like New York City, which should have taken the wiser route of Paris.
Riders don't want it, drivers don't really want it, and it doesn't map well to events where surge pricing isn't meant to exist (disasters, large events where cars aren't wanted).
It's still 60% white. White doesn't count anymore?
They detract from diversity candidate quotas, and thus must be reduced to some token number. They would rather have the non-diverse whites on a permatemp track that leads nowhere - or not employed at all.
It doesn't work that way. To address and preempt your lines of argument:
Skilled immigrating workers may bring capabilities that are not available in the native workforce
Realistically, they're not. Unless culturally-developed attitudes of non-objecting servitude is a capability, they're only bringing in warm bodies with a lack of citizenship status. Why else would a need exist to train them on non-trivial concepts, a la California Edison & Disney?
...immigration of young employable people tends to expand the economy by more than the number of jobs they take, creating net employment for the pre-existing workforce.
This needs a large [citation needed], since the only "extra" jobs relate to
Legal services that only exist to defend the status quo, which is to replace citizens with non-citizens
Jobs given to individuals closely related to said H1-b individuals.
Statistically-generated "gains" that exist largely on paper.
Remove those and you will see a net loss on citizens and a net gain on non-citizen (guest worker) labor. The "net gain" jobs you (and other non-citizen labor force) suggest just simply doesn't exist.
They bring skills that couldn't be acquired by hiring an American into the company and cause that company to be more productive
Would skills include a culturally-developed high tolerance for indentured servitude? That's about the only thing they bring to the table, since US citizens cannot and will not acquire such willingness.
Never mind that the replacement and promotion rate is effectively nil, since US citizens are considered a problem in business.
If the businesses stopped with such practices, government wouldn't have its constituents calling them to action.
There is no need for government regulation here. The market will fix this.
The market isn't going to fix a practice that will be adopted by the other identical companies. If anything, it will increase in adoption despite consumer action.
This isn't anything new over the regular, licensed, picks-up-anyone taxi service.
This "study" sounds suspicious enough to be a Uber puff-piece.
It'll be fully compliant with everything possible, but does nothing in terms of functionality.
Then make it strictly optional for someone to work for a third party, or for anything less than a full-time working arrangement, as a condition of accepting work.
With the rampant fraud and claims of "shortages", it's not going to be good.
Not-Safe-For-Work subreddits aren't the target, but Narrative Breaking subreddits are.
Jailed, no.
Persecuted in the sense of losing one's job for being doxxed? Yes.
Murder through causing a suicide? Yes.
Arguably, Reddit is that serious.
Are people being shadow banned for being involved in unpopular sub-reddits?
Yes, but that's the least of it. The site has gone from open discussions to a history-revised narrative - favored subreddit groups (ShitRedditSays) get immunity from enforcement while everyone else gets the deaf ear when reporting abuse.
About the only thing that would save it would be for Reddit (or its parent) to be bought up, the staff given its own purge, a purge of the social justice warriors, and a clearing of all bans (user, subreddit, shadow).
Like the last few purges of counter-narrative content, SRS continues to exist despite violating every rule in the book.
If you're an SJW, harassment/doxxing/etc. is encouraged - especially if it causes RL harm. Reporting it to the admins does nothing.
This doesn't work. It artificially inflates the price of labor, and we've seen what happens when local labor is expensive. Never mind that creating a two (three) tiered society of Citizens and (il)legal Immigrants is the Kuwaiti system. You don't get to vote yourself into the aristocracy.
Make it even more expensive to not use in-country labor, including the vigorous prosecution of individuals contracting or employing illegals as well as individual aiding or abetting them.
Besides, you can argue that "stability" is bad for both employer and employee. Without ties to a particular job, it's much easier for an employee to shop his skills around and find a better job
Really? For the greater part of humanity, including those of us in the modern Roman Empire (the United States), stability is a good thing. It allows long-term planning, a chance to gain the skills that impart flexibility in any economy, and otherwise provide for a mutual benefit.
I thought the American way was to reward ambitious self-motivated people and let starve the ones too lazy to care for themselves.
Wrong century. That might have been true for history up to the mid-20th, but it is not true today (despite attempts to return to the darker days).
Make it hard to not hire someone legally present in that country and very painful to hire anyone with any less-than-legal status..
Even better yet, remove any ability to require a person to associate with any third party or on any non-FTE basis as a condition of working with any entity. Granted, that does include unions, but it also hits the benefit-dodging contract firms - hard. It also discourages the benefit-dodging forms of casualization of labor, as non-FTE labor would have to outcompete FTE labor.
That, and it makes quitting that much easier when even the least competent have a chance to find good work and improve.
The Camaro? No, even if you ask for the V6. The only problem I have is that there's no sub-$25k 4-door equivalent in GM's lineup. It's either 2 doors and a good V6, or straight to $30k+ land.
The ATS? Definitely, since you're paying for more bling and less engine. For their existing price points, I'd rather see V6/Turbo V6/V8.
Another Eurotrash frame with an underpowered engine?
In truth, black and white gets us no-where and in order to be successful companies will need to leverage whip-smart contract labor,
Given permatemping, there's just the whip and no real smarts beyond devising something that no person should be able to meet to get a regular job.
Precarious work needs to DIAF.
while building capable internal teams to support their efforts after they have been sent off to their next world-building exercise.
In other words, people that managed to be the token few that weren't permatemped.
Maybe the 'stability' from 1950 to 1980 was the real 'aberration' and the constant changes driven by an influx of new workers is the real American norm
Then do whatever it takes litigatively/legislatively/extrajudicially to bring back stability and make it a epic, royal, and complete PITA to dodge it. After that, make it hard to not hire citizens by making it worth more to hire any citizen FTE's by default.