folks can't do daily manual labor much past 55. Not 40 hours a week of it. Yes, there are exceptions. They're exceptions.
Even if office work experience is over rated. I need 1 experience guy to keep tabs on 10 newbies. Those newbies work 60 hours a week on salary and don't mind doing it since their careers are getting started. In terms of raw output you can't compete with them. Yes, they'll work hard to fix their mistakes, but in a dog eat dog world with more workers than jobs that's not a bug, it's a feature.
even if that's in fine print. And it won't be. It'll be a 'feature'.
You can't just throw up your hands and say anything you don't like is fraud. If you don't want to be gouged by the cable companies you're going to have to actually do something about it. And that means voting for the kinds of politicians that will do something about it (we're a representative democracy after all). And that means kicking the Republican party out of power (and all the right wing corporate Dems while we're at it). Show up and vote in your primary.
the 2008 crash (and lack of a real recovery) did. There's less money to go around, meaning less money going into new shows and less risk taking on new ideas.
to stop sending a party to Washington that opposes Net Neutrality? You're talking about the Whitehouse, but it seems to me the entire country flips every decade. But more importantly the country's been moving to a right wing, pro-corporate politic since Clinton. So even if the other party's in charge it's not like it matters if they act exactly like the Republicans when push comes to shove.
he is reducing government regulation. But there's going to be consequences. He's repealing the laws put in place from the 2008 crash. There's going to be another, worse crash. He's rolling back EPA regulations on clean air and water. He's reducing regulations that required schools to teach science instead of religion. Those are the kinds of regulations he's reducing.
Most regulations were done for a reason. They were reactive, not proactive, and they're not just some libtard trying to spoil everybody's fun or some science nerd trying to bilk a paycheck out of the public Universities. There are going to be some nasty consequences for all this deregulation. The annoying part is it'll be like it always is. A Republican deregulates, something blows up and a bunch of awful things happen, then a Dem cleans up the mess. That's where the 'cyclical' nature of the economy comes from.
and there's plenty to support Trump being anti-science. To wit:
His EPA chief is ignoring air and water quality research and reducing controls on water and air quality
He called Global Warming a Chinese hoax, despite the overwhelming condenses of peer reviewed science recognizing it
He opposes Net Neutrality and ignores studies that show eliminating it would have negative effects on the free exchange of ideas.
He and his VP support Abstinence based education even though it's been shown to be completely ineffective (again, by science).
Two words: Clean Coal.
Two more words: Betsy Devos
I could go on and on. The scientific position to take is that Trump is, in fact, anti-science. He doesn't believe in evidence and facts, preferring the "I substitute your reality with my own" school of thought. To call him anything but anti-science is itself anti-science. It's an attempt to ignore or refute reality itself.
until Saddam & Gaddafi. In both cases we secured promises, backed up by extensive international inspections, that they would not develop weapons of mass destruction. And in both cases we proved to be untrustworthy and brutal and arranged for both men to be murdered (Gaddafi died with a bayonet twisting in his gut).
Kim would be a real mad man if he stopped trying to get nukes after seeing what we do to people who relinquish them
and not wrecked it? Come to think of it I can't think of any studios that survived a big buyout. Maybe Blizzard, but they were pretty huge when they got bought out so that boardered on being a merger. Bioware certainly didn't survive unscathed. ME4 stunk on ice and by all accounts Anthem is less an RPG and more a Destiny competitor (or clone if you're being mean).
and he made it very, very clear he'd oppose any effort to address or even recognize climate change or do anything whatsoever that would get in the way of business (under the theory we'd all be better off thanks to a large increase in employment opportunities).
This is exactly what we signed on for, America. What I find odd is that there's so many pro Trump folks on/. (which is ostensibly a site for pro-science nerds) when it was so obvious Trump would oppose everything this site stands for. I mean, yeah, I don't like Hilary and voted against her in the primary, but she at least has a firm grasp on reality and believes in the scientific method.
it just that. Bullshit. We had decades of stability until Regan came along and started repealing depression era laws designed to stop another depression. Liz Warren's been going around trying to get people to understand that and failing because the media (which has a pro-corporate bias) won't cover her except when Trump calls her names.
The big thing is keeping risky Wall Street stuff away from safe Main Street Stuff. Also regulating commodities and keeping crap like High Frequency trading and other parasitic & short term investment tools under control or just plain dead. There's a lot more to it than that (it's a complex subject) but just doing that would put a stop to a lot of this crap. If you want to know more go read some of Liz Warren's books plus "But Where are the investor's Yachts".
the median income crash the economy every 8-10 years like clockwork. How do you build wealth when everytime you start the rug gets yanked out from under you. Meanwhile I get saddled with high taxes to fund their bailouts and the wars needed to protect their foreign investments.
When Activision's CEO was pissed because gamers played thousands of hours of Call of Duty and only paid $60 bucks for the privilege. IIRC he stopped just short of calling them thieves. This is like that, only nicer. CEOs are angry they're not getting $60/mo from us to play games.
First, what the _hell_ are you doing on/.. I don't think Bernie Madoff could pull that off with a pyramid scheme. You must be some kind of financial genius.
Second, you do know what inflation is, right? At the current rate you're $1 million saved will have about $140k in buying power in 50 years based on the Cureau of Labor Statistics' calculator. Only inflation is _much_ worse than it was 50 years ago, so better plan on that being $100k.
Also, better plan on a few major market crashes wiping out your savings. We just repealed Dodd-Frank and a whole bunch of other Wall Street regulations that were passed after the 2008 market crash.
and sitting quietly waiting to go to work (or better yet, working 16 hours a day) then the nasty little heathens deserve what they get. Maybe that's not what you intended, but it's the sentiment you're echoing whether you know it or not. It's a narrative pushed by the ruling class so they can steal all your money. Don't fall for it.
It's a verifiable fact that Millennials are worse off than their parents and grandparents. It's kind of a big deal, since that's the first time in centuries that's happened. It's even worse because they're _better_educated_ than their parents and grandparents. They're working harder for less.
You're being lied to, or you're lying. I don't know which. If it's the former, wake up before it's too late. If latter, well, I don't know what you think you're doing serving the ruling class. Maybe you think if you do good enough they'll let you join. Maybe you think you can make money off the rubes like Steve Bannon & the Televangelists do. You can't. If posting on/. is the best you can do you've already lost that battle. Me? I'm just venting.
that's still what people do. There's lots of adverts for retirement services because they're mostly scams to get ahold of people's money. Those ads work just like the ads for diamonds though: they create a false narrative that retirement's what everybody does and if you're not retiring there's just something wrong with you (e.g. you're lazy, a spendthrift, a bad person or maybe even you've ticked off God).
The idea of retirement came from doing something with people who can't work productively anymore besides letting them die in the streets. That hasn't changed in the slightest. Most folks aren't much use past 55 or so and almost everybody is useless after 65 or so. Also the sooner you get them out of the job market the sooner they can make way for younger, more productive people.
Retirement is a _necessary_ goal. We need to clear old, infirm people out of the job market or the whole thing collapses as wages plummet from desperate people trying to survive. We also need older, less productive people out of the market because, well, they're either going to hurt themselves or somebody else, especially if they keep trying to do blue collar work. The only people who benefit from destroying a system of retirement are the ruling class, who get more of that sweet, sweet cheap labor. After all, supply and demand works both ways, and although less productive the need to get enough food to survive one more day is a powerful driver.
in the stock market. And that includes retirement programs. The gig economy, outsourcing & offshoring eliminating middle class jobs and the constant assault on Unions means they have no opportunity and with most living paycheck to paycheck they have no opportunity to save.
And nobody's going to convince me that half Americans are just irresponsible spend thrifts or lazy bums; especially since Europe is having none of these problems. Even if they are, what the hell is wrong with our civilization if that's the case? I thought America was the greatest country on earth. God's country and all that rot. Bullshit. Something's wrong. Something outside our control. And let's face it, we know damn well what it is
we're talking about minimizing that risk. If you're having that much trouble it's because nobody's managing the queue. But at least there _is_ a queue. There's something written down that can be post mortemed. The alternatives I've seen is to write a massive design document and have at it.
it's too small an issue. You run on a pro worker platform, which incidentally includes copyright reform because 140 year copyright is anti-working class. It drives up the cost of mass market entertainment, which is one of the few pleasures the working class have.
And nobody's saying today's Dems are much good. Whether it's Joe Manchin, Nancy Pelosi or that bastard Chuck Schumer they're all selling us out. But my point is there's something to salvage in the Democratic party. I don't feel that way about the Republicans. They've gone all in on oligarchy.
they're not Progressives. Being a Progressive doesn't just mean you're tolerant of gays and abortion. Those are social issues. The folks you're referring to are Hollywood, and to a man they're economically right wing.
The Democratic party is being run by economically right wing and socially moderate (the Hillary wing didn't support Gay Marriage until forced to by the base) conservatives. Being Progressive means being _economically_ progressive too. That means these things:
1. Medicare for all.
2. Living Wage.
3. College for all.
4. New New Deal (google it).
5. End the Wars.
Disney, the most Hollywood of Hollywood definitely opposes #1-#4 and I'm guessing if forced to answer would oppose #5 (their board of directors owns stock in the defense industry along with everybody else at the top).
No. What make agile work is accountability. The agile shops I've seen have what's basically a case system that tracks User Stories which describe small amounts of work. That's used to manage the teams and make sure they're move forward to some definite goal. That's the reason agile works. You can keep tabs on what your devs are doing and if they go off the rails fix it in 1 sprint.
you choose not to exercise it. Show up to your primary. Also, and this isn't popular to say, but join the Democratic party. The Republicans are too far too the corporate side to redeem at this point. They shifted right in response to Bill Clinton and the Democrats followed them. Today's Democrats are Regan Republicans, but there's a core of progressives who oppose pro-corporate crap like this. They run candidates every year in the primary and they lose because nobody shows up expect old, economic right wingers. But there's _very_ few of them. If folks would just show up to vote for things that benefit them they'd be drowned out.
Sorry to get so partisan, but there's no other way to fix this. We need to move the country left, and the best place to do that is in the Democratic party's primaries.
Slashdot Mirror
folks can't do daily manual labor much past 55. Not 40 hours a week of it. Yes, there are exceptions. They're exceptions.
Even if office work experience is over rated. I need 1 experience guy to keep tabs on 10 newbies. Those newbies work 60 hours a week on salary and don't mind doing it since their careers are getting started. In terms of raw output you can't compete with them. Yes, they'll work hard to fix their mistakes, but in a dog eat dog world with more workers than jobs that's not a bug, it's a feature.
even if that's in fine print. And it won't be. It'll be a 'feature'.
You can't just throw up your hands and say anything you don't like is fraud. If you don't want to be gouged by the cable companies you're going to have to actually do something about it. And that means voting for the kinds of politicians that will do something about it (we're a representative democracy after all). And that means kicking the Republican party out of power (and all the right wing corporate Dems while we're at it). Show up and vote in your primary.
the 2008 crash (and lack of a real recovery) did. There's less money to go around, meaning less money going into new shows and less risk taking on new ideas.
to stop sending a party to Washington that opposes Net Neutrality? You're talking about the Whitehouse, but it seems to me the entire country flips every decade. But more importantly the country's been moving to a right wing, pro-corporate politic since Clinton. So even if the other party's in charge it's not like it matters if they act exactly like the Republicans when push comes to shove.
he is reducing government regulation. But there's going to be consequences. He's repealing the laws put in place from the 2008 crash. There's going to be another, worse crash. He's rolling back EPA regulations on clean air and water. He's reducing regulations that required schools to teach science instead of religion. Those are the kinds of regulations he's reducing.
Most regulations were done for a reason. They were reactive, not proactive, and they're not just some libtard trying to spoil everybody's fun or some science nerd trying to bilk a paycheck out of the public Universities. There are going to be some nasty consequences for all this deregulation. The annoying part is it'll be like it always is. A Republican deregulates, something blows up and a bunch of awful things happen, then a Dem cleans up the mess. That's where the 'cyclical' nature of the economy comes from.
and there's plenty to support Trump being anti-science. To wit:
His EPA chief is ignoring air and water quality research and reducing controls on water and air quality
He called Global Warming a Chinese hoax, despite the overwhelming condenses of peer reviewed science recognizing it
He opposes Net Neutrality and ignores studies that show eliminating it would have negative effects on the free exchange of ideas.
He and his VP support Abstinence based education even though it's been shown to be completely ineffective (again, by science).
Two words: Clean Coal.
Two more words: Betsy Devos
I could go on and on. The scientific position to take is that Trump is, in fact, anti-science. He doesn't believe in evidence and facts, preferring the "I substitute your reality with my own" school of thought. To call him anything but anti-science is itself anti-science. It's an attempt to ignore or refute reality itself.
who can speak intelligently about nuclear weapons vs nuclear power?
until Saddam & Gaddafi. In both cases we secured promises, backed up by extensive international inspections, that they would not develop weapons of mass destruction. And in both cases we proved to be untrustworthy and brutal and arranged for both men to be murdered (Gaddafi died with a bayonet twisting in his gut).
Kim would be a real mad man if he stopped trying to get nukes after seeing what we do to people who relinquish them
and not wrecked it? Come to think of it I can't think of any studios that survived a big buyout. Maybe Blizzard, but they were pretty huge when they got bought out so that boardered on being a merger. Bioware certainly didn't survive unscathed. ME4 stunk on ice and by all accounts Anthem is less an RPG and more a Destiny competitor (or clone if you're being mean).
and he made it very, very clear he'd oppose any effort to address or even recognize climate change or do anything whatsoever that would get in the way of business (under the theory we'd all be better off thanks to a large increase in employment opportunities).
/. (which is ostensibly a site for pro-science nerds) when it was so obvious Trump would oppose everything this site stands for. I mean, yeah, I don't like Hilary and voted against her in the primary, but she at least has a firm grasp on reality and believes in the scientific method.
This is exactly what we signed on for, America. What I find odd is that there's so many pro Trump folks on
it just that. Bullshit. We had decades of stability until Regan came along and started repealing depression era laws designed to stop another depression. Liz Warren's been going around trying to get people to understand that and failing because the media (which has a pro-corporate bias) won't cover her except when Trump calls her names.
The big thing is keeping risky Wall Street stuff away from safe Main Street Stuff. Also regulating commodities and keeping crap like High Frequency trading and other parasitic & short term investment tools under control or just plain dead. There's a lot more to it than that (it's a complex subject) but just doing that would put a stop to a lot of this crap. If you want to know more go read some of Liz Warren's books plus "But Where are the investor's Yachts".
TL;DR, you've been lied to.
the median income crash the economy every 8-10 years like clockwork. How do you build wealth when everytime you start the rug gets yanked out from under you. Meanwhile I get saddled with high taxes to fund their bailouts and the wars needed to protect their foreign investments.
Who's CEO argued phones having backdoors was a good thing? No thanks, you're the last group of people I want anywhere near my data.
When Activision's CEO was pissed because gamers played thousands of hours of Call of Duty and only paid $60 bucks for the privilege. IIRC he stopped just short of calling them thieves. This is like that, only nicer. CEOs are angry they're not getting $60/mo from us to play games.
First, what the _hell_ are you doing on /.. I don't think Bernie Madoff could pull that off with a pyramid scheme. You must be some kind of financial genius.
Second, you do know what inflation is, right? At the current rate you're $1 million saved will have about $140k in buying power in 50 years based on the Cureau of Labor Statistics' calculator. Only inflation is _much_ worse than it was 50 years ago, so better plan on that being $100k.
Also, better plan on a few major market crashes wiping out your savings. We just repealed Dodd-Frank and a whole bunch of other Wall Street regulations that were passed after the 2008 market crash.
and sitting quietly waiting to go to work (or better yet, working 16 hours a day) then the nasty little heathens deserve what they get. Maybe that's not what you intended, but it's the sentiment you're echoing whether you know it or not. It's a narrative pushed by the ruling class so they can steal all your money. Don't fall for it.
/. is the best you can do you've already lost that battle. Me? I'm just venting.
It's a verifiable fact that Millennials are worse off than their parents and grandparents. It's kind of a big deal, since that's the first time in centuries that's happened. It's even worse because they're _better_educated_ than their parents and grandparents. They're working harder for less.
You're being lied to, or you're lying. I don't know which. If it's the former, wake up before it's too late. If latter, well, I don't know what you think you're doing serving the ruling class. Maybe you think if you do good enough they'll let you join. Maybe you think you can make money off the rubes like Steve Bannon & the Televangelists do. You can't. If posting on
that's still what people do. There's lots of adverts for retirement services because they're mostly scams to get ahold of people's money. Those ads work just like the ads for diamonds though: they create a false narrative that retirement's what everybody does and if you're not retiring there's just something wrong with you (e.g. you're lazy, a spendthrift, a bad person or maybe even you've ticked off God).
The idea of retirement came from doing something with people who can't work productively anymore besides letting them die in the streets. That hasn't changed in the slightest. Most folks aren't much use past 55 or so and almost everybody is useless after 65 or so. Also the sooner you get them out of the job market the sooner they can make way for younger, more productive people.
Retirement is a _necessary_ goal. We need to clear old, infirm people out of the job market or the whole thing collapses as wages plummet from desperate people trying to survive. We also need older, less productive people out of the market because, well, they're either going to hurt themselves or somebody else, especially if they keep trying to do blue collar work. The only people who benefit from destroying a system of retirement are the ruling class, who get more of that sweet, sweet cheap labor. After all, supply and demand works both ways, and although less productive the need to get enough food to survive one more day is a powerful driver.
in the stock market. And that includes retirement programs. The gig economy, outsourcing & offshoring eliminating middle class jobs and the constant assault on Unions means they have no opportunity and with most living paycheck to paycheck they have no opportunity to save.
And nobody's going to convince me that half Americans are just irresponsible spend thrifts or lazy bums; especially since Europe is having none of these problems. Even if they are, what the hell is wrong with our civilization if that's the case? I thought America was the greatest country on earth. God's country and all that rot. Bullshit. Something's wrong. Something outside our control. And let's face it, we know damn well what it is
we're talking about minimizing that risk. If you're having that much trouble it's because nobody's managing the queue. But at least there _is_ a queue. There's something written down that can be post mortemed. The alternatives I've seen is to write a massive design document and have at it.
you know that's a good thing, right? Just so we're on the same page it's a good thing.
it's too small an issue. You run on a pro worker platform, which incidentally includes copyright reform because 140 year copyright is anti-working class. It drives up the cost of mass market entertainment, which is one of the few pleasures the working class have.
And nobody's saying today's Dems are much good. Whether it's Joe Manchin, Nancy Pelosi or that bastard Chuck Schumer they're all selling us out. But my point is there's something to salvage in the Democratic party. I don't feel that way about the Republicans. They've gone all in on oligarchy.
they're not Progressives. Being a Progressive doesn't just mean you're tolerant of gays and abortion. Those are social issues. The folks you're referring to are Hollywood, and to a man they're economically right wing.
The Democratic party is being run by economically right wing and socially moderate (the Hillary wing didn't support Gay Marriage until forced to by the base) conservatives. Being Progressive means being _economically_ progressive too. That means these things:
1. Medicare for all.
2. Living Wage.
3. College for all.
4. New New Deal (google it).
5. End the Wars.
Disney, the most Hollywood of Hollywood definitely opposes #1-#4 and I'm guessing if forced to answer would oppose #5 (their board of directors owns stock in the defense industry along with everybody else at the top).
because she won the primary. If folks had showed up to vote we'd have President Bernie Sanders now.
No. What make agile work is accountability. The agile shops I've seen have what's basically a case system that tracks User Stories which describe small amounts of work. That's used to manage the teams and make sure they're move forward to some definite goal. That's the reason agile works. You can keep tabs on what your devs are doing and if they go off the rails fix it in 1 sprint.
you choose not to exercise it. Show up to your primary. Also, and this isn't popular to say, but join the Democratic party. The Republicans are too far too the corporate side to redeem at this point. They shifted right in response to Bill Clinton and the Democrats followed them. Today's Democrats are Regan Republicans, but there's a core of progressives who oppose pro-corporate crap like this. They run candidates every year in the primary and they lose because nobody shows up expect old, economic right wingers. But there's _very_ few of them. If folks would just show up to vote for things that benefit them they'd be drowned out.
Sorry to get so partisan, but there's no other way to fix this. We need to move the country left, and the best place to do that is in the Democratic party's primaries.