We're all good and screwed except a few rich asshats. The last gen didn't "Earn their way up". They had massive socialist programs. College, welfare, higher minimum wage, etc. There's a name for what they're doing: Pulling the ladder up behind you
And did you even read my post? The problem is you can't save what you don't have. Shit happens and it takes money to put out fires.
And the difference is _all_ Republicans are in big biz's pockets. They're unapologetic about it. The Laffer curve will trickle it down. I'm not trolling saying that, it's made a comeback.
he still needs votes or he's out the door. Period. Even with Gerrymandering.
Bernie's been talking about this. Folks are pressuring the Dems to move right on social issues. To which he replies: I'm pro-choice, pro-LGBTQ and nobody gives a damn. They want health care. They want education. They want higher wages.
People voted for Trump because he made promises and Hilary didn't. Somebody (538?) showed her ads and campaign were almost completely devoid of content. The Dems are moving on a progressive, populist platform. If they do that get ready for some changes.
because governments, especially central governments, are such a useful tool that they will always form. It's like a box of loaded rifles lying around. Somebody's gonna pick 'em up and use them. The question is never, "Should we have a central government", it's always "Are you going to participate in the one we have".
but why should I have to pay for someone else's Internet connection? I'm devil's advocating here, but I'd love to get a nice, pithy answer to that question. While we're at it how about an answer to "What right do you have to force me to pay for somebody's Internet?". There are sound, logical answers to both of these and they both sound & feel just awful. The left never did get the hang of catch phrases.
not with someone who has no shareholders and no need to run a profit. You're either going to nationalize it or you're going to create a public option in name only (with a ton of money being handed out to the well connected while you're at it). Do one or the other (I'd prefer the public option) not both.
but the real argument against NN is that there's a lot of competition in the world of ISPs. Which is true if you include dial up & cell phone providers. Heck the cell phones even count as broadband by the legal definition of it.
The office is where you network. If you're a programmer you need to realize you have a shelf life of 40 years. If you haven't moved into management by then you're toast (unless you're a math genius, but you're not a programmer at that point, you're a mathematician who happens to program).
And give up on age discrimination lawsuits. Remember kiddos: It's not a law if it's not enforce.
to understand is you can't budget what you don't have. I see this a lot, where people are struggling and convince themselves if they could just budget the numbers a bit better it'd all work out. I'm seeing apps that say they'll do it. But fact is we make about 20% less than the boomers did. That's why we're struggling.
It reminds me of all these stories after the crash of folks who paid off debt by living frugal. The stories always glossed over the $100k+ salaries. It's a lot easier to be frugal when you make that much. It's the difference between a new car and paying rent...
legislated or otherwise. A lot of folks want these things left in private hands, but they also want the government to take an active role so that rural communities have access at a price they can afford. If you want those two things together the only solution is subsidies. Big ones. Otherwise you have to accept some level of nationalization or state run utilities. Usually you're talking nationalization since the money's coming from the Fed in a lot of cases (since most states with big rural populations don't have enough of their own money to run all that expensive cabling...).
The third option: Low prices due to competition, isn't on the table. Even if these weren't natural monopolies (which given that they often need eminent domain to run cable they are) the amounts of money they make (Comcast charges $80/mo for Internet that costs them $9/mo, support included and that's from their SEC filing so it's accurate) they'll just buy up their competitors.
news at eleven. If you want fairness guarantee people access to food, shelter, healthcare, education & transportation. Then the rest will sort itself out when folks can no longer leverage their monopoly on those things into the forging of slaves.
already pointed this out, but it bears repeating: Nothing will come of this because all the major airlines were allowed to merge into 4 big ones and they tacitly collude to avoid competition. So if you need to fly sooner or later you're going to be a customer of United or you're gonna pay though the nose x10 taking the most round about routes possible (fancy going from LA to Phoenix via Barcelona?).
This is why we used to regulate public services like transportation. But as the saying goes ain't nobody got time for that...
What prevents they guys that run the Screenwriter's Union from doing just that? Nothing, except their constituents don't allow it. The teachers and policemen unions don't either. Anyone who tells you that is lying to you so they can bust the Unions.
And you don't understand how Unions work. The reason they can't just hire scabs to write for them is the workers have solidarity. They'll blacklist anyone who breaks ranks (e.g. you'll never work in that town again). Unless the labor market's tight there's only two ways Unions work: solidarity or laws (or both). Otherwise the owner class just uses people's desperation against them.
Dems were against Unions in the past because the pro-worker & pro-capitalist parties switched sides.
even though I've got several friends/family who've been saved by them (major medical issues, all hereditary/genetic that would have killed them without a ton of expensive medical care).
It's a knee jerk reaction because I can see the money coming out of my paycheck. The logical part of my brain knows I'm being foolish, and that I've lost way more to falling wages in the IT sector than I've ever lost to taxes. But my lizard brain kicks in every year in April with a mix of anger and fear.
Now, if we had single payer health care I think I could reign the lizard brain in.
and esoteric. It didn't even register with voters. OTOH there's evidence linking the Russians to the "Bernie Bros" campaign (not that folks don't love Bernie, he's the most popular politician in America today and for good reason). Then there's the mounting evidence that Russia hacked voter rolls and shared that data with team Trump. That sorta data is a gold mine beyond value and if true that more than anything would explain Trump's win.
There's mounting evidence that Russia hacked voter rolls and shared them with people involved with the Trump campaign. The theory being the data was used to target ad buys and campaigning. It would explain how Trump ran such a stellar campaign with so few resources. Then there's the entire fake news thing. It doesn't do any good to have all that fake news if you can't get it in front of people's eyeballs.
I don't like the idea that a Russian propaganda machine helped choose our president. Maybe you feel different. Maybe you're one of those Russians.
well, they check a box. Haven't you ever filled out a job app?
And a major study just showed 25% of the country still harbor racism. Hilary's "Deplorables" comment was based on sound science. That's just F'd up. Or how about some anecdotal evidence. My black truck drivin' buddy had trouble getting runs because it wasn't safe for his driver manager to send him down through the South.
And maybe if we wouldn't defund those kids primary schools they wouldn't struggle when they hit college. Maybe if we wouldn't fund schools with property taxes so asshat rich people could get out of paying for poor kids schools things would turn out different. Maybe if we actually did _more_ about institutionalized racism instead of pretending it's not a thing. Not a chance with guys like you lying to yourself to feel better. But hey, you feel better, right?
Net Seal is just software. It's not even a little illegal. It's license management software, like uPlay, Steam & Origin. He sold software to somebody who then committed a crime. We're right back where we started. It's the same as trying to sue a Gun manufacturer for selling handguns. Probably less so. With the gun manufacturer you could argue they weren't following all the laws/rules about selling guns (there are lots, and some folks tow the line pretty close on them). With software there's nothing to say I can't sell to whoever's buying. They'd have to prove not that I was selling to the keylogger guy but that I was trying to aid him in keylogging.
This all smacks of Law enforcement cracking down on a powerless guy because they can. It's infuriating because it gives good cops a bad name and puts the public at odds with law enforcement.
and my God, this is the most epic troll I've read in years. Or at least I hope it is. The best trolls mix some of both sides, which this one does.
Anyway, on to the meat: Discrimination isn't a thought crime. It's an actual crime. And not just because we say so. It's a crime because of the principle that all humans are human. As soon as you let go of that principle anything goes. You've thrown yourself into Alister Crowley's "Do what thou wilt" form of government. Any society needs a bedrock to base principles on. You can use religion, but only if you're opposed to freedom of religion (since if you pick on to base your society off of the others are, by definition, wrong). Since America picked Freedom of Religion our bedrock is that all are created equally. That instantly means Discrimination (which in this context is understood to mean based on skin color, facial features, sex, sexual preferences or faith based beliefs) is incompatible with our society and must be banned.
If you don't like American society then just say so. But don't start out on the side of our Free speech principles and then try to shit all over the thing that makes all those principles work. You can't have it both ways. It doesn't work like that.
They're not discussing it because by and large it's not happening. Real wages have been falling for 30-40 years now. To make up for that women don't "drop out" anymore. At least not in America (might be different in Europe). Liz Warren wrote an entire book on it. It's called "The two income trap".
on the H1B program. It's entirely possible that's what's causing the extreme distortion. India is a much more conservative state which is going to mean fewer women in the workforce, especially in high paying jobs. And those engineers are mostly coming from there (with a smattering from China)
Slashdot Mirror
I'm doing better than most of them (not by much).
We're all good and screwed except a few rich asshats. The last gen didn't "Earn their way up". They had massive socialist programs. College, welfare, higher minimum wage, etc. There's a name for what they're doing: Pulling the ladder up behind you
And did you even read my post? The problem is you can't save what you don't have. Shit happens and it takes money to put out fires.
See here.
And the difference is _all_ Republicans are in big biz's pockets. They're unapologetic about it. The Laffer curve will trickle it down. I'm not trolling saying that, it's made a comeback.
he still needs votes or he's out the door. Period. Even with Gerrymandering.
Bernie's been talking about this. Folks are pressuring the Dems to move right on social issues. To which he replies: I'm pro-choice, pro-LGBTQ and nobody gives a damn. They want health care. They want education. They want higher wages.
People voted for Trump because he made promises and Hilary didn't. Somebody (538?) showed her ads and campaign were almost completely devoid of content. The Dems are moving on a progressive, populist platform. If they do that get ready for some changes.
because governments, especially central governments, are such a useful tool that they will always form. It's like a box of loaded rifles lying around. Somebody's gonna pick 'em up and use them. The question is never, "Should we have a central government", it's always "Are you going to participate in the one we have".
but why should I have to pay for someone else's Internet connection? I'm devil's advocating here, but I'd love to get a nice, pithy answer to that question. While we're at it how about an answer to "What right do you have to force me to pay for somebody's Internet?". There are sound, logical answers to both of these and they both sound & feel just awful. The left never did get the hang of catch phrases.
not with someone who has no shareholders and no need to run a profit. You're either going to nationalize it or you're going to create a public option in name only (with a ton of money being handed out to the well connected while you're at it). Do one or the other (I'd prefer the public option) not both.
but the real argument against NN is that there's a lot of competition in the world of ISPs. Which is true if you include dial up & cell phone providers. Heck the cell phones even count as broadband by the legal definition of it.
The office is where you network. If you're a programmer you need to realize you have a shelf life of 40 years. If you haven't moved into management by then you're toast (unless you're a math genius, but you're not a programmer at that point, you're a mathematician who happens to program).
And give up on age discrimination lawsuits. Remember kiddos: It's not a law if it's not enforce.
to understand is you can't budget what you don't have. I see this a lot, where people are struggling and convince themselves if they could just budget the numbers a bit better it'd all work out. I'm seeing apps that say they'll do it. But fact is we make about 20% less than the boomers did. That's why we're struggling.
It reminds me of all these stories after the crash of folks who paid off debt by living frugal. The stories always glossed over the $100k+ salaries. It's a lot easier to be frugal when you make that much. It's the difference between a new car and paying rent...
legislated or otherwise. A lot of folks want these things left in private hands, but they also want the government to take an active role so that rural communities have access at a price they can afford. If you want those two things together the only solution is subsidies. Big ones. Otherwise you have to accept some level of nationalization or state run utilities. Usually you're talking nationalization since the money's coming from the Fed in a lot of cases (since most states with big rural populations don't have enough of their own money to run all that expensive cabling...).
The third option: Low prices due to competition, isn't on the table. Even if these weren't natural monopolies (which given that they often need eminent domain to run cable they are) the amounts of money they make (Comcast charges $80/mo for Internet that costs them $9/mo, support included and that's from their SEC filing so it's accurate) they'll just buy up their competitors.
China's pretty damn corrupt on it's own merits. It's sheer size makes it look more competitive than it actually is.
news at eleven. If you want fairness guarantee people access to food, shelter, healthcare, education & transportation. Then the rest will sort itself out when folks can no longer leverage their monopoly on those things into the forging of slaves.
already pointed this out, but it bears repeating: Nothing will come of this because all the major airlines were allowed to merge into 4 big ones and they tacitly collude to avoid competition. So if you need to fly sooner or later you're going to be a customer of United or you're gonna pay though the nose x10 taking the most round about routes possible (fancy going from LA to Phoenix via Barcelona?).
This is why we used to regulate public services like transportation. But as the saying goes ain't nobody got time for that...
What prevents they guys that run the Screenwriter's Union from doing just that? Nothing, except their constituents don't allow it. The teachers and policemen unions don't either. Anyone who tells you that is lying to you so they can bust the Unions. And you don't understand how Unions work. The reason they can't just hire scabs to write for them is the workers have solidarity. They'll blacklist anyone who breaks ranks (e.g. you'll never work in that town again). Unless the labor market's tight there's only two ways Unions work: solidarity or laws (or both). Otherwise the owner class just uses people's desperation against them. Dems were against Unions in the past because the pro-worker & pro-capitalist parties switched sides.
even though I've got several friends/family who've been saved by them (major medical issues, all hereditary/genetic that would have killed them without a ton of expensive medical care).
It's a knee jerk reaction because I can see the money coming out of my paycheck. The logical part of my brain knows I'm being foolish, and that I've lost way more to falling wages in the IT sector than I've ever lost to taxes. But my lizard brain kicks in every year in April with a mix of anger and fear.
Now, if we had single payer health care I think I could reign the lizard brain in.
Here ya go. Seriously, it's just a GIS.
and esoteric. It didn't even register with voters. OTOH there's evidence linking the Russians to the "Bernie Bros" campaign (not that folks don't love Bernie, he's the most popular politician in America today and for good reason). Then there's the mounting evidence that Russia hacked voter rolls and shared that data with team Trump. That sorta data is a gold mine beyond value and if true that more than anything would explain Trump's win.
There's mounting evidence that Russia hacked voter rolls and shared them with people involved with the Trump campaign. The theory being the data was used to target ad buys and campaigning. It would explain how Trump ran such a stellar campaign with so few resources. Then there's the entire fake news thing. It doesn't do any good to have all that fake news if you can't get it in front of people's eyeballs.
I don't like the idea that a Russian propaganda machine helped choose our president. Maybe you feel different. Maybe you're one of those Russians.
well, they check a box. Haven't you ever filled out a job app?
And a major study just showed 25% of the country still harbor racism. Hilary's "Deplorables" comment was based on sound science. That's just F'd up. Or how about some anecdotal evidence. My black truck drivin' buddy had trouble getting runs because it wasn't safe for his driver manager to send him down through the South.
And maybe if we wouldn't defund those kids primary schools they wouldn't struggle when they hit college. Maybe if we wouldn't fund schools with property taxes so asshat rich people could get out of paying for poor kids schools things would turn out different. Maybe if we actually did _more_ about institutionalized racism instead of pretending it's not a thing. Not a chance with guys like you lying to yourself to feel better. But hey, you feel better, right?
Since when is an office supply store adding a coffee shop/bar to their stores News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters?
Net Seal is just software. It's not even a little illegal. It's license management software, like uPlay, Steam & Origin. He sold software to somebody who then committed a crime. We're right back where we started. It's the same as trying to sue a Gun manufacturer for selling handguns. Probably less so. With the gun manufacturer you could argue they weren't following all the laws/rules about selling guns (there are lots, and some folks tow the line pretty close on them). With software there's nothing to say I can't sell to whoever's buying. They'd have to prove not that I was selling to the keylogger guy but that I was trying to aid him in keylogging.
This all smacks of Law enforcement cracking down on a powerless guy because they can. It's infuriating because it gives good cops a bad name and puts the public at odds with law enforcement.
Saying you're for Social Justice doesn't get you a pass from us. Whatdayathink we are? Televangelists?
and my God, this is the most epic troll I've read in years. Or at least I hope it is. The best trolls mix some of both sides, which this one does.
Anyway, on to the meat: Discrimination isn't a thought crime. It's an actual crime. And not just because we say so. It's a crime because of the principle that all humans are human. As soon as you let go of that principle anything goes. You've thrown yourself into Alister Crowley's "Do what thou wilt" form of government. Any society needs a bedrock to base principles on. You can use religion, but only if you're opposed to freedom of religion (since if you pick on to base your society off of the others are, by definition, wrong). Since America picked Freedom of Religion our bedrock is that all are created equally. That instantly means Discrimination (which in this context is understood to mean based on skin color, facial features, sex, sexual preferences or faith based beliefs) is incompatible with our society and must be banned.
If you don't like American society then just say so. But don't start out on the side of our Free speech principles and then try to shit all over the thing that makes all those principles work. You can't have it both ways. It doesn't work like that.
They're not discussing it because by and large it's not happening. Real wages have been falling for 30-40 years now. To make up for that women don't "drop out" anymore. At least not in America (might be different in Europe). Liz Warren wrote an entire book on it. It's called "The two income trap".
on the H1B program. It's entirely possible that's what's causing the extreme distortion. India is a much more conservative state which is going to mean fewer women in the workforce, especially in high paying jobs. And those engineers are mostly coming from there (with a smattering from China)