There is usually a reason why nearly half of the whole population stays away from some completely normal activity, but not any of (supposedly similar) others.
So what's the reason males tend to stay away from elementary teaching but not high school teaching. It's not because they are discouraged by the school system. Elementary schools tend to want to get some (or more) male teachers.
Why is there an imperative to increase the number? For sure there shouldn't be sexual discrimination if women want to be software engineers. But if it's simply a case that a fewer proportion on them want to be, so what?
Men and women are different. One or more of those differences may account for the disparity in software engineers. For example women tend to be more social creatures. Maybe they tend to choose jobs that are more sociable than coding?
Then again I'm one of those super-human freaks who can see a difference between 1080 and 4k
When people claim they can hear differences between different codecs, they are asked by audio experts whether they have taken a double blind test. Often times, people who claim to be able to tell the difference between two codecs are blown out of the water when they do.
Unless you've done a double blind test between 1080p and 4K, I don't know that what you think is the case truly is.
Apple aren't delisted, because they are not cheating. It's very amusing to see all the Fandroids in full denial mode here, because their favoured Android shipping manufacturers have been caught cheating.
And yet the iPhone outsells the Nexus 5 and the Moto G. Because there are plenty of other reasons people want iPhones other than the screen size. Indeed many don't share your belief that 5" is better than 4" when it comes to a pocketable device.
This time it's the screen resolution... Apple has always bragged about their high resolution retina displays, and now that they're lacking in that department, all of a sudden high resolution is a bad thing and Apple's retina are the "perfect resolution".
You appear to be hearing voices in your head. Recommend you see a psychiatrist.
Not really, I would have seen the problem as self correcting.
That's your guess. No one knows. As I said, if things had gone bad by not bailing those companies out you would have blamed the government for that too.
I don't think you understand how ceo pay generally works.
There's no reason for you to come to that conclusion, as there was nothing previously about the make up of a rewards package. By all means introduce the subject of rewards not always coming in salary, but don't pretend you are uniquely aware of this everyday fact.
I've already written in a comment elsewhere that different elements of a rewards package can already be evaluated for tax purposes. It can equally be evaluated when working out a maximum wage ratio. "Wage" being informally used, in quotation marks, to mean the rewards package.
Likewise a lower level employee's company health plan (should they be lucky enough to have one) should be considered as part of their rewards.
Also, there are no tax breaks for big busineses that smaller ones csnnot aldo take advantage of.
There are loads of them. Such as the tax breaks that big factories are offered by different cities/states/countries to be located in a certain place. They are not offered to small businesses.
And multinationals like Amazon, Apple and Google often pay no tax in some countries where they make lots of profit, using complicated shell company schemes to declare the profit in other lower tax countries.
I don't care what you do or do mot have a problem with when it is not yours to make decisions about.
Property is an artificial construct, that only exists if you can take it and defend it or if there's a government to defend it for you. You didn't make the land or the raw materials of anything. They were already there, and someone took them. At some stage or another a government sanctioned who was currently in possession. So a government can always say who owns what, and can always take things back. That's where compulsory purchase/ eminent domain comes from.
Oh, and you don't care about my opinion, why should I care about yours?
You're really not equating racial discrimination with CEO pay?
It's a ratio. It's not just about the highest paid, it's about the lowest paid. It's about the mix of salaries, and how it shouldn't unreasonably mostly go to those that are already in the top 1%.
However, that point wasn't about the equivalence of discrimination and pay disparity. Simply that the possibility of loopholes isn't a reason for not going ahead with otherwise good legislation.
So now you have to cover every loophole?
Huh? That doesn't follow at all.
How about startups that give huge stock options to some employees but not others? Should that be capped as well? Why should an owner / CEO get such a huge payday when the janitor gets a straight salary?
Why indeed?
How about a company that outsources manufacturing? Should all the salaries be capped since many regular wage owners could make significantly more than the lowest paid factory workers at an outsourced plant. How is that different form hiring a cleaning service?
These are issues that would have to be addressed when drafting a law. Few laws can be written on the back of a postage stamp.
Do you really think a company that would do that cares about the backlash?
There's plenty of companies that care about the backlash.
Not really, because it doesnt cost me a dime when companies go under.
Depends if it's a company that you;re doing business with. I'm reminded of a company that supplies Christmas Hampers to senior citizens. It went out of business shortly before Christmas, leaving all the poor pensioners without their Christmas goodies.
The idea that companies going bankrupt doesn't affect you is ridiculous. They always affect some people, and sometimes, by chance, you will be one of those people.
So you ask me to name one, and yet you've already come up with 3. So you're asking me for a forth. To what point when you've already come up with 3. You've already accespted that the category of things that are best done by government exists. You're just wanting to quibble about which items belong in the set.
And "just fine" isn't good enough. "As good or better than the government" is the bar.
Roads is an obvious one. Sure, there is the odd private road in most countries, but that's cherry picking the profitable routes. Private enterprise never provides a comprehensive road system like a government.
Welfare is another.
Schools is another. Again, a few private schools doesn't cut it - that's cherry picking the offspring of the richest few. Private enterprise doesn't ever provide a comprehensive education system.
If the website isn't working, just fall back to pen, paper, stamps, and envelopes, like it would have been in the ancient past of say... 20 years ago before everybody expected regular consumers to have web access.
Just because you go back to paper forms in the mail doesn't mean it's going to happen. That's a system that would also need setting up. And as service is in any case is a multi-variable comparison of many different providers to see which one is best for a particular citizen, that part of it would need a computer system creating anyway, for the people receiving the forms to calculate the answer.
Im the CEO of a Fortune 500 company and I can't get answers from my subordinates regarding the failures of my flagship project. What happens to me? *I am fired.*
No, you are allowed to resign with a golden handshake of $millions.
The difference is, the government takes money from taxpayers to build those sites. When private enterprise builds a crappy web site, it's their employees and shareholders who pay.
1)... and their customers, who get poor service.
2) So the difference ISN"T that private enterprise is better. Just that it's smaller.
3) So you're not an employee or a shareholder? Most people are.
Slashdot Mirror
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_journals#Medicine
What a surprise. "Homeopathy" isn't listed. Neither is the Catholic Herald.
You know you can't win.
No, it's not just "preference".
How do you know?
There is usually a reason why nearly half of the whole population stays away from some completely normal activity, but not any of (supposedly similar) others.
So what's the reason males tend to stay away from elementary teaching but not high school teaching. It's not because they are discouraged by the school system. Elementary schools tend to want to get some (or more) male teachers.
Proof? Where's your proof?
Do you actually have a point to make?
Why is there an imperative to increase the number? For sure there shouldn't be sexual discrimination if women want to be software engineers. But if it's simply a case that a fewer proportion on them want to be, so what?
Men and women are different. One or more of those differences may account for the disparity in software engineers. For example women tend to be more social creatures. Maybe they tend to choose jobs that are more sociable than coding?
What TouchID fiasco?
Then again I'm one of those super-human freaks who can see a difference between 1080 and 4k
When people claim they can hear differences between different codecs, they are asked by audio experts whether they have taken a double blind test. Often times, people who claim to be able to tell the difference between two codecs are blown out of the water when they do.
Unless you've done a double blind test between 1080p and 4K, I don't know that what you think is the case truly is.
Apple aren't delisted, because they are not cheating. It's very amusing to see all the Fandroids in full denial mode here, because their favoured Android shipping manufacturers have been caught cheating.
And yet the iPhone outsells the Nexus 5 and the Moto G. Because there are plenty of other reasons people want iPhones other than the screen size. Indeed many don't share your belief that 5" is better than 4" when it comes to a pocketable device.
This time it's the screen resolution... Apple has always bragged about their high resolution retina displays, and now that they're lacking in that department, all of a sudden high resolution is a bad thing and Apple's retina are the "perfect resolution".
You appear to be hearing voices in your head. Recommend you see a psychiatrist.
Not really, I would have seen the problem as self correcting.
That's your guess. No one knows. As I said, if things had gone bad by not bailing those companies out you would have blamed the government for that too.
I don't think you understand how ceo pay generally works.
There's no reason for you to come to that conclusion, as there was nothing previously about the make up of a rewards package. By all means introduce the subject of rewards not always coming in salary, but don't pretend you are uniquely aware of this everyday fact.
I've already written in a comment elsewhere that different elements of a rewards package can already be evaluated for tax purposes. It can equally be evaluated when working out a maximum wage ratio. "Wage" being informally used, in quotation marks, to mean the rewards package.
Likewise a lower level employee's company health plan (should they be lucky enough to have one) should be considered as part of their rewards.
Also, there are no tax breaks for big busineses that smaller ones csnnot aldo take advantage of.
There are loads of them. Such as the tax breaks that big factories are offered by different cities/states/countries to be located in a certain place. They are not offered to small businesses.
And multinationals like Amazon, Apple and Google often pay no tax in some countries where they make lots of profit, using complicated shell company schemes to declare the profit in other lower tax countries.
I don't care what you do or do mot have a problem with when it is not yours to make decisions about.
Property is an artificial construct, that only exists if you can take it and defend it or if there's a government to defend it for you. You didn't make the land or the raw materials of anything. They were already there, and someone took them. At some stage or another a government sanctioned who was currently in possession. So a government can always say who owns what, and can always take things back. That's where compulsory purchase/ eminent domain comes from.
Oh, and you don't care about my opinion, why should I care about yours?
You're really not equating racial discrimination with CEO pay?
It's a ratio. It's not just about the highest paid, it's about the lowest paid. It's about the mix of salaries, and how it shouldn't unreasonably mostly go to those that are already in the top 1%.
However, that point wasn't about the equivalence of discrimination and pay disparity. Simply that the possibility of loopholes isn't a reason for not going ahead with otherwise good legislation.
So now you have to cover every loophole?
Huh? That doesn't follow at all.
How about startups that give huge stock options to some employees but not others? Should that be capped as well? Why should an owner / CEO get such a huge payday when the janitor gets a straight salary?
Why indeed?
How about a company that outsources manufacturing? Should all the salaries be capped since many regular wage owners could make significantly more than the lowest paid factory workers at an outsourced plant. How is that different form hiring a cleaning service?
These are issues that would have to be addressed when drafting a law. Few laws can be written on the back of a postage stamp.
Do you really think a company that would do that cares about the backlash?
There's plenty of companies that care about the backlash.
Not really, because it doesnt cost me a dime when companies go under.
Depends if it's a company that you;re doing business with. I'm reminded of a company that supplies Christmas Hampers to senior citizens. It went out of business shortly before Christmas, leaving all the poor pensioners without their Christmas goodies.
The idea that companies going bankrupt doesn't affect you is ridiculous. They always affect some people, and sometimes, by chance, you will be one of those people.
I never needed to. I live in a civilised country with a national health service. I don't need health insurance.
That will of course vary by country. Right now in Britain an obvious example is energy utilities. They are all cheating their customers.
The only bit missing was how to figure out who the domain experts were.
The only person who's finding that hard is you.
But like the finger-print scanner farce, you just double down
And it's back to the ad-hominems. You know you've lost.
So you ask me to name one, and yet you've already come up with 3. So you're asking me for a forth. To what point when you've already come up with 3. You've already accespted that the category of things that are best done by government exists. You're just wanting to quibble about which items belong in the set.
And "just fine" isn't good enough. "As good or better than the government" is the bar.
Roads is an obvious one. Sure, there is the odd private road in most countries, but that's cherry picking the profitable routes. Private enterprise never provides a comprehensive road system like a government.
Welfare is another.
Schools is another. Again, a few private schools doesn't cut it - that's cherry picking the offspring of the richest few. Private enterprise doesn't ever provide a comprehensive education system.
There are many more.
I don't understand why the private enterprise has to have any part of healthcare.
yeah but if you're a customer of a sh!tty company you can just switch to a different company.
What about when they're all shitty?
Politics is the art of the possible.
If the website isn't working, just fall back to pen, paper, stamps, and envelopes, like it would have been in the ancient past of say... 20 years ago before everybody expected regular consumers to have web access.
Just because you go back to paper forms in the mail doesn't mean it's going to happen. That's a system that would also need setting up. And as service is in any case is a multi-variable comparison of many different providers to see which one is best for a particular citizen, that part of it would need a computer system creating anyway, for the people receiving the forms to calculate the answer.
Im the CEO of a Fortune 500 company and I can't get answers from my subordinates regarding the failures of my flagship project. What happens to me? *I am fired.*
No, you are allowed to resign with a golden handshake of $millions.
Again, the government bailed out the banks. How is this supposed to prove that government does things better than private businesses?
Again, if the government hadn't bailed out the banks, you'd be blaming whatever economic crisis resulted on the government. Blame them either way.
That's why the smart ones leave when they realise the company is going down.
And you're not smart enough to leave the country?
The difference is, the government takes money from taxpayers to build those sites. When private enterprise builds a crappy web site, it's their employees and shareholders who pay.
1) ... and their customers, who get poor service.
2) So the difference ISN"T that private enterprise is better. Just that it's smaller.
3) So you're not an employee or a shareholder? Most people are.