You're implying that there's less overhead with a fed? That's flat out incorrect. Yes, individual contractors typically make better wages, and the overhead is there. But, don't get me started on the size of govt. offices, and the overhead they bring. As for CEOs, they're a tiny fraction of the cost of doing business...though I won't argue that any of them are under-compensated (trying not to stroll off-topic). I've seen numerous govt. IT shops replaced by fewer than half as many contractor personnel.
FWIW, I've been on both sides for the last 38 years.
Yes, it's better to be a contractor because they typically bring skills to the table that govt. employees don't have. They're also typically fired at will, which is something you almost never see when a govt. employee's position is no longer needed, or if they're a screw up.
that's pretty arrogant to think that because we homo sapiens think it's impossible, it must be completely impossible everywhere.
Not really. It's pretty ignorant to think that a well understood law of physics can be transformed somewhere else. Now, if by some circumstance we got that law wrong, then the possibility could exist. But unless there's some chink in the armor of that law that was missed, the GP is absolutely correct.
how about a honda civic compared to a ford mustang? (also a good analogy since the foreign product will be junk, at first, based on inappropriate chunks of existing technology from other projects, but eventually will surpass others in reliability...)
I love people perpetuating myths. Have you looked at any recent data? American vehicles have also recently been showing better quality numbers than Euro cars. The Dodge I'm driving today (2012 model), isn't anywhere near the crap they produced twenty years ago. And FWIW, I've owned everything from Mercedes, Saab & BMW to Infiniti, to nearly every flavor of US make, in my ~40 yrs of driving. Just anecdotal here, but most of the foreign brands broke as frequently as the domestics, but were more expensive to repair, with my Infiniti being the exception (most reliable vehicle I've owned), though they wanted ~$500 to replace a headlight ballast.
Your basic premise is that nobody should be allowed to legally make a website w/o "implementing basic IT security", correct? Because if they get hacked, they should be punished.
Yes, that makes perfect sense...in some small minded world.
Maybe you should look at the graph that YOU provided, and notice that the years that Reagan was in office '81-89 in fact leveled off the steep decline from the Carter years...go figure.
You've clearly got no fucking idea what you're talking about. Everyone makes mistakes in parenting. But then my own circumstances were never part of the topic. But since you asked, I've raised a child (including 7 yrs as a single parent) very successfully, put her through college, and she's spent the last year in a three year leadership program at a major national company. So yeah, I guess I fucked up.
Blah, blah, blah. You don't answer the question...where's the push to get more men into teaching and nursing.
And for the record, I've personally hired more women then men for the last several years. Sometimes for the right reason...they were more qualified, but more often than not, it's only to meet the quota. Not only that, they're given larger pay raises, and more are promoted to meet this politically correct agenda at my company. So don't start your bullshit about whining.
The people making money or I should say, making the decent returns, on your house are the banks.
Guess I'm a bank then.
Bought a home in '85, sold in '91. Made money, even through the housing decline of the late 80s.
Bought a home in 96, sold in 02. Made money...early housing bubble days.
Bought a home in '02, and based on the Zillow estimate, we've added 65% equity above the purchase price (current valuation minus purchase price...not including the equity we've gained paying the mortgage...that adds another 15-20%), and are roughly back to within 15% of the bubble valuation. We'll be selling this in a few years to retire, and purchase our final smaller place outright in a lower cost area.
I haven't read the linked article, but from my own experience, having purchased my first townhouse in '85, then another in '96, and finally a single family in '00, I've pulled gained value over renting in each case. And that's even in a down housing market (late 80s), I got a traditional 30yr fixed mortgage each time, no debt consolidation, or second mortgages. The single exception is the HELOC I have on our current home, which I've used to help pay my daughter's college, and a new vehicle...that' is debt is nearly zero now. The point being with the mortgage interest tax write off, you're not only building equity, you're paying less in income tax.
Well first, no one attributes the economic expansion of the 1980s with trickle-down economics. Literally nobody of any importance in the field of economics.
Yeah, I guess that recession were were in when he entered office disappeared by itself. Were you not around back then? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...
And, If you believe that trickle down policies were responsible for the 1980s economy, your position is equally the same to me as an anti-vaxxer or a climate change denier. You believe in fantasy.
I guess I'll just live with the facts that were presented then, and you can ignore them and cite an imaginary equivalency...Squirrel!!!
Second, for a current example of those same "cut taxes results in boom" ridiculous ideas in action today, you need only look as far as the state of Kansas, who now have a two billion dollar deficit directly caused by lowering the income tax. Unsurprisingly, increased revenue did not result.
Yeah, I'm well aware of the Kansas situation. It's not the same. It's an extreme case, and doesn't compare.
So, you're saying he won because of gerrymandering? Is that even possible in a gubernatorial election? Isn't it a straight up numerical statewide vote? I could see your point if you were talking about a representative, but governor?
You mean the one time it was tried? The phrase was coined specifically as a pejorative against Reagan's economics. And how did that turn out? Well, it was the second longest peacetime economic expansion in U.S. history. It had a net increase of 21 million jobs. And, the misery index, defined as the inflation rate added to the unemployment rate, shrunk from 19.33 when he began his administration to 9.72.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd suggest that Russians are a bit cheaper labor. Conscripts don't cost nearly as much.
You're implying that there's less overhead with a fed? That's flat out incorrect. Yes, individual contractors typically make better wages, and the overhead is there. But, don't get me started on the size of govt. offices, and the overhead they bring. As for CEOs, they're a tiny fraction of the cost of doing business...though I won't argue that any of them are under-compensated (trying not to stroll off-topic). I've seen numerous govt. IT shops replaced by fewer than half as many contractor personnel.
FWIW, I've been on both sides for the last 38 years.
Yes, it's better to be a contractor because they typically bring skills to the table that govt. employees don't have. They're also typically fired at will, which is something you almost never see when a govt. employee's position is no longer needed, or if they're a screw up.
What happens when someone programs the AI to think that it is God?
that's pretty arrogant to think that because we homo sapiens think it's impossible, it must be completely impossible everywhere.
Not really. It's pretty ignorant to think that a well understood law of physics can be transformed somewhere else. Now, if by some circumstance we got that law wrong, then the possibility could exist. But unless there's some chink in the armor of that law that was missed, the GP is absolutely correct.
Court orders to /. would still give up your info. I've seen it happen to former coworkers.
how about a honda civic compared to a ford mustang? (also a good analogy since the foreign product will be junk, at first, based on inappropriate chunks of existing technology from other projects, but eventually will surpass others in reliability...)
I love people perpetuating myths. Have you looked at any recent data? American vehicles have also recently been showing better quality numbers than Euro cars. The Dodge I'm driving today (2012 model), isn't anywhere near the crap they produced twenty years ago. And FWIW, I've owned everything from Mercedes, Saab & BMW to Infiniti, to nearly every flavor of US make, in my ~40 yrs of driving. Just anecdotal here, but most of the foreign brands broke as frequently as the domestics, but were more expensive to repair, with my Infiniti being the exception (most reliable vehicle I've owned), though they wanted ~$500 to replace a headlight ballast.
Your basic premise is that nobody should be allowed to legally make a website w/o "implementing basic IT security", correct? Because if they get hacked, they should be punished.
Yes, that makes perfect sense...in some small minded world.
Who the fuck creates a new account when they change employers?
You watch too much TV
Maybe you should look at the graph that YOU provided, and notice that the years that Reagan was in office '81-89 in fact leveled off the steep decline from the Carter years...go figure.
You've clearly got no fucking idea what you're talking about. Everyone makes mistakes in parenting. But then my own circumstances were never part of the topic. But since you asked, I've raised a child (including 7 yrs as a single parent) very successfully, put her through college, and she's spent the last year in a three year leadership program at a major national company. So yeah, I guess I fucked up.
Blah, blah, blah. You don't answer the question...where's the push to get more men into teaching and nursing.
And for the record, I've personally hired more women then men for the last several years. Sometimes for the right reason...they were more qualified, but more often than not, it's only to meet the quota. Not only that, they're given larger pay raises, and more are promoted to meet this politically correct agenda at my company. So don't start your bullshit about whining.
The people making money or I should say, making the decent returns, on your house are the banks.
Guess I'm a bank then.
Bought a home in '85, sold in '91. Made money, even through the housing decline of the late 80s.
Bought a home in 96, sold in 02. Made money...early housing bubble days.
Bought a home in '02, and based on the Zillow estimate, we've added 65% equity above the purchase price (current valuation minus purchase price...not including the equity we've gained paying the mortgage...that adds another 15-20%), and are roughly back to within 15% of the bubble valuation. We'll be selling this in a few years to retire, and purchase our final smaller place outright in a lower cost area.
Only an idiot pays 6% now.
I haven't read the linked article, but from my own experience, having purchased my first townhouse in '85, then another in '96, and finally a single family in '00, I've pulled gained value over renting in each case. And that's even in a down housing market (late 80s), I got a traditional 30yr fixed mortgage each time, no debt consolidation, or second mortgages. The single exception is the HELOC I have on our current home, which I've used to help pay my daughter's college, and a new vehicle...that' is debt is nearly zero now. The point being with the mortgage interest tax write off, you're not only building equity, you're paying less in income tax.
Maybe your average ex-con anus. Mine is a bit tighter.
Well first, no one attributes the economic expansion of the 1980s with trickle-down economics. Literally nobody of any importance in the field of economics.
Yeah, I guess that recession were were in when he entered office disappeared by itself. Were you not around back then? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...
I didn't pull the numbers above out of my anus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...
And, If you believe that trickle down policies were responsible for the 1980s economy, your position is equally the same to me as an anti-vaxxer or a climate change denier. You believe in fantasy.
I guess I'll just live with the facts that were presented then, and you can ignore them and cite an imaginary equivalency...Squirrel!!!
Second, for a current example of those same "cut taxes results in boom" ridiculous ideas in action today, you need only look as far as the state of Kansas, who now have a two billion dollar deficit directly caused by lowering the income tax. Unsurprisingly, increased revenue did not result.
Yeah, I'm well aware of the Kansas situation. It's not the same. It's an extreme case, and doesn't compare.
You've clearly never worn those shoes.
So, you're saying he won because of gerrymandering? Is that even possible in a gubernatorial election? Isn't it a straight up numerical statewide vote? I could see your point if you were talking about a representative, but governor?
I provided facts. You provided propaganda.
Really? Counter the facts I produced. He spent billions on the military (I'm well aware, as I served during this time), and ended the Cold War.
You've drunk the Kool-aid.
I just posted this above, but here's a link to the results the one time it was tried. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...
Please note the parts about economic expansion, 21 million net jobs, and the decline of the misery index.
You mean the one time it was tried? The phrase was coined specifically as a pejorative against Reagan's economics. And how did that turn out? Well, it was the second longest peacetime economic expansion in U.S. history. It had a net increase of 21 million jobs. And, the misery index, defined as the inflation rate added to the unemployment rate, shrunk from 19.33 when he began his administration to 9.72.
So, please tell us again what's broken in that?
Mr. Walker is so out of touch with his own state, I can't imagine how he could effectively lead a nation.
I guess his election was an accident then? Or are the majority of voters also out of touch with their own state?