Spain has an universal health care system, and yet people can go to a doctor outside of the system if they wish: There's less lines, but higher fees. This makes private insurance much cheaper, because they really are not expected to cover the disaster situations: In most ways, they are just a supplement over what the public system won't take care of as quickly as you'd like.
As it is now in the US, with people spending a thousand a month insurance still having to spend hundreds of dollars on fees and deductibles for visiting an emergency room, does insurance even make sense?
And yet, poor people pay more sales tax relative to their income than the rich, if just because their expenses are a higher percentage of their income.
So, while they are flat in principle, when push comes to shove sales taxes are pretty much irrelevant for someone making half a million a year, and are a significant part of the budget for someone making 35K.
Would you consider a sales tax that only applies to vehicles that cost over 50K to be a measure that taxes all people equally?
If you don't like a game built around a lot of rules to be min-maxed, you play one of many other RPGs that stay far away from the D&D family, and are light on rules precisely to avoid this very issue.
In D&Ds case, the reason min-maxers are bad is because they turn a cooperative game into a competitive game: If your character is not tuned and theirs is, yours actions become less relevant, and eventually you don't feel like you are playing.
In the stock market today, a big problem is that many people aren't playing with their own money: They've been entrusted with money because they are supposedly experts. In the end, the fall they take once they go too far is losing their job, not their life savings. Same thing with corporate managers, that will be rehired by their buddies in other companies if they drive their corporation into the ground.
And yet, he'd have a million problems getting the Spanish credits accepted back in the US. Not to mention all the fun of big classes, teachers that don't care, tests designed to make people fail, and an outdated curriculum.
I actually moved to the US after seeing the awful world of Spanish state universities. Some foreigners enjoy themselves in classes designed mostly for them, but for core courses? It always ends up being a mistake.
He could try SLU's Madrid Campus, an American university in Spain, but I don't think they offer enough CS classes to make it worthwhile, unless he's already expecting to 'waste' a semester.
I hated NWN out of the box. The campaign was a turd sandwich, boring as they get. The party size limitation made the game into a mess too: You cannot really have a full party, so no adventures that are challenging and interesting for all classes could be set up in the first place. D&D was designed with groups of 4,5 characters in mind: How can you play with just 2?
The [arty interactions were also severely limited. Half of the fun in BG was to hear your party bickering. NWN got rid of that too.
I'd not say it was the worst RPG ever, but it was definitely a step down, and only gets closer to BGII in quality after downloading the very best user generated content.
The top 1% is a pretty deceitful way of measuring rich people.
First, being in the top 1% in income is not the same as being in the top 1% richest. What if the wealth is all land? what if it's invested? Until the wealth is sold, there's relatively little income (like dividends), even if the investment is appreciating yearly.
Then, there's ways of detaching yourself of your investment income. A corporation or a charity could be holding your wealth and spending money to your benefit.
And finally, the top 1% is too large to mean rich people. the bottom of that top 1% still shares a lot with most of us humans, and have less resources to exploit tax loopholes. The top 1% inculdes millions of people! Look at the top 20K earners. They still have most of the wealth, but their tax picture is different than most people in that 1%
Do your professors know much about polling? Any serious political poll weights its data based on the expected 'shape' of the population. So, even if 75% of the respondents were democrats, or women, or asian, the final results would not be affected very much.
I'd rather have the Spanish solution: Ignore the solar noon altogether. Spain is in the same time zone as most of eastern Europe, so it's never dawn at 6, but there's light much later in the day.
As it is now in the US, many hours of sunlight are wasted unless you wake up at 6, and do something for two hours before getting to work. Instead, it's dark very early, so anything you'll do after coming from work in the winter will be done in darkness.
If noon is at the middle of the day, office hours should start at 6 or 7.
My company spent A YEAR looking for quality Java programmers in Missouri. All the experienced candidates we interviewed were little better than someone fresh out of school, and, for the position, that didn't cut it. In the end, we started to look at H1-Bs, and hired one that was unhappy with his former employer. He asked for pretty good money and got it.
At certain positions, the problem is qualifications, not salary. If you need someone to be a lead developer, limiting yourself to Americans is a great way to spend many months shifting through people that have been programming for many years, but have really used their time to learn anything valuable. The more you open the pool, the easier the chances of ending up finding a good candidate.
An employer still has a lot more power over the H1-B employee than over an American. Most H1-Bs want to be sponsored for a Green Card, and that's expensive, takes a long while, and the process gets longer with badly timed job switches mid stream. Many companies won't even bother with an H1-B transfer, so their job options are also much more limited.
Want to lower abuse? Lower fees for the applications for H1-Bs that already have a valid H1-B for another company, and make Green Cards more available. As it is, people use 3 and 4 H1B waiting for permanent residency, while still working in the US. Those people don't count for the H1-B visa limits anyway. Why not increase the green cards allotted to employment-based requests? If anything, they'd make salaries rise, as people's job mobility increases.
The H1-B system works just fine as a transition for entry level employees that studies in the US. Practical training visas don't cover enough time to handle the long initial green card period, so they get extended into H1-Bs, which will let them continue to work for you.
Picking a random, experienced H1-B straight from India, China or Europe is no different than trying to hire an experienced programmer: It's very difficult to find a good programmer, no matter what. You really need to use references, have very good interviewing skills, or just luck out.
That's because American schools actually pay attention to their sports teams. I was taught in a European high school, and while there were at least a dozen different competitive teams, nobody gave a rat's ass about how well or bad the team did. Nobody went to see then play. There were no letterman jackets for team members: The only reason one would know that you were in a team is because you stayed in school after classes. There were no special considerations for jocks that underperformed. They'd just fail their classes, and get kicked from the team.
On the other hand, the top 5% of students received props. Who got the girls? The students with good grades, decent looks, and some social skills.
That's a known problem in Guitar Hero 3. The jump from the top of medium to the beginning of hard is just way too steep. That was not an issue in guitar hero I and II.
My recommendation? move to hard Bass. Bass is much easier than guitar, and you'll get used to the orange button slowly. That should make hard doable.
Or you could play rock band, which doesn't have the problem at all.
So are you telling me you've never seen someone get a great grasp of a concept that takes most people months to master? Or solve a design problem in a matter of seconds, while a team of 6 people, with just as much experience, have failed to find an acceptable solution for months?
Intelligent people don't have to work as hard to get the same results in many situations. That's the point of being intelligent. Some environments will ask more of intelligent people, but that's an issue of the environment, and those environments are typically a very twisted school or some parents trying to be evenhanded. After that, those environments go away. I've yet to see a workplace that asks more from an intelligent person than from a more average employee, just because they seem intelligent, and not because they have a position with more responsibility and a better salary.
Of course different wages are fair. But having everyone in accordance of what they get from the state is also fair. The government safeguards property. The more you earn, the more property is safeguarded, from foreign invasion, a local thug, or even a large corporation.
There's also the need to penalize those that were born to riches, and haven't done a single thing on their lives other than let other people invest their money. Is Paris Hilton a hard working American, deserving of every dollar she has?
The fact is, parental economic status is such a good predictor of the wealth of their offspring that it's not hard to argue that, in the end, wealth has little to do with being hard working or innovating, but with being born with the means of success.
As a side note, do you know who likes sales taxes more than anything? Foreigners like me. I plan to retire outside of the US. By using only sales taxes, instead of just deferring tax payments using retirement accounts, I could just avoid getting taxed altogether in all money I just save and invest. A family of 4 Americans with the same salary spends more than I do, so they'd get tax significantly higher, and would get all their money taxed for retiring in the US. One has to love a taxing system that punishes the American family and helps the opportunistic European.
Some of us, who favor gun control, do not have any problem whatsoever with this decision. It seems like a perfectly reasonable view of the constitution as written. Trying to say otherwise is intellectually dishonest.
What I question is the constitution itself: Is the right to bear arms really a key element to protest against excessive government control? India didn't gain their independence through guns. Today, we don't need them.
On the other hand, the right of privacy, not clearly stated in the American constitution, is necessary, and should be added. There was no need for it in the 1800s, if just because it was impossible to violate with their technology. It was pretty easy to keep the content of your conversations private: don't talk near a government official. Today, you can be snooped on alone in your home, over a phone, or on the internet. Technology has created a new issue, that deserves a constitutional amendment. Some European countries with constitutions that came after the telephone do cover the right of privacy explicitly. To become a freer country, America must follow their lead.
Having those same people compete with you from their home countries, where the employment costs are so much lower, does not lower wages in the US, right?
It's better to have people compete with you on your own turn than on theirs.
The premium isn't bad at all now that the MacBook Pro was just upgraded, but it grows larger every day after release, because Apple doesn't drop prices as time goes by.
For the plan white MacBook, their prices in February 2007 were the same as in the first week of January of 08, and the specs were the same too. You could get a PC with the same features for about $100 less when it came out. 11 Months later, the PC is last year's model, discounted everywhere, while the MacBook hasn't dropped a dollar. Until, in one week, the Messiah comes and updates all of its features keeping the same price, making everyone that bought one three weeks later feel ripped off.
I've interviewed more than a few new hires over the years.
First, if you are straight out of school, chances are you're not highly skilled. Have you dealt with any code bases with at least 200K lines of code? How many times have you worked in a team larger than 6?
Then, there's the interviewing skills. I'd not hire a rookie that ever claimed that 50k is chump change for what he can do. I'd be afraid you'd jump ship in under a year, just due to attitude.
After that, your problem might be your location. There's areas where there's so many experienced programmers that one rarely has to hire straight out of school for anything other than helpdesk jobs. In other places, like most of the midwest, it's still relatively easy to land a job, as long as you keep your salary expectations in check. $50 is a little high around here for no experience, but you could probably get $47K or so.
The students would rather have an easier path to green cards, and eventually citizenship, but it's not the most popular idea among most Americans.
We all know that most people's problem with illegal immigration and H1-Bs has nothing to do with the illegals being illegal or the H1-Bs lowering wages: It's plain old racism. Increasing the green card quotas would just bring more people with strange accents into the country, and that's not something that middle america wants.
I for one find it ridiculous, but I see the racism every day.
Because the department that deals with immigration, USCIS, is part of DHS.
Yes, that's how Bush decided to organize it. No, it doesn't make much sense to me, but having a department of homeland security doesn't make sense to me in the first place.
I for one think this is madness. Why? because there's no way to be 100% secure on the internet. It doesn't matter what tools you use, or how you do it: bugs happen, and from bugs come exploits, and from exploits, bank fraud. If the bank is to blame, many things can be done about it systematically by banks. They have the resources to enhance security, and the ability to talk to other banks to deal with fraudulent transactions.
If the user is to blame, the banks don't give a crap. If your money flies away, they wouldn't care. Transferring all your funds to a russian account? oh well, they used the correct password, so it's the customer's fault. A bank can handle it if one in ten thousand transactions is fraudulent. All an average Joe needs to have their finances wrecked is ONE transaction. Which would be acceptable and all, if there was such thing as 100% security.
Just think about it: what do you need to have real security? Even a normally trusted site can be hacked to embed a 0 day exploit of any browser, in any OS. So you better have a banking-only browser. Even if you do, chances are your OS isn't truly safe from a privilege escalation attack of some sort. So I guess you need to run a separate install of the OS, used just for banking. And then someone could run a man in the middle attack after hacking your router, which leads to even more layers of security, all of which can still be broken.
In the end, nothing short of a closed banking appliance connected directly to their network is free from tampering. And that's just because our friend the bank would be liable for the defects in its software and hardware.
With laws like that, expect a booming banking insurance industry, where insurance companies take the risks that normal people can't take. How is that any better than what we have now?
It's the opposite of Spain, which got itself in the same timezone as Germany. In the western side of Spain, the sun starts to come up after 8 am! This guarantees light for as long as possible. In the summer, the sun is still up at 11pm. Now, in the beginning of march, dawn is 7:54 am , and dusk at 7:17 pm. Compare that to St Louis, where dawn is at 6:01 am and dusk at 6:23 pm.
I agree with the GP, but the problem is not that more experienced programmers can't learn. Top programmers don't reach their status by just experience. With little talent, 15 years of experience don't make a great programmer. It's easy to spot talent after working with any programmer for a few months. This means that in most cases, top talent will be spotted by others quickly, and will probably not have to ever look for a job outside of their network of former coworkers after just a few years.
How many good programmers that have been coding for 5 years don't have a bunch of friends that would jump at the opportunity of getting their company to hire them? In my experience, the local programmers that have trouble landing new jobs are those that most former coworkers would never recommend. Every good hire I've seen over the years was either from someone moving, someone without much experience, or a referral.
Slashdot Mirror
Spain has an universal health care system, and yet people can go to a doctor outside of the system if they wish: There's less lines, but higher fees. This makes private insurance much cheaper, because they really are not expected to cover the disaster situations: In most ways, they are just a supplement over what the public system won't take care of as quickly as you'd like.
As it is now in the US, with people spending a thousand a month insurance still having to spend hundreds of dollars on fees and deductibles for visiting an emergency room, does insurance even make sense?
And yet, poor people pay more sales tax relative to their income than the rich, if just because their expenses are a higher percentage of their income.
So, while they are flat in principle, when push comes to shove sales taxes are pretty much irrelevant for someone making half a million a year, and are a significant part of the budget for someone making 35K.
Would you consider a sales tax that only applies to vehicles that cost over 50K to be a measure that taxes all people equally?
If you don't like a game built around a lot of rules to be min-maxed, you play one of many other RPGs that stay far away from the D&D family, and are light on rules precisely to avoid this very issue.
In D&Ds case, the reason min-maxers are bad is because they turn a cooperative game into a competitive game: If your character is not tuned and theirs is, yours actions become less relevant, and eventually you don't feel like you are playing.
In the stock market today, a big problem is that many people aren't playing with their own money: They've been entrusted with money because they are supposedly experts. In the end, the fall they take once they go too far is losing their job, not their life savings. Same thing with corporate managers, that will be rehired by their buddies in other companies if they drive their corporation into the ground.
And yet, he'd have a million problems getting the Spanish credits accepted back in the US. Not to mention all the fun of big classes, teachers that don't care, tests designed to make people fail, and an outdated curriculum.
I actually moved to the US after seeing the awful world of Spanish state universities. Some foreigners enjoy themselves in classes designed mostly for them, but for core courses? It always ends up being a mistake.
He could try SLU's Madrid Campus, an American university in Spain, but I don't think they offer enough CS classes to make it worthwhile, unless he's already expecting to 'waste' a semester.
I hated NWN out of the box. The campaign was a turd sandwich, boring as they get. The party size limitation made the game into a mess too: You cannot really have a full party, so no adventures that are challenging and interesting for all classes could be set up in the first place. D&D was designed with groups of 4,5 characters in mind: How can you play with just 2?
The [arty interactions were also severely limited. Half of the fun in BG was to hear your party bickering. NWN got rid of that too.
I'd not say it was the worst RPG ever, but it was definitely a step down, and only gets closer to BGII in quality after downloading the very best user generated content.
The top 1% is a pretty deceitful way of measuring rich people.
First, being in the top 1% in income is not the same as being in the top 1% richest. What if the wealth is all land? what if it's invested? Until the wealth is sold, there's relatively little income (like dividends), even if the investment is appreciating yearly.
Then, there's ways of detaching yourself of your investment income. A corporation or a charity could be holding your wealth and spending money to your benefit.
And finally, the top 1% is too large to mean rich people. the bottom of that top 1% still shares a lot with most of us humans, and have less resources to exploit tax loopholes. The top 1% inculdes millions of people! Look at the top 20K earners. They still have most of the wealth, but their tax picture is different than most people in that 1%
Do your professors know much about polling? Any serious political poll weights its data based on the expected 'shape' of the population. So, even if 75% of the respondents were democrats, or women, or asian, the final results would not be affected very much.
I'd rather have the Spanish solution: Ignore the solar noon altogether. Spain is in the same time zone as most of eastern Europe, so it's never dawn at 6, but there's light much later in the day.
As it is now in the US, many hours of sunlight are wasted unless you wake up at 6, and do something for two hours before getting to work. Instead, it's dark very early, so anything you'll do after coming from work in the winter will be done in darkness.
If noon is at the middle of the day, office hours should start at 6 or 7.
My company spent A YEAR looking for quality Java programmers in Missouri. All the experienced candidates we interviewed were little better than someone fresh out of school, and, for the position, that didn't cut it. In the end, we started to look at H1-Bs, and hired one that was unhappy with his former employer. He asked for pretty good money and got it.
At certain positions, the problem is qualifications, not salary. If you need someone to be a lead developer, limiting yourself to Americans is a great way to spend many months shifting through people that have been programming for many years, but have really used their time to learn anything valuable. The more you open the pool, the easier the chances of ending up finding a good candidate.
An employer still has a lot more power over the H1-B employee than over an American. Most H1-Bs want to be sponsored for a Green Card, and that's expensive, takes a long while, and the process gets longer with badly timed job switches mid stream. Many companies won't even bother with an H1-B transfer, so their job options are also much more limited.
Want to lower abuse? Lower fees for the applications for H1-Bs that already have a valid H1-B for another company, and make Green Cards more available. As it is, people use 3 and 4 H1B waiting for permanent residency, while still working in the US. Those people don't count for the H1-B visa limits anyway. Why not increase the green cards allotted to employment-based requests? If anything, they'd make salaries rise, as people's job mobility increases.
The H1-B system works just fine as a transition for entry level employees that studies in the US. Practical training visas don't cover enough time to handle the long initial green card period, so they get extended into H1-Bs, which will let them continue to work for you.
Picking a random, experienced H1-B straight from India, China or Europe is no different than trying to hire an experienced programmer: It's very difficult to find a good programmer, no matter what. You really need to use references, have very good interviewing skills, or just luck out.
That's because American schools actually pay attention to their sports teams. I was taught in a European high school, and while there were at least a dozen different competitive teams, nobody gave a rat's ass about how well or bad the team did. Nobody went to see then play. There were no letterman jackets for team members: The only reason one would know that you were in a team is because you stayed in school after classes. There were no special considerations for jocks that underperformed. They'd just fail their classes, and get kicked from the team.
On the other hand, the top 5% of students received props. Who got the girls? The students with good grades, decent looks, and some social skills.
That's a known problem in Guitar Hero 3. The jump from the top of medium to the beginning of hard is just way too steep. That was not an issue in guitar hero I and II.
My recommendation? move to hard Bass. Bass is much easier than guitar, and you'll get used to the orange button slowly. That should make hard doable.
Or you could play rock band, which doesn't have the problem at all.
No.
So are you telling me you've never seen someone get a great grasp of a concept that takes most people months to master? Or solve a design problem in a matter of seconds, while a team of 6 people, with just as much experience, have failed to find an acceptable solution for months?
Intelligent people don't have to work as hard to get the same results in many situations. That's the point of being intelligent. Some environments will ask more of intelligent people, but that's an issue of the environment, and those environments are typically a very twisted school or some parents trying to be evenhanded. After that, those environments go away. I've yet to see a workplace that asks more from an intelligent person than from a more average employee, just because they seem intelligent, and not because they have a position with more responsibility and a better salary.
Of course different wages are fair. But having everyone in accordance of what they get from the state is also fair. The government safeguards property. The more you earn, the more property is safeguarded, from foreign invasion, a local thug, or even a large corporation.
There's also the need to penalize those that were born to riches, and haven't done a single thing on their lives other than let other people invest their money. Is Paris Hilton a hard working American, deserving of every dollar she has?
The fact is, parental economic status is such a good predictor of the wealth of their offspring that it's not hard to argue that, in the end, wealth has little to do with being hard working or innovating, but with being born with the means of success.
As a side note, do you know who likes sales taxes more than anything? Foreigners like me. I plan to retire outside of the US. By using only sales taxes, instead of just deferring tax payments using retirement accounts, I could just avoid getting taxed altogether in all money I just save and invest. A family of 4 Americans with the same salary spends more than I do, so they'd get tax significantly higher, and would get all their money taxed for retiring in the US. One has to love a taxing system that punishes the American family and helps the opportunistic European.
Some of us, who favor gun control, do not have any problem whatsoever with this decision. It seems like a perfectly reasonable view of the constitution as written. Trying to say otherwise is intellectually dishonest.
What I question is the constitution itself: Is the right to bear arms really a key element to protest against excessive government control? India didn't gain their independence through guns. Today, we don't need them.
On the other hand, the right of privacy, not clearly stated in the American constitution, is necessary, and should be added. There was no need for it in the 1800s, if just because it was impossible to violate with their technology. It was pretty easy to keep the content of your conversations private: don't talk near a government official. Today, you can be snooped on alone in your home, over a phone, or on the internet. Technology has created a new issue, that deserves a constitutional amendment. Some European countries with constitutions that came after the telephone do cover the right of privacy explicitly. To become a freer country, America must follow their lead.
Having those same people compete with you from their home countries, where the employment costs are so much lower, does not lower wages in the US, right?
It's better to have people compete with you on your own turn than on theirs.
The premium isn't bad at all now that the MacBook Pro was just upgraded, but it grows larger every day after release, because Apple doesn't drop prices as time goes by.
For the plan white MacBook, their prices in February 2007 were the same as in the first week of January of 08, and the specs were the same too. You could get a PC with the same features for about $100 less when it came out. 11 Months later, the PC is last year's model, discounted everywhere, while the MacBook hasn't dropped a dollar. Until, in one week, the Messiah comes and updates all of its features keeping the same price, making everyone that bought one three weeks later feel ripped off.
I've interviewed more than a few new hires over the years.
First, if you are straight out of school, chances are you're not highly skilled. Have you dealt with any code bases with at least 200K lines of code? How many times have you worked in a team larger than 6?
Then, there's the interviewing skills. I'd not hire a rookie that ever claimed that 50k is chump change for what he can do. I'd be afraid you'd jump ship in under a year, just due to attitude.
After that, your problem might be your location. There's areas where there's so many experienced programmers that one rarely has to hire straight out of school for anything other than helpdesk jobs. In other places, like most of the midwest, it's still relatively easy to land a job, as long as you keep your salary expectations in check. $50 is a little high around here for no experience, but you could probably get $47K or so.
The students would rather have an easier path to green cards, and eventually citizenship, but it's not the most popular idea among most Americans.
We all know that most people's problem with illegal immigration and H1-Bs has nothing to do with the illegals being illegal or the H1-Bs lowering wages: It's plain old racism. Increasing the green card quotas would just bring more people with strange accents into the country, and that's not something that middle america wants.
I for one find it ridiculous, but I see the racism every day.
Because the department that deals with immigration, USCIS, is part of DHS.
Yes, that's how Bush decided to organize it. No, it doesn't make much sense to me, but having a department of homeland security doesn't make sense to me in the first place.
I for one think this is madness. Why? because there's no way to be 100% secure on the internet. It doesn't matter what tools you use, or how you do it: bugs happen, and from bugs come exploits, and from exploits, bank fraud. If the bank is to blame, many things can be done about it systematically by banks. They have the resources to enhance security, and the ability to talk to other banks to deal with fraudulent transactions.
If the user is to blame, the banks don't give a crap. If your money flies away, they wouldn't care. Transferring all your funds to a russian account? oh well, they used the correct password, so it's the customer's fault. A bank can handle it if one in ten thousand transactions is fraudulent. All an average Joe needs to have their finances wrecked is ONE transaction. Which would be acceptable and all, if there was such thing as 100% security.
Just think about it: what do you need to have real security? Even a normally trusted site can be hacked to embed a 0 day exploit of any browser, in any OS. So you better have a banking-only browser. Even if you do, chances are your OS isn't truly safe from a privilege escalation attack of some sort. So I guess you need to run a separate install of the OS, used just for banking. And then someone could run a man in the middle attack after hacking your router, which leads to even more layers of security, all of which can still be broken.
In the end, nothing short of a closed banking appliance connected directly to their network is free from tampering. And that's just because our friend the bank would be liable for the defects in its software and hardware.
With laws like that, expect a booming banking insurance industry, where insurance companies take the risks that normal people can't take. How is that any better than what we have now?
Alienware? You know they were bought by Dell back in 06, right?
It's the opposite of Spain, which got itself in the same timezone as Germany. In the western side of Spain, the sun starts to come up after 8 am! This guarantees light for as long as possible. In the summer, the sun is still up at 11pm. Now, in the beginning of march, dawn is 7:54 am , and dusk at 7:17 pm. Compare that to St Louis, where dawn is at 6:01 am and dusk at 6:23 pm.
I agree with the GP, but the problem is not that more experienced programmers can't learn. Top programmers don't reach their status by just experience. With little talent, 15 years of experience don't make a great programmer. It's easy to spot talent after working with any programmer for a few months. This means that in most cases, top talent will be spotted by others quickly, and will probably not have to ever look for a job outside of their network of former coworkers after just a few years.
How many good programmers that have been coding for 5 years don't have a bunch of friends that would jump at the opportunity of getting their company to hire them? In my experience, the local programmers that have trouble landing new jobs are those that most former coworkers would never recommend. Every good hire I've seen over the years was either from someone moving, someone without much experience, or a referral.