I suspect you had the wrong product for your customer. These are cheap home grade devices - I've seen a few in people's homes. I would never use them in a business.
Europe has managed it for decades. But typically the US is behind on social issues. It'll get there, much like the rest of the social issues of our time just not yet. Trouble is it usually takes the older ones to die of old age first.
"We tell people they can't discriminate on the basis..."... in certain commercial spheres of life. That's philosophically arguable either way, but at least is some way from the notion of stereotype thought-crime.
Regardless, I'd take governments' lecturing about non-discrimination more seriously if they stopped their own actual overt race/gender/etc.-favoritism.
I'm not asking for people to stop being sexist arseholes - just equal pay and equal rights. It's not difficult and well within the rights of Congress under the Constitution.
This isn't a dystopia - unless you count America as being a dystopia. You asked me for a citation - I gave you one.
I'm not arguing (in this instance) in favor of interference in education, etc. I'm not even searching for root causes. I'm arguing in favor of government telling people not to be dicks. We tell people they can't discriminate on the basis of color, why can't we tell them not to discriminate on the basis of gender.
Indeed - I'd forgotten The Sun - that shining example of investigative journalism in my native land - had created a website to cater to the lowest brow segment of it's audience.
So you think women do less work than men - even though their jobs are exactly the same.
Granted I've never had to employ anyone (male or female), but I would see the value in what they do regardless of their gender.
It's telling that you decide to realise that there is a significant pay discrepancy between men and women, and even with all the evidence that supports it, and ignore it all anyway and decide it's a non-issue.
Well the answer to that is quite simple - we'll knock off 9% from your earnings and see how you like it (and seeing as most people's pensions are tied to their earnings, their pension too). You've done nothing different from what you do now - but your employer just wants to discriminate against you for whatever reason. And every other employer you look at wants to discriminate against you by the same amount, so you can't even go find a job elsewhere.
You do realise that most women in the workplace taking time off for pregnancy are in their 20's and early 30's - biology limits that quite well*. So you're telling me that the 40 something woman, with the same experiences, doing the same work should be paid 9% less than the 40 something man? 9% is still statistically significant.
And what about the women who don't want children/can't have children? Are you telling me they should be paid 9% less too? Just because they are biologically different from men? What about people who are biologically different and have black skin instead of white - should they be paid less too?
Discrimination is discrimination and brushing it off in the face of statistics like the ones I provided above makes you part of the problem, not part of the solution.
* Sure there are outliers, teen pregnancy and women in their 50s getting pregnant. I did say *most*
Most top of the line vending machines can report to central command when they are jammed, along with their apparent inventory level.
Eventually a real life human will have to go re-fill the machine and at the same time do a stock take. When there's a big enough discrepancy between the stock level and the inventory level an engineer goes and checks the machine out to see why it's double dropping. And perhaps fits a camera at the same time to look for employees who are being less than honest
Supply closets aren't just used for storing supplies? Although I'm not sure Facebook (or any other company) would agree to allowing their employees to have sex on company time.
Ok - given that you're too lazy to even Google it: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1983185,00.html
Even after taking into account various things like education and occupation, there is still a statistically significant difference in pay. 91 cents on the dollar, if I'm reading the article right. So yes there is a pay discrepancy problem.
Why shouldn't women have more pension - or at least the same pension as men?
What is wrong with some stereotypes? each individual may be different but in aggregate they can be adequately described by stereotypes (as a first-order approximation). It is indeed Orwellian that the EU believe they have the right to create *thought crimes* instead of promoting free thinking. In fact this is the biggest and most retarded mistake of the political class. They are for diversity and every perversity - except for the diversity that actually matters, *diversity of thought*. It is anathema to the political class to allow views that are against their orthodoxy and they will suppress other views ruthlessly (which is what we see here). Orwellian is a great word to describe the belief of the EU governors that they have the right to regulate the thought of EU citizens. So don't scoff so lightly at this.
FTFY. The political right is just as bad and Orwellian. Try standing up at a Tea Party conference and say that a single payer healthcare system is the best (with supporting evidence), and all three of the attendees will shout you down for being a socialist.
What exactly is wrong with boys playing with dolls, and girls playing with guns? My son has a doll. I know grown men who had dolls as kids. Unless you're going to suggest that this might make them gay.
The Sun newspaper in the UK used to (and might still do) have a girl with her boobs out on page 3 every day. Other papers in the UK do it too.
The Sun has a terrible reputation with anyone who has a brain, for shitty tabloid "journalism". It's also owned by that "Captain of Industry" Rupert Murdoch.
The board of directors - all of whom are executive level - and get to decide each other's pay. A typical I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine - and we'll all fuck over the employees whilst we're at it.
No - it's just that CEOs are in charge of their own pay. So they get to determine what is 'fair' - unbelievable rises in their pay and bonuses, and flatline for everyone else. Nothing subjective about that.
If the company as a whole is being more productive than every, why shouldn't EVERYONE who is contributing to that productivity get compensated more instead of the just the executive level?
The answer to the question: Are companies all stupid?
No - the real question you need to ask is: Who approves the pay increases and golden parachutes? Oh yes the CEOs. So when you put people in charge of their own pay, at the expense of people they psychopathically hate (read: employees) guess what - they shaft the employees and get paid enormous amounts to do it.
Slashdot Mirror
I suspect you had the wrong product for your customer. These are cheap home grade devices - I've seen a few in people's homes. I would never use them in a business.
You need to admit that the song does not have a single instance of actual irony in it.
I always figured that was why it was called Ironic. A song about irony, that didn't have any irony in it.
Europe has managed it for decades. But typically the US is behind on social issues. It'll get there, much like the rest of the social issues of our time just not yet. Trouble is it usually takes the older ones to die of old age first.
"We tell people they can't discriminate on the basis ..." ... in certain commercial spheres of life. That's philosophically arguable either way, but at least is some way from the notion of stereotype thought-crime.
Regardless, I'd take governments' lecturing about non-discrimination more seriously if they stopped their own actual overt race/gender/etc.-favoritism.
I'm not asking for people to stop being sexist arseholes - just equal pay and equal rights. It's not difficult and well within the rights of Congress under the Constitution.
This isn't a dystopia - unless you count America as being a dystopia. You asked me for a citation - I gave you one.
I'm not arguing (in this instance) in favor of interference in education, etc. I'm not even searching for root causes. I'm arguing in favor of government telling people not to be dicks. We tell people they can't discriminate on the basis of color, why can't we tell them not to discriminate on the basis of gender.
Indeed - I'd forgotten The Sun - that shining example of investigative journalism in my native land - had created a website to cater to the lowest brow segment of it's audience.
So you think women do less work than men - even though their jobs are exactly the same.
Granted I've never had to employ anyone (male or female), but I would see the value in what they do regardless of their gender.
It's telling that you decide to realise that there is a significant pay discrepancy between men and women, and even with all the evidence that supports it, and ignore it all anyway and decide it's a non-issue.
You don't happen to vote Republican do you?
But women do earn it - just as much as men. Just as black people earn it as much as white people.
Well the answer to that is quite simple - we'll knock off 9% from your earnings and see how you like it (and seeing as most people's pensions are tied to their earnings, their pension too). You've done nothing different from what you do now - but your employer just wants to discriminate against you for whatever reason. And every other employer you look at wants to discriminate against you by the same amount, so you can't even go find a job elsewhere.
You do realise that most women in the workplace taking time off for pregnancy are in their 20's and early 30's - biology limits that quite well*. So you're telling me that the 40 something woman, with the same experiences, doing the same work should be paid 9% less than the 40 something man? 9% is still statistically significant.
And what about the women who don't want children/can't have children? Are you telling me they should be paid 9% less too? Just because they are biologically different from men? What about people who are biologically different and have black skin instead of white - should they be paid less too?
Discrimination is discrimination and brushing it off in the face of statistics like the ones I provided above makes you part of the problem, not part of the solution.
* Sure there are outliers, teen pregnancy and women in their 50s getting pregnant. I did say *most*
Most top of the line vending machines can report to central command when they are jammed, along with their apparent inventory level.
Eventually a real life human will have to go re-fill the machine and at the same time do a stock take. When there's a big enough discrepancy between the stock level and the inventory level an engineer goes and checks the machine out to see why it's double dropping. And perhaps fits a camera at the same time to look for employees who are being less than honest
Supply closets aren't just used for storing supplies? Although I'm not sure Facebook (or any other company) would agree to allowing their employees to have sex on company time.
Ok - given that you're too lazy to even Google it: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1983185,00.html
Even after taking into account various things like education and occupation, there is still a statistically significant difference in pay. 91 cents on the dollar, if I'm reading the article right. So yes there is a pay discrepancy problem.
Why shouldn't women have more pension - or at least the same pension as men?
No - equal rights regardless of difference has not been achieved:
The list goes on and on and on.
You've not been paying much attention to EU politics. A number of countries there have recently banned Islamic headdresses
What is wrong with some stereotypes? each individual may be different but in aggregate they can be adequately described by stereotypes (as a first-order approximation). It is indeed Orwellian that the EU believe they have the right to create *thought crimes* instead of promoting free thinking. In fact this is the biggest and most retarded mistake of the political class. They are for diversity and every perversity - except for the diversity that actually matters, *diversity of thought*. It is anathema to the political class to allow views that are against their orthodoxy and they will suppress other views ruthlessly (which is what we see here). Orwellian is a great word to describe the belief of the EU governors that they have the right to regulate the thought of EU citizens. So don't scoff so lightly at this.
FTFY. The political right is just as bad and Orwellian. Try standing up at a Tea Party conference and say that a single payer healthcare system is the best (with supporting evidence), and all three of the attendees will shout you down for being a socialist.
What exactly is wrong with boys playing with dolls, and girls playing with guns? My son has a doll. I know grown men who had dolls as kids. Unless you're going to suggest that this might make them gay.
Incidentally: GI Joe is a doll.
The Nazi's haven't risen to power in Germany since WW2.
Ergo, banning Nazi logos has worked exactly as intended.
Most people would agree that's a good thing.
So you think that because men and women are biologically different, they should be paid different amounts for the same work?
Surely being able to sue for libel and slander is a curb on free speech.
The Sun newspaper in the UK used to (and might still do) have a girl with her boobs out on page 3 every day. Other papers in the UK do it too.
The Sun has a terrible reputation with anyone who has a brain, for shitty tabloid "journalism". It's also owned by that "Captain of Industry" Rupert Murdoch.
Tell that to mime artists. Obviously they wouldn't have a thing or two to say about that
The board of directors - all of whom are executive level - and get to decide each other's pay. A typical I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine - and we'll all fuck over the employees whilst we're at it.
No - it's just that CEOs are in charge of their own pay. So they get to determine what is 'fair' - unbelievable rises in their pay and bonuses, and flatline for everyone else. Nothing subjective about that.
If the company as a whole is being more productive than every, why shouldn't EVERYONE who is contributing to that productivity get compensated more instead of the just the executive level?
The answer to the question: Are companies all stupid?
No - the real question you need to ask is: Who approves the pay increases and golden parachutes?
Oh yes the CEOs. So when you put people in charge of their own pay, at the expense of people they psychopathically hate (read: employees) guess what - they shaft the employees and get paid enormous amounts to do it.
If all Democrats overspend, how come Clinton had a budget surplus?