Support cutoff does not mean that the OS stops working.
Of course, I am not sure what the regular ( not to mention extended ) support is worth in the first place. I suppose it gives PBH's some comfort level.
If they are a sloppy enough programmer not to look at what is going on, and to ensure the size of the destination, they will be sloppy enough to use the same dratted variable in both spots, drool all over the keyboard and move on to the next sloppy bit of code.
"Why would anyone in the market have had an interest in loaning to high-risk individuals if it wasn't for the "affordable housing" and "homeownership for all" agenda pushed by both the Clinton and Bush administrations?"
Those who knew that they would only be originating the loan, taking fees ( and profit ) and immediately selling that loan off to some other company for defaulting on?
"well, it's not like the guy treated his prisoners like honored guests"
It's not about how *he* treated his prisoners, it's about us saying and thinking we are better than he, about our ideals. And not living up to that standard.
Another thing that operates for some people is that there is a good deal more difficulty in moving than one might think...
For me, if I were to move far enough that economic conditions were different, my oldest Daughter's mother would kick up a fight about custody ( I have custody now ), I would be either have to leave my ailing mother behind ( my brother would probably pick up this task ), or move her with us, and my youngest daughter's mother *might* have issues that fall into similar scenarios as above ( custody battle, or having to relocate her as well... ).
I presume you dealt with a bail bonds corporation?
They are a third party to the whole situation, and their product is getting you released from jail if the court allows this, and sets a bail amount. They don't know if you are guilty or innocent, the whole question is beyond their ken.
From that 10%, they pay an insurance company some percentage for standing as Surety. They also maintain staff to track you down in case you skip a court date. And the staff to run the office, and run down to the jail to post the documents that get you out.
Also, if it is a California bail bonds agency, they are required to charge 10% ( unless, as I understand it, you are represented by council, a member of the military, or a union, and can prove one of the preceding, in which case, they can charge 8% ).
Coming soon, wages fall, so the ability for these companies to sell products at their acustomed prices also falls, the wages are all in India, China and points non-US, the products are bought there, the US companies become surplus to requirements, as the Indians and Chinese and others stand up their own companies ( they are plenty smart, and the executives are willing to working for less also ) and take the American's lunch.
*That* is also reality. Better get used to that, too.
"By removing it it would cause prices to fall in today's economy"
Maybe, maybe not. I dont think so, by and large. They can also keep their prices right where they are, and satisfy Wall Street's demand for earnings growth on the difference between the falling wage cost and the same old price. Can they do this forever? Probably not, as the number of people who can afford to pay will shrink. And the kinds of things that people *have* to have will be the ones where they can forestall a drop in price longest. And there are real people who have to find a way thru this painful time.
"and people would also have more jobs."
Maybe, maybe not. If they earn less than they have to pay to make ends meet, they may chose welfare ( if it is available ). And if they do have a job as you decribe, it begins to sound like serfdom, until this supposed equilibrium is reached. Once workers are there, will employers let them back up? History tells me no.
Cant you just see John Wayne standing up when confronted with something that might be wrong on "his side of the fence", and whining "but the other guy is a big dumb poo poo head!".
That is kinda how you sound.
If you think he is wrong, say so, and say how. If you think he is right, agree or leave it alone.
"but because they make it relatively easy to get very, very, skilled people from overseas."
That is the theory. Counterexample: I have worked with/interviewed several people over on H1B's, not one was "very very skilled". Mostly just average. Not bad, but not stellar. Not even great. Good.
"What would be good though would be to replace H1Bs with an expanded green card program, so fear of losing one's job does not factor into the equation"
You are right, but H1Bs make perfect sense if you think of it as companies knowing about and liking the leverage they have over H1Bs.
"Why is the life and labor of a person in this country inherently worth more than one of another country?"
It isn't. But there are effects of laying off the American worker that harm America and our society. I don't care much for all the nationality nonsense either, but it is there, on both sides. The Indians and Chinese and other nationalities we accept H1Bs from ( and outsource to ) are *not* as open and caring ( not that they are evil or anything ) as we are, and they are looking out for themselves. We need to look out for ourselves ( not that that has hurt others needlessly ).
During the dot com boom days, everyone wanted to be a programmer. Why? The wages were high. The market works for this. So, if companies want to complain about the availability of American IT workers, they have no farther than themselves to look. Pay a good wage, they will come. While the wage is small, they will not.
Capitalism and employment based on merit and all is fine for most companies, until they are sweating - then the government/nanny needs to protect them from any possibility of harm.
There, fixed that for you. Or what do you think H1B's are *really* about. Protecting companies from the market affects that would raise wages and draw people into a career.
Competition is very good, but the playing field needs to be level.
And it is not "less skilled", the difference is expense. I know it is popular to bash both American ( and Indian ) workers, but they are ( both ) good. Allow the market to work on wages, and people will be drawn into programming and IT. Continue to depress wages artificially, and people will ( as we have seen ) avoid this career. I love how the market is king, unless it works against a company.
Another thing, who is buying the product? Americans? Outsourcing means that there are fewer Americans pulling down salaries where they can afford the product at the "first world" price. What will eventually happen is that wages will fall ( painfully, and across the economy ), then prices will have to fall to match. I think these companies are trading short term profits for long term bad times.
Slashdot Mirror
Good points.
Support cutoff does not mean that the OS stops working.
Of course, I am not sure what the regular ( not to mention extended ) support is worth in the first place. I suppose it gives PBH's some comfort level.
"If you always wait for the next release of that software, that car, or that style shoes you like you'll never end up with anything."
If you always upgrade, even when what you have is sufficient, you will never have any money. And those are my tax dollars being spent.
It still will not help.
If they are a sloppy enough programmer not to look at what is going on, and to ensure the size of the destination, they will be sloppy enough to use the same dratted variable in both spots, drool all over the keyboard and move on to the next sloppy bit of code.
By that analysis, everyone is losing potential money, as you can always claim that there would be someone who could pay more.
"Why would anyone in the market have had an interest in loaning to high-risk individuals if it wasn't for the "affordable housing" and "homeownership for all" agenda pushed by both the Clinton and Bush administrations?"
Those who knew that they would only be originating the loan, taking fees ( and profit ) and immediately selling that loan off to some other company for defaulting on?
Why are you bringing composers into this?
"well, it's not like the guy treated his prisoners like honored guests"
It's not about how *he* treated his prisoners, it's about us saying and thinking we are better than he, about our ideals. And not living up to that standard.
"So you tell me. You play CEO and tell me how would you convince Google engineers to quit Google and become operators"
I dunno, pay them a lot?
"in other words, the free market is about as undogmatic and unreligious a way to value discoveries as you can get"
Quite. But there are many who are religious and dogmatic about the free market.
"move somewhere else"
Another thing that operates for some people is that there is a good deal more difficulty in moving than one might think...
For me, if I were to move far enough that economic conditions were different, my oldest Daughter's mother would kick up a fight about custody ( I have custody now ), I would be either have to leave my ailing mother behind ( my brother would probably pick up this task ), or move her with us, and my youngest daughter's mother *might* have issues that fall into similar scenarios as above ( custody battle, or having to relocate her as well... ).
Someone needs to write a catchy song about it....
"We're not a perfect society, I don't think we'll ever have perfect rules."
That is quite true. But it does not justify that we should not *try* for a perfect society and perfect rules. As close as we can come to them.
Yeah. I agree, the Police keeping the 10% is pretty ridiculous.
I presume you dealt with a bail bonds corporation?
They are a third party to the whole situation, and their product is getting you released from jail if the court allows this, and sets a bail amount. They don't know if you are guilty or innocent, the whole question is beyond their ken.
From that 10%, they pay an insurance company some percentage for standing as Surety. They also maintain staff to track you down in case you skip a court date. And the staff to run the office, and run down to the jail to post the documents that get you out.
Also, if it is a California bail bonds agency, they are required to charge 10% ( unless, as I understand it, you are represented by council, a member of the military, or a union, and can prove one of the preceding, in which case, they can charge 8% ).
"That's reality. Better get used to it."
Coming soon, wages fall, so the ability for these companies to sell products at their acustomed prices also falls, the wages are all in India, China and points non-US, the products are bought there, the US companies become surplus to requirements, as the Indians and Chinese and others stand up their own companies ( they are plenty smart, and the executives are willing to working for less also ) and take the American's lunch.
*That* is also reality. Better get used to that, too.
"By removing it it would cause prices to fall in today's economy"
Maybe, maybe not. I dont think so, by and large. They can also keep their prices right where they are, and satisfy Wall Street's demand for earnings growth on the difference between the falling wage cost and the same old price. Can they do this forever? Probably not, as the number of people who can afford to pay will shrink. And the kinds of things that people *have* to have will be the ones where they can forestall a drop in price longest. And there are real people who have to find a way thru this painful time.
"and people would also have more jobs."
Maybe, maybe not. If they earn less than they have to pay to make ends meet, they may chose welfare ( if it is available ). And if they do have a job as you decribe, it begins to sound like serfdom, until this supposed equilibrium is reached. Once workers are there, will employers let them back up? History tells me no.
Cant you just see John Wayne standing up when confronted with something that might be wrong on "his side of the fence", and whining "but the other guy is a big dumb poo poo head!".
That is kinda how you sound.
If you think he is wrong, say so, and say how. If you think he is right, agree or leave it alone.
Or scare them off.
"but because they make it relatively easy to get very, very, skilled people from overseas."
That is the theory. Counterexample: I have worked with/interviewed several people over on H1B's, not one was "very very skilled". Mostly just average. Not bad, but not stellar. Not even great. Good.
"What would be good though would be to replace H1Bs with an expanded green card program, so fear of losing one's job does not factor into the equation"
You are right, but H1Bs make perfect sense if you think of it as companies knowing about and liking the leverage they have over H1Bs.
"Why is the life and labor of a person in this country inherently worth more than one of another country?"
It isn't. But there are effects of laying off the American worker that harm America and our society. I don't care much for all the nationality nonsense either, but it is there, on both sides. The Indians and Chinese and other nationalities we accept H1Bs from ( and outsource to ) are *not* as open and caring ( not that they are evil or anything ) as we are, and they are looking out for themselves. We need to look out for ourselves ( not that that has hurt others needlessly ).
Why is this all on the students?
During the dot com boom days, everyone wanted to be a programmer. Why? The wages were high. The market works for this. So, if companies want to complain about the availability of American IT workers, they have no farther than themselves to look. Pay a good wage, they will come. While the wage is small, they will not.
"heroes are the ones willing to take responsibility for themselves!"
Where are they now?
"That house, that food, and even that education would get cheaper."
The house will only get cheaper if sold. At a loss to someone.
The education is already a sunk cost, it happened in the past, and cannot get cheaper.
Capitalism and employment based on merit and all is fine for most companies, until they are sweating - then the government/nanny needs to protect them from any possibility of harm.
There, fixed that for you. Or what do you think H1B's are *really* about. Protecting companies from the market affects that would raise wages and draw people into a career.
Competition is very good, but the playing field needs to be level.
And it is not "less skilled", the difference is expense. I know it is popular to bash both American ( and Indian ) workers, but they are ( both ) good. Allow the market to work on wages, and people will be drawn into programming and IT. Continue to depress wages artificially, and people will ( as we have seen ) avoid this career. I love how the market is king, unless it works against a company.
Another thing, who is buying the product? Americans? Outsourcing means that there are fewer Americans pulling down salaries where they can afford the product at the "first world" price. What will eventually happen is that wages will fall ( painfully, and across the economy ), then prices will have to fall to match. I think these companies are trading short term profits for long term bad times.