Not really. The wage gap comes from the high unemployment rates and the glut of workers willing to replace you once you become more expensive than them. Yes, this is in part because of efficiency through technology and increased productivity, but it is also largely due to over regulation and competition with third world markets where costs in general will be cheaper all the way around.
Gallows and guillotines will do nothing other than make you feel good while making it worse. There was an article about how Elon Musk's empire sucked billions in government subsidies and later articles about how all his competitors do it too. This should tell us something about how hard it is to do business in the US and how regulation is limiting it. If these road blocks were not in place, subsidies would not be needed, employment numbers would be a lot higher, and employee wages would be higher also. Minimum wage jobs would go back to being stepping stones for inexperienced workers like they used to be instead of career paths they are today. I understand fast food joints need workers over 18 to get around child labor laws, but flipping burgers and asking 'you want fries with that' should not be a career choice to aspire to. Sadly, that is what it has come to in many places- most of which relish all the road blocks in the way of business.
So it's fine to be part of the problem as long as you don't break a law?
Yes, if a person acts lawfully, no matter how despicable you think his acts might be, it is still lawful. Change the law to make his acts unlawful and wait for him to violate those laws. That is what it means to be free. To be able to do anything you want lawfully unless a law passed making it unlawful.
Great, so everyone abusing social security (within the legal limits, just not within its intended function) is off the hook now and no longer a despicable sponge but actually a shrewd businessman!
No one is abusing social security if they are not breaking a law. You thinking there should be a law about that doesn't amount to anything until there actually is a law about that. Now you can have an opinion about how people lawfully use social security and if you purpose your opinion properly, you might get a law made that in fact does make this illegal, but until then, it is just one man's opinion and you should not be shocked or surprised that others hold different opinions about people doing things within the bounds of the law.
What makes you think that? There is space debris smaller than a pebble that could damage things without any of that. A micrometeorite strafing the docking port could damage it to the point of inoperable status without ever piercing the walls or decompressing it.
Besides, it was just a freaking example of a potential real life use. It doesn't matter if 10,000 other things are likely to happen, if the one outlined scenario happens, that could be a use.
Actually, I was thinking editing outside the TOS defined terms. However, in looking for a cite to the prodigy lawsuit, I noticed that the communications decency act of 96 pretty much gave service providers a lot of immunity to leeway to edit content so I guess my point is pointless anyways.
You mean like when you want a hug or are needing satisfied in certain ways?
I would say this is just a demonstration of precision and control capabilities and not directly mean for human to human interactions. Imagine a repair needing to be made in a remote location to lets say the space station. Suppose something struck part of it and has disabled the airlocks and boarding docks. You cannot get anything out there to see the extent of the damage but know you can unbolt it and replace it if you could. It's hard to preprogram a robot for the precise maneuvers or detect when the attempt to fix is going to make things worse. With this, it would be similar to a human touch but by a robot. It goes a long way at making things safer.
Now lets get grounded for a bit. Suppose it's not in space but at a nuclear reactor that's had some issues and it is to dangerous to sent live people in. This could be a step above current robotic capabilities and have a human like presence. But think about other things like earth quakes and so on. The lists go on and on where possibly one expert in some mechanical application or medical field can be in 20 different places in the amount of time it takes to reconfigure a connection from command center to another robot already set in place by less specialized people.
Huh? There were plenty of huge multinational organizations when the first amendment was created. Part of the revolutionary war was because of several and all but two of the original 13 colonies was sponsored/created by them. They largely operated under Proprietary charters and many of the state names are derived from them. Most of them were revoked and a royal charter was in place by the 1760s but even then, we have the Boston Tea Party which was a protest over taxes created to reward the failing East India Company.
If you run a messenger service, you aren't entitled to decide that select groups can't use your service. You can't decide that you will monitor the messages, and only deliver those messages that you approve of. You don't get to decide that you will deliver partisan messages that favor your position, and just lose messages that support the other side.
Yes you can. This is different from the phone companies because the phone companies are not private corporations but a public utility and have a common carrier status which exempts them from any liability for unlawful use. They cannot monitor calls outside of monitoring network quality or legal pursuits lawfully justified.
Now here is where the messenger services fall into trouble if they do this censoring for any reason. They now become liable for the content of their users because they already monitor and regulate it for their own purposes. They are private companies not public utilities and are not under the same regulations.
I would say quite a few of them do. They invade slashdot quite heavily any time there is an election or some protest we are supposed to be behind because it's the social justice warrior thing to do or something. Some have accounts and some post anon.
Does Facebook and Twitter and such scan for links to domains blocked by spam lists? Seems to me to be a pretty good way to stop them from becoming a spam riddled craphole.
There is a way to find out. Have law enforcement purchase the business and use said purchase as rvidence for his prosecution. He'd be out of business pretty quickly.
Eh... it wasn't really until the mid 90s before laptops or processors had a large difference between generations. 15 and 30 mhz 486s desktops were still common on store shelves in 1995. Sound cards and CD roms were still expensive add ons around then too. A lot of systems were still dos or Windows 3.1 and not only did you have to purchase a web browser, you had to install a network stack just to dial up the internet. I remember being stoked when i upgraded the 9600 baud modem to a USR 33.6k modem for
June of 1997? Ain't that about the time bill gates started giving away free coffee cup holders? That's probably why lost it. You were excited about the gifts.
It doesn't matter what the subsidies consist of. I already know anyways which is obvious from my initial post in this thread.
There is no logical fallacy either. If company would not exist without subsidies, employees of that company would not exist either. You seem to think that somehow they would.
Oh and nice try pretending you somehow became confused and thought comments about subsidies and employees of a company meant all employees everywhere or something. My first thought after reading that was if you were really that stupid. Then i remembered that this is slashdot so its entirety possible you are but it is more likely you are a pedantic troll. Give it a rest. Any idiot knows what was said and the context it was said in. Your argument fails any reasonable examination.
I reconciled it just fine. I'm not sure how many more ways it can be said; if the job would not exist without the subsidies, they are all going to the employees. You have failed to counter that and just mentioned that the employees could be employed somewhere else.
You are correct though. There is nothing more to intelligently discuss as it's already been said. Your deviations serve nothing but trying to hide reality.
First, no one said the company was the sum of employee cost. If the company doesn't turn a profit, there will be no employee cost because it will not be in business. If the subsidies are the reason the company is making a profit and still open, then it is entirely reasonable to connect the subsidies to their pay.
Second the only thing not logical is your thinking. Sure they could get a job somewhere else. But that ignores the fact that they wouldn't be working for that company. It also ignores the fact that unemployment is not zero. Their reemployment elsewhere would either displace another worker if all things otherwise was the same or some other company would expand due to that company no longer being in business. That means they are not employed or the subsidies are depressing other businesses.
The rest of your post misses the fact that if all other costs caused them to not be profitable enough to stay in business without the subsidies, the jobs would only exist because of the subsidies. Again it is completely reasonable to connect them.
It is not a complicated process at all. If the company can not make money without the subsidies, it no longer exists. Those jobs no longer exist if they were even created in the first place. You can try to hide or ignore that all you want but it doesn't change anything.
Sure it does. The cost of the employees is not limited to their salaries. They would not be employed if the business didn't make some sort of economic sense and have work to do and that seems to be reliant on the subsidies.
Interesting. . You justify waste by pointing out waste. I bet your household budget is all rosey and you actually believe buying something you will never use because it's 30% off is saving you money.
And that comes to what, over $360,000 per employee?
Here is the problem. Most of this subsidy money is not given to anyone or any companies. It is a waiver of future costs that wouldn't likely be collected anyways. Some is in the format of direct payment but those are generally to share the costs of getting people and companies to do what they wouldn't do already. So its pointless to really argue about it outside of whether we want someone or companies to act in certain ways while remaining free people.
Yes, you certainly have not tried to make make it secrete and it would have been considerably harder if you tried but not impossible because you are somewhat successful in life. Well, what i would consider successful anyways.
I was just wanting to make a point. I live about 3000 miles from you (no, not in florida either..lol.) and have no desire to go to jail over someone i don't even know so don't take anything i've done as a threat or anything. Government already collects substantial amounts of information and this data mining isn't limited to backwards idiots far away from us. It's right in our backyards sometimes without us even realizing it. Kids most of all probably do not understand just how much information they are giving away. Even well educated and successful adults don't realize it sometimes. Its even worse when you understand espionage tactics and information/inteligence gathering. The US army had a bunch of training films during WWII about how this is done. I foget the nae of the series, but it was three or four films long about interrogating prisoners who didn't say anything obvious but gave all sorts of information away. At the end, it listed all the information gathered and it was obvious how it was gathered in hindsight but completely obfuscated it practice. This is what happens with online presence being so persistent and accessible. Schools or government datamining social media should be scary even if we don't think we are doing anything wrong/illegal.
I'm not going to out you any further than the county you live in. I could, you have plastered it all over the web. But I don't see the point in it. There are not 20 glendales in ventura county. I can tell that you live in a condo with 2 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms near near Heritage Park. 805 should mean something to you as should 484.
I think your missing the point though. It wasn't that I could find you, it's that people do not realize how much they are giving away to strangers and a school district near you is just as brazen about collecting this information or spying as orange county florida is. In other words, there are idiots all around us and if we are not careful, we might find ourselves sucked in with them.
If you want, I can post everything I know about you and tell you where I found it. You would likely think it is obvious afterwards. I just don't think it's wise to do so.
You shouldn't be that glad. Glendale school district did this same thing and that is near where you live. It actually should be more near to ventura county since glendale is in los angeles county than orange county would be.
Oh, and no, we do not know each other, I just spent about 5 minutes scraping some information from the web to determine your approx location. Well, in case you were wondering that is.
Slashdot Mirror
Not really. The wage gap comes from the high unemployment rates and the glut of workers willing to replace you once you become more expensive than them. Yes, this is in part because of efficiency through technology and increased productivity, but it is also largely due to over regulation and competition with third world markets where costs in general will be cheaper all the way around.
Gallows and guillotines will do nothing other than make you feel good while making it worse. There was an article about how Elon Musk's empire sucked billions in government subsidies and later articles about how all his competitors do it too. This should tell us something about how hard it is to do business in the US and how regulation is limiting it. If these road blocks were not in place, subsidies would not be needed, employment numbers would be a lot higher, and employee wages would be higher also. Minimum wage jobs would go back to being stepping stones for inexperienced workers like they used to be instead of career paths they are today. I understand fast food joints need workers over 18 to get around child labor laws, but flipping burgers and asking 'you want fries with that' should not be a career choice to aspire to. Sadly, that is what it has come to in many places- most of which relish all the road blocks in the way of business.
Yes, if a person acts lawfully, no matter how despicable you think his acts might be, it is still lawful. Change the law to make his acts unlawful and wait for him to violate those laws. That is what it means to be free. To be able to do anything you want lawfully unless a law passed making it unlawful.
No one is abusing social security if they are not breaking a law. You thinking there should be a law about that doesn't amount to anything until there actually is a law about that. Now you can have an opinion about how people lawfully use social security and if you purpose your opinion properly, you might get a law made that in fact does make this illegal, but until then, it is just one man's opinion and you should not be shocked or surprised that others hold different opinions about people doing things within the bounds of the law.
What makes you think that? There is space debris smaller than a pebble that could damage things without any of that. A micrometeorite strafing the docking port could damage it to the point of inoperable status without ever piercing the walls or decompressing it.
Besides, it was just a freaking example of a potential real life use. It doesn't matter if 10,000 other things are likely to happen, if the one outlined scenario happens, that could be a use.
Actually, I was thinking editing outside the TOS defined terms. However, in looking for a cite to the prodigy lawsuit, I noticed that the communications decency act of 96 pretty much gave service providers a lot of immunity to leeway to edit content so I guess my point is pointless anyways.
You mean like when you want a hug or are needing satisfied in certain ways?
I would say this is just a demonstration of precision and control capabilities and not directly mean for human to human interactions. Imagine a repair needing to be made in a remote location to lets say the space station. Suppose something struck part of it and has disabled the airlocks and boarding docks. You cannot get anything out there to see the extent of the damage but know you can unbolt it and replace it if you could. It's hard to preprogram a robot for the precise maneuvers or detect when the attempt to fix is going to make things worse. With this, it would be similar to a human touch but by a robot. It goes a long way at making things safer.
Now lets get grounded for a bit. Suppose it's not in space but at a nuclear reactor that's had some issues and it is to dangerous to sent live people in. This could be a step above current robotic capabilities and have a human like presence. But think about other things like earth quakes and so on. The lists go on and on where possibly one expert in some mechanical application or medical field can be in 20 different places in the amount of time it takes to reconfigure a connection from command center to another robot already set in place by less specialized people.
Huh? There were plenty of huge multinational organizations when the first amendment was created. Part of the revolutionary war was because of several and all but two of the original 13 colonies was sponsored/created by them. They largely operated under Proprietary charters and many of the state names are derived from them. Most of them were revoked and a royal charter was in place by the 1760s but even then, we have the Boston Tea Party which was a protest over taxes created to reward the failing East India Company.
Yes you can. This is different from the phone companies because the phone companies are not private corporations but a public utility and have a common carrier status which exempts them from any liability for unlawful use. They cannot monitor calls outside of monitoring network quality or legal pursuits lawfully justified.
Now here is where the messenger services fall into trouble if they do this censoring for any reason. They now become liable for the content of their users because they already monitor and regulate it for their own purposes. They are private companies not public utilities and are not under the same regulations.
I would say quite a few of them do. They invade slashdot quite heavily any time there is an election or some protest we are supposed to be behind because it's the social justice warrior thing to do or something. Some have accounts and some post anon.
Does Facebook and Twitter and such scan for links to domains blocked by spam lists? Seems to me to be a pretty good way to stop them from becoming a spam riddled craphole.
That or use URL shortening service.
My bet is it is actually being spammed and appropriately being marked as such.
There is a way to find out. Have law enforcement purchase the business and use said purchase as rvidence for his prosecution. He'd be out of business pretty quickly.
That is not the point of government. Businesses will not now my lawn free of charge and government shouldn't either.
What the op was talking about is bridge to nowhere projects and the magical more funding to make whatever isn't working all the sudden work.
Eh... it wasn't really until the mid 90s before laptops or processors had a large difference between generations. 15 and 30 mhz 486s desktops were still common on store shelves in 1995. Sound cards and CD roms were still expensive add ons around then too. A lot of systems were still dos or Windows 3.1 and not only did you have to purchase a web browser, you had to install a network stack just to dial up the internet. I remember being stoked when i upgraded the 9600 baud modem to a USR 33.6k modem for
Telemarketer, how about a pissed off ex girlfriend or disgruntled employee.
June of 1997? Ain't that about the time bill gates started giving away free coffee cup holders? That's probably why lost it. You were excited about the gifts.
It doesn't matter what the subsidies consist of. I already know anyways which is obvious from my initial post in this thread.
There is no logical fallacy either. If company would not exist without subsidies, employees of that company would not exist either. You seem to think that somehow they would.
Oh and nice try pretending you somehow became confused and thought comments about subsidies and employees of a company meant all employees everywhere or something. My first thought after reading that was if you were really that stupid. Then i remembered that this is slashdot so its entirety possible you are but it is more likely you are a pedantic troll. Give it a rest. Any idiot knows what was said and the context it was said in. Your argument fails any reasonable examination.
I reconciled it just fine. I'm not sure how many more ways it can be said; if the job would not exist without the subsidies, they are all going to the employees. You have failed to counter that and just mentioned that the employees could be employed somewhere else.
You are correct though. There is nothing more to intelligently discuss as it's already been said. Your deviations serve nothing but trying to hide reality.
Lol.. what you miss could fill a novel.
First, no one said the company was the sum of employee cost. If the company doesn't turn a profit, there will be no employee cost because it will not be in business. If the subsidies are the reason the company is making a profit and still open, then it is entirely reasonable to connect the subsidies to their pay.
Second the only thing not logical is your thinking. Sure they could get a job somewhere else. But that ignores the fact that they wouldn't be working for that company. It also ignores the fact that unemployment is not zero. Their reemployment elsewhere would either displace another worker if all things otherwise was the same or some other company would expand due to that company no longer being in business. That means they are not employed or the subsidies are depressing other businesses.
The rest of your post misses the fact that if all other costs caused them to not be profitable enough to stay in business without the subsidies, the jobs would only exist because of the subsidies. Again it is completely reasonable to connect them.
It is not a complicated process at all. If the company can not make money without the subsidies, it no longer exists. Those jobs no longer exist if they were even created in the first place. You can try to hide or ignore that all you want but it doesn't change anything.
Sure it does. The cost of the employees is not limited to their salaries. They would not be employed if the business didn't make some sort of economic sense and have work to do and that seems to be reliant on the subsidies.
Interesting. . You justify waste by pointing out waste. I bet your household budget is all rosey and you actually believe buying something you will never use because it's 30% off is saving you money.
Lol.. if that was all, you might have a point. Why do you believe the subsidies have stopped and no more will occure over the life of the company?
And that comes to what, over $360,000 per employee?
Here is the problem. Most of this subsidy money is not given to anyone or any companies. It is a waiver of future costs that wouldn't likely be collected anyways. Some is in the format of direct payment but those are generally to share the costs of getting people and companies to do what they wouldn't do already. So its pointless to really argue about it outside of whether we want someone or companies to act in certain ways while remaining free people.
Yes, you certainly have not tried to make make it secrete and it would have been considerably harder if you tried but not impossible because you are somewhat successful in life. Well, what i would consider successful anyways.
I was just wanting to make a point. I live about 3000 miles from you (no, not in florida either..lol.) and have no desire to go to jail over someone i don't even know so don't take anything i've done as a threat or anything. Government already collects substantial amounts of information and this data mining isn't limited to backwards idiots far away from us. It's right in our backyards sometimes without us even realizing it. Kids most of all probably do not understand just how much information they are giving away. Even well educated and successful adults don't realize it sometimes. Its even worse when you understand espionage tactics and information/inteligence gathering. The US army had a bunch of training films during WWII about how this is done. I foget the nae of the series, but it was three or four films long about interrogating prisoners who didn't say anything obvious but gave all sorts of information away. At the end, it listed all the information gathered and it was obvious how it was gathered in hindsight but completely obfuscated it practice. This is what happens with online presence being so persistent and accessible. Schools or government datamining social media should be scary even if we don't think we are doing anything wrong/illegal.
I'm not going to out you any further than the county you live in. I could, you have plastered it all over the web. But I don't see the point in it. There are not 20 glendales in ventura county. I can tell that you live in a condo with 2 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms near near Heritage Park. 805 should mean something to you as should 484.
I think your missing the point though. It wasn't that I could find you, it's that people do not realize how much they are giving away to strangers and a school district near you is just as brazen about collecting this information or spying as orange county florida is. In other words, there are idiots all around us and if we are not careful, we might find ourselves sucked in with them.
If you want, I can post everything I know about you and tell you where I found it. You would likely think it is obvious afterwards. I just don't think it's wise to do so.
You shouldn't be that glad. Glendale school district did this same thing and that is near where you live. It actually should be more near to ventura county since glendale is in los angeles county than orange county would be.
http://snaptrends.com/schools-...
Oh, and no, we do not know each other, I just spent about 5 minutes scraping some information from the web to determine your approx location. Well, in case you were wondering that is.