I won't tell you where I worked, just that I spent a decade working in Defense. When deaths occurred due to failures in our systems, yes we were expected to be on-call and working on a fix. Reading casualty reports should be incentive for you to do just that. Being a US Army veteran, you bet your ass I was working overtime and odd hours when and where needed. The company compensated where necessary to ensure I didn't burn out in the process.
This person was not hired by the company supporting an intern's iPad, BAE is a defense contractor responsible for gear used by the military for both training and combat.
Not all Government related jobs are bad, you just have that perception.
Germans were wiser shortly after WWII, after being duped twice by propaganda and thought police. Your appeal to ego was simply repeated for the last 30 or so years while your liberties have been stripped away. Germans have been foolish enough to believe the appeals to ego.
Don't worry, it's an effective piece of rhetoric that works very well and many people from all countries are duped by it. "All the smart people believe", "all the cool people do", "all of the nice people do", and of course "you are mean/dumb/uncivilized if you do" results in no thoughts of the subject.
Dave Rubin did the same thing, and many others are joining that trend. It's not just a warped version of "equality" being displayed, it's a weaponized version of "equality" coming from the far left.
How about the employee claiming he had no restrictions for on-call on-site work, but on his first day demanded no call and off site work? That has nothing to do with his wife, but everything to do with terms agreed upon at hiring. Even if you assume that the guy made a decision under personal stress, is that the companies fault that he lied?
Not everything is about "evil employers" you know. There are plenty of bad apples on the employee's side as well.
"They are saying he should be available to work 24/7."
If you are in the US, likely it is ILLEGAL for them to require that...
You have never heard of a "right to work" law?
Nobody made the person take this job, they chose the job. Nobody makes you take a job with similar requirements in the US, you volunteer for those jobs. There is no requirement that they pay you truckloads of money, but the market will dictate that they have to pay higher for people to agree to those terms. If you have bunches of people willing to work that type of job, the pay will go down.
The rest of your statements are predicated on a false belief that employee/employer relationships are one way with the employer on the hook for everything the employee wants. Which is complete bullshit, and part of the reason we have to pass bad laws like "right to work". Without those laws, Employers have no protection. With them, both sides gain disadvantages.
IANAL, but...
That was made obvious in the first part of your post. Do society a favor and stop trying to give out bad legal advise based on ignorance and lies.
After years of safe space demanding snowflakes in the US, we are starting to see them turn into cannibals. During the "woman's day march" fights broke out between different groups, with some groups claiming that the white protesters were not as victimized as others. But it's not enough, and not fast enough. The damage that things like Title 9 have done because of these groups isn't going away any time soon.
Belief _only_ on feelings is irrational. There are 2 facts given in that blog, neither of which are damning to the company. If anything, one of those facts hints at misdeeds by the employee.
My point was that I agree with GP but would have used different wording. I fully agree that all speech should be legal, and thankfully in the US we have a Constitutional protection (for now) on free speech. I just saw from SXSW that a group of Germans was lecturing people about how speech needs to be prevented, and they could not answer some basic questions. Like: Who determines what is and is not "hate" speech?
Germans should know better. Prior to starting off two major world wars their leadership did exactly what they are doing. Stifle free speech, push propaganda, control the populace.
BAE is a Defense contractor and his work would involve classified data which can not be accessed remotely. This work involves rooms with layers of physical security and dropping all of your gear into a locker (no cell phones, no external computers) before you enter the rooms.
This is obviously a concern for the employee who would probably want to have a constant ability for his wife to contact him.
Many people can't handle this type of work, many people crack a bit mentally because of the work. It's a choice whether or not to take this type of job, and nobody is unclear about the requirements. Every single person entering this work receives numerous briefings describing the work environment and requirements, and once you are in the job you will continue to be briefed on the work environment and requirements. Those briefings are required by both regulation and policy.
While the dialogue is a bit harsh it's getting harder to complain or even be complicit. These people demanding ends of basic human rights are quite disturbing, and have no concern about the majority that disagrees with them. Facts are ignored, science is ignored, history is ignored, yet they persist. Ridicule and harsh language against these people is certainly becoming a strong option.
A belief based on feelings and not facts is irrational and illogical.
Did you notice that the person worked for a total of 4 hours at BAE? Given that very glaring item:
Is it possible that the employee misled employers and said he was willing to work within their terms, but on day one refused to those same terms? The reasoning does not matter, it's the action that matters.
If the employee was dishonest in the terms of hiring they need to be held accountable for their actions. It never ceases to amaze me how people jump to the guilty verdict due to appeals to emotion. Western Justice works, or is at least supposed to work, on the principle of innocent until proven otherwise.
Reading a blog post full of appeal to emotion arguments does not indicate guilt or innocence. The amount of hyperbole, fallacy, and claims like "If I was their attorney I would settle out of court!" makes me question the claim even more.
I have a deep sympathy for the man and his wife, my dad died of cancer when I was 14 years old. My sympathy does not mean I lose sight of Justice.
Socialism and Communism have always resulted in either a tyranny or the same Government as the revolt tried to remove. The reason the USA is called the great experiment is because it's unique in having a Free Market and Democratic Republic (which must coexist to have either).
Why the rich get richer is due to the Government failing to control monopolies. Media of all forms being the worst for our society, but we also have monopoly powers on countless other critical areas (monopoly != regulation). Start petitioning Government to fix the monopolies, and vote in candidates who will do just that.
The best systems appear to be a mix of socialism and capitalism, although that may depend on your personal view of "good". Science cannot put value judgments on trade-offs, only make probabilistic predictions at best.
We may be able to come to an agreeable way to define the mix, but it's surely related to very limited Government and Free market (with the Government performing it's intended role in breaking up and preventing monopolization). Taxes can support Welfare programs, but bureaucracies must be limited.
Anyhow, I didn't give a value judgement in the list, unless you interpret the intended humor as ridicule, which I suppose is a legitimate possible interpretation, but it was intended as mostly humor and you are welcome to present a list of ACA names such "CommieCare", etc.
It was hard to take the line any other way since I know the works. Rand was pro capitalism. "CommieCare" would have been seen differently since it's more relative to the other members of the list.
By the way, socialism and communism are mostly different things. Socialism mostly describes an economic system while communism mostly describes a political system. But they are imperfect terms and a cleaner classification system would confuse and/or bored readers.
Socialism is Communism without a gun, and tends to turn into Communism (or a different form of tyranny) when the people get tired of not being able to own anything of value for any length of time. Most revolts turn into dictatorships. Socialism and Communism fail when they run out of people's money to spend.
First, read what I wrote to "drinkypoo". Sorry, they are named you are not. You missed the lesson completely.
Next, you are claiming that we don't have any failed Socialist or Communist states to determine points of failure? Venezuela didn't just recently collapse? How about Honduras? Costa Rica? Cuba? The Ukraine, Greece, East Germany, Serbia, Vietnam all can't be used as an example of why those states failed? Many of those failed multiple times for the same reasons. Nope, no examples except in your strange and bizarre view "Democrats and Republicans and the Empire of Rome". It's really amazing that 2 of those are not Governments or Economic systems within a form of Government.
Ah, somebody has gotten a butt-hurt over "feelings" haven't they?
Uh, no. I'm more concerned about actual science that gets ignored for "Social Justice". I'm even more concerned about the denunciation of actual science for the purpose of "Social Justice". (and if you Study Plato you will find that modifying Justice makes it anything but "Justice").
Then the real purpose of your post comes out. Yet another wacko distorting any conversation possible with anti-Trump propaganda. No wonder you post anonymously, you should be embarrassed displaying your mental disorder so openly.
You missed the moral lesson completely. People will turn the other cheek for so long. Vigilantes appear all over the place in history, and generally tend to be as abusive as the people they overthrow. Is the vigilante who murders career criminals worse than the career criminals who takes everything destroying the lives of a helpless populace?
You can't stomach what you fail to understand, or even consider an alternative perspective.
So you are claiming that Ayn Rand was wrong? Where exactly was she wrong? We only have literally many hundreds of failed socialist and communist examples to choose from over the last 100 years to work with. Come on now Jim Taggert, enlighten us. Dr. Ferris' opinion does not count as an argument.
I do find it interesting that you mention her. I constantly think that certain people really believe this is the "Age of the Heart" and that science and reason are foolish existence of the past. As long as your cause is good, you can take anything you want from people. Your feelings have more rights than your neighbor.
More lies, and enough dealing with stupid people who use sock puppets and AC posts to back their bullshit.
Dozens of tons?
Nice low ball estimate. LHC requires about.2tons and is a very small fraction of the size Hyperloop has planned. You are probably looking at 100 tons when all is said and done.
How you got under the impression that shock waves move at the speed of light is beyond me.
You just made up a flat lie, I never insinuated that failures occur at the speed of light. I stated that the full structure must conserve the energy and that a failure would see the brunt of the force. You just made the dumbest argument I have ever seen. Here is a hint: Take a nice tight coiled spring held with a thin rope. Put the spring on the floor and put your head on the top of the spring and cut the rope. The rope didn't have to be heavy to hold the spring, but the bruising welt on your noggin should be a reminder that things don't have to move at the speed of light to be harmful.
As a hunch, you have never ever seen simulations of things like car crashes, or bullet impact, or anything else for that matter. There are ways to simulate how they work and you can watch the structure failures before they ever occur. Notice that there are no FEA simulations to show what happens during a failure even though _BASIC_PHYSICS describes it happening. Why no FEA if the Hyperloop is so sound?
Next, the one tanker car you mentioned is not the only tanker car that is on the rails. You are a dumbass to believe that gravity drain is the most cost effective way to empty a tanker. And yes, you continue to show you are a dumbass. You also can not dispute the structural analysis portion I pointed out, so simply play the bullshit "nuh uh" ostrich game.
I similarly never stated that dealing with vacuums was new. We have plenty of accidents with vacuums and plenty of experiments to demonstrate structural failures with vacuum chambers. YOU on the other hand pretend that science does not exist, and experience does not matter. If only you believe strongly enough you can make things happen right?
Do us all a favor and be the first to volunteer on the test track. Make sure you post your real name so I can submit you for a Darwin award.
The point about the conservation of energy is that the SYSTEM will be storing _all_ of the energy required to create the vacuum. A weakness in the structure would be catastrophic.
The nickel you falsely claim completely ignores the fact that until we have teleportation of mass objects and people solved, the system must go through a new process of creating the vacuum constantly. You will not be able to maintain a vacuum over such a massive system, especially while cars and people have to move in and out of the system.
Now to your easiest to disprove lie. Tankers must undergo some testing for vacuums because a vacuum system is used to release stored materials. Further, the inversion of pressure in the chamber is inversely proportional to an increase in pressure from a Fluid Dynamics and Structural analysis perspective. A failure from a massive increase in pressure would be identical when a massive decrease. The only difference is the direction the deformation moves and the final result. Massive collapse or massive expansion (material tearing, etc..)
You don't seem to have even a basic grasp of structural dynamics, fluid dynamics, or basic physics. You have the appeal to authority down pat, and a whole lot of BS.
No, you misunderstand. Pushing for Law Enforcement is well within the means of the public through the Democratic process. If President Trump does not end up being a "Law and Order" candidate then you get the next guy in office who hopefully will. What you are claiming is that your only option is submission.
Do your duty as a citizen instead of going belly up. I have been for decades. Educating your fellow citizens is a big part of that duty, nominating and voting is another. It's not my fault people are ignorant, but it is my fault if I refuse to try to educate them.
Instead of claiming some magical appeal to authority where you dislike the science presented, how about getting some science of your own to discount it. Namely, for the dozenth time in this thread, why does Conservation of Energy not apply to the Hyperloop. Understanding of course the amount of energy required to bring a massive single structure to a near perfect vacuum.
As to your claim about rail cars, they do have to test for partial vacuums. The test is not invalid at all, you are simply refusing (as you did with Phil Mason) to review actual science.
So when the majority of the country performs an act that you dislike, you simply ignore it. I see how you think, and it is quite pathetic.
Repeating propaganda you have heard since election day does not make it true. President Trump has already required all appointed officials to sign a contract preventing them from lobbying for 5 years after leaving office (for any reason) and a lifetime ban on foreign lobbying. President Trump has already signed an EO requiring 2 regulations be cancelled for every 1 approved by any Government Department. This is in addition to getting the budget done to submit to Congress, and passing immigration reforms (like it or not) which we have been promised since the 1970s.
While not directly related to President Trump, Senator Cruz has already submitted a bill requiring term limits for Senators and Congress.
It's been 50 days since he's been in office, and considering the amount of push back and shenanigans from the Media and Democratic party he has done quite more than most Presidents do in their first year.
FWIW, I was never pro-Trump and am still very skeptical. I voted for the lesser of two evils, which was Trump. I don't measure his success or failure by what propagandists say, I read what he does and measure from actions.
There was a recession when I hit the workforce after university. It was tough getting a job. REALLY tough. So I did manual labour for a few years before I finally got into my chosen career's industry. This happens. In retrospect, even fresh out of school I wasn't really ready. Too many expectations beyond what my worth as an employee could justify.
You don't happen to mention what your degree was in. Was it in a Liberal Art's degree, or something in STEM? The problem is, the education industry has sold people a line of shit. People have the perception that any degree should earn them 6 figures. There are only so many Mythology, Gender Studies, etc.. degrees which are useful to society. Journalism, Video editing, and blogging are a flooded market, PoliSci won't get you far unless you continue to Law School, and the majority don't. People don't, or can't, do the STEM degrees which would land them a better entry level job.
Now I'm seeing more or less the same situation with the current generation. The world doesn't owe you shit, life doesn't have to be fair, and no matter how recent your education, chances are there's a grumpy asshole who is of more practical use to an employer because they can handle social interactions in a workplace and understand the way work life works, with enough experience (in precisely what their employer requires!) to more than raise their net value above an inexperienced applicants'.
The problem isn't underemployment of the youth (suck it up, Buttercup, that's how almost everyone starts while they're learning all the things schools don't teach), the problem is the jobs where they can get their real world experience are drying up and it's only going to get worse.
However, as long as there are jobs to be done by humans and humans aren't immortal, eventually older people retire, lose it, or die off and have to be replaced. Hiring will happen. If kids aren't getting hired, it's because there are less jobs overall required to maintain our currently desired economic productivity.
That's a sociopolitical issue to be resolved not by minimum wage hikes or make-work programs, but by legislating shorter standard work weeks and nationalizing health benefits. Make it affordable for employers to hire more people to do the work, make it less life-affecting for people to work less.
While I agree that society does not owe people anything, I disagree with some of your other points. For example, it's an oxymoron to claim we should not increase minimum wage but claim we should reduce working hours. Without the disclaimer that wages drop, the insinuation is less work for more money so _WORSE_ than minimum wage.
Yeah, education is great if you want to do (and can do) the hard work for a STEM degree. If not, you should really weigh your options and consider trade school instead of college. The money required is much less, and job prospects are much better.
I realize I'm old and went to school long ago, but when I was going the first question I asked is "what degrees are needed most?". This question seems to elude many people today. I received my first degree in Math and my second was Philosophy. I enjoyed the latter but needed the former to start my career.
Since millions of people in this area just saw a monthly bill of 750.00 for 2 consecutive months to heat a 1,000sq/ft apartment, I believe an investigation is underway. I'll wait for the class action suit.
Slashdot Mirror
I won't tell you where I worked, just that I spent a decade working in Defense. When deaths occurred due to failures in our systems, yes we were expected to be on-call and working on a fix. Reading casualty reports should be incentive for you to do just that. Being a US Army veteran, you bet your ass I was working overtime and odd hours when and where needed. The company compensated where necessary to ensure I didn't burn out in the process.
This person was not hired by the company supporting an intern's iPad, BAE is a defense contractor responsible for gear used by the military for both training and combat.
Not all Government related jobs are bad, you just have that perception.
I didn't quote you at all, I restated my position for clarity. It seemed like you are confused, but now I see you are just an idiotic troll.
Germans were wiser shortly after WWII, after being duped twice by propaganda and thought police. Your appeal to ego was simply repeated for the last 30 or so years while your liberties have been stripped away. Germans have been foolish enough to believe the appeals to ego.
Don't worry, it's an effective piece of rhetoric that works very well and many people from all countries are duped by it. "All the smart people believe", "all the cool people do", "all of the nice people do", and of course "you are mean/dumb/uncivilized if you do" results in no thoughts of the subject.
Dave Rubin did the same thing, and many others are joining that trend. It's not just a warped version of "equality" being displayed, it's a weaponized version of "equality" coming from the far left.
How about the employee claiming he had no restrictions for on-call on-site work, but on his first day demanded no call and off site work? That has nothing to do with his wife, but everything to do with terms agreed upon at hiring. Even if you assume that the guy made a decision under personal stress, is that the companies fault that he lied?
Not everything is about "evil employers" you know. There are plenty of bad apples on the employee's side as well.
"They are saying he should be available to work 24/7."
If you are in the US, likely it is ILLEGAL for them to require that...
You have never heard of a "right to work" law?
Nobody made the person take this job, they chose the job. Nobody makes you take a job with similar requirements in the US, you volunteer for those jobs. There is no requirement that they pay you truckloads of money, but the market will dictate that they have to pay higher for people to agree to those terms. If you have bunches of people willing to work that type of job, the pay will go down.
The rest of your statements are predicated on a false belief that employee/employer relationships are one way with the employer on the hook for everything the employee wants. Which is complete bullshit, and part of the reason we have to pass bad laws like "right to work". Without those laws, Employers have no protection. With them, both sides gain disadvantages.
IANAL, but...
That was made obvious in the first part of your post. Do society a favor and stop trying to give out bad legal advise based on ignorance and lies.
After years of safe space demanding snowflakes in the US, we are starting to see them turn into cannibals. During the "woman's day march" fights broke out between different groups, with some groups claiming that the white protesters were not as victimized as others. But it's not enough, and not fast enough. The damage that things like Title 9 have done because of these groups isn't going away any time soon.
Belief _only_ on feelings is irrational. There are 2 facts given in that blog, neither of which are damning to the company. If anything, one of those facts hints at misdeeds by the employee.
My point was that I agree with GP but would have used different wording. I fully agree that all speech should be legal, and thankfully in the US we have a Constitutional protection (for now) on free speech. I just saw from SXSW that a group of Germans was lecturing people about how speech needs to be prevented, and they could not answer some basic questions. Like: Who determines what is and is not "hate" speech?
Germans should know better. Prior to starting off two major world wars their leadership did exactly what they are doing. Stifle free speech, push propaganda, control the populace.
Hey Germans, what ever happened to "nie wieder"?
BAE is a Defense contractor and his work would involve classified data which can not be accessed remotely. This work involves rooms with layers of physical security and dropping all of your gear into a locker (no cell phones, no external computers) before you enter the rooms.
This is obviously a concern for the employee who would probably want to have a constant ability for his wife to contact him.
Many people can't handle this type of work, many people crack a bit mentally because of the work. It's a choice whether or not to take this type of job, and nobody is unclear about the requirements. Every single person entering this work receives numerous briefings describing the work environment and requirements, and once you are in the job you will continue to be briefed on the work environment and requirements. Those briefings are required by both regulation and policy.
While the dialogue is a bit harsh it's getting harder to complain or even be complicit. These people demanding ends of basic human rights are quite disturbing, and have no concern about the majority that disagrees with them. Facts are ignored, science is ignored, history is ignored, yet they persist. Ridicule and harsh language against these people is certainly becoming a strong option.
A belief based on feelings and not facts is irrational and illogical.
Did you notice that the person worked for a total of 4 hours at BAE? Given that very glaring item:
Is it possible that the employee misled employers and said he was willing to work within their terms, but on day one refused to those same terms? The reasoning does not matter, it's the action that matters.
If the employee was dishonest in the terms of hiring they need to be held accountable for their actions. It never ceases to amaze me how people jump to the guilty verdict due to appeals to emotion. Western Justice works, or is at least supposed to work, on the principle of innocent until proven otherwise.
Reading a blog post full of appeal to emotion arguments does not indicate guilt or innocence. The amount of hyperbole, fallacy, and claims like "If I was their attorney I would settle out of court!" makes me question the claim even more.
I have a deep sympathy for the man and his wife, my dad died of cancer when I was 14 years old. My sympathy does not mean I lose sight of Justice.
Socialism and Communism have always resulted in either a tyranny or the same Government as the revolt tried to remove. The reason the USA is called the great experiment is because it's unique in having a Free Market and Democratic Republic (which must coexist to have either).
Why the rich get richer is due to the Government failing to control monopolies. Media of all forms being the worst for our society, but we also have monopoly powers on countless other critical areas (monopoly != regulation). Start petitioning Government to fix the monopolies, and vote in candidates who will do just that.
The best systems appear to be a mix of socialism and capitalism, although that may depend on your personal view of "good". Science cannot put value judgments on trade-offs, only make probabilistic predictions at best.
We may be able to come to an agreeable way to define the mix, but it's surely related to very limited Government and Free market (with the Government performing it's intended role in breaking up and preventing monopolization). Taxes can support Welfare programs, but bureaucracies must be limited.
Anyhow, I didn't give a value judgement in the list, unless you interpret the intended humor as ridicule, which I suppose is a legitimate possible interpretation, but it was intended as mostly humor and you are welcome to present a list of ACA names such "CommieCare", etc.
It was hard to take the line any other way since I know the works. Rand was pro capitalism. "CommieCare" would have been seen differently since it's more relative to the other members of the list.
By the way, socialism and communism are mostly different things. Socialism mostly describes an economic system while communism mostly describes a political system. But they are imperfect terms and a cleaner classification system would confuse and/or bored readers.
Socialism is Communism without a gun, and tends to turn into Communism (or a different form of tyranny) when the people get tired of not being able to own anything of value for any length of time. Most revolts turn into dictatorships. Socialism and Communism fail when they run out of people's money to spend.
First, read what I wrote to "drinkypoo". Sorry, they are named you are not. You missed the lesson completely.
Next, you are claiming that we don't have any failed Socialist or Communist states to determine points of failure? Venezuela didn't just recently collapse? How about Honduras? Costa Rica? Cuba? The Ukraine, Greece, East Germany, Serbia, Vietnam all can't be used as an example of why those states failed? Many of those failed multiple times for the same reasons. Nope, no examples except in your strange and bizarre view "Democrats and Republicans and the Empire of Rome". It's really amazing that 2 of those are not Governments or Economic systems within a form of Government.
Ah, somebody has gotten a butt-hurt over "feelings" haven't they?
Uh, no. I'm more concerned about actual science that gets ignored for "Social Justice". I'm even more concerned about the denunciation of actual science for the purpose of "Social Justice". (and if you Study Plato you will find that modifying Justice makes it anything but "Justice").
Then the real purpose of your post comes out. Yet another wacko distorting any conversation possible with anti-Trump propaganda. No wonder you post anonymously, you should be embarrassed displaying your mental disorder so openly.
You missed the moral lesson completely. People will turn the other cheek for so long. Vigilantes appear all over the place in history, and generally tend to be as abusive as the people they overthrow. Is the vigilante who murders career criminals worse than the career criminals who takes everything destroying the lives of a helpless populace?
You can't stomach what you fail to understand, or even consider an alternative perspective.
So you are claiming that Ayn Rand was wrong? Where exactly was she wrong? We only have literally many hundreds of failed socialist and communist examples to choose from over the last 100 years to work with. Come on now Jim Taggert, enlighten us. Dr. Ferris' opinion does not count as an argument.
I do find it interesting that you mention her. I constantly think that certain people really believe this is the "Age of the Heart" and that science and reason are foolish existence of the past. As long as your cause is good, you can take anything you want from people. Your feelings have more rights than your neighbor.
Then again, most people have not read her works.
More lies, and enough dealing with stupid people who use sock puppets and AC posts to back their bullshit.
Dozens of tons?
Nice low ball estimate. LHC requires about .2tons and is a very small fraction of the size Hyperloop has planned. You are probably looking at 100 tons when all is said and done.
How you got under the impression that shock waves move at the speed of light is beyond me.
You just made up a flat lie, I never insinuated that failures occur at the speed of light. I stated that the full structure must conserve the energy and that a failure would see the brunt of the force. You just made the dumbest argument I have ever seen. Here is a hint: Take a nice tight coiled spring held with a thin rope. Put the spring on the floor and put your head on the top of the spring and cut the rope. The rope didn't have to be heavy to hold the spring, but the bruising welt on your noggin should be a reminder that things don't have to move at the speed of light to be harmful.
As a hunch, you have never ever seen simulations of things like car crashes, or bullet impact, or anything else for that matter. There are ways to simulate how they work and you can watch the structure failures before they ever occur. Notice that there are no FEA simulations to show what happens during a failure even though _BASIC_PHYSICS describes it happening. Why no FEA if the Hyperloop is so sound?
Next, the one tanker car you mentioned is not the only tanker car that is on the rails. You are a dumbass to believe that gravity drain is the most cost effective way to empty a tanker. And yes, you continue to show you are a dumbass. You also can not dispute the structural analysis portion I pointed out, so simply play the bullshit "nuh uh" ostrich game.
I similarly never stated that dealing with vacuums was new. We have plenty of accidents with vacuums and plenty of experiments to demonstrate structural failures with vacuum chambers. YOU on the other hand pretend that science does not exist, and experience does not matter. If only you believe strongly enough you can make things happen right?
Do us all a favor and be the first to volunteer on the test track. Make sure you post your real name so I can submit you for a Darwin award.
The point about the conservation of energy is that the SYSTEM will be storing _all_ of the energy required to create the vacuum. A weakness in the structure would be catastrophic.
The nickel you falsely claim completely ignores the fact that until we have teleportation of mass objects and people solved, the system must go through a new process of creating the vacuum constantly. You will not be able to maintain a vacuum over such a massive system, especially while cars and people have to move in and out of the system.
Now to your easiest to disprove lie. Tankers must undergo some testing for vacuums because a vacuum system is used to release stored materials. Further, the inversion of pressure in the chamber is inversely proportional to an increase in pressure from a Fluid Dynamics and Structural analysis perspective. A failure from a massive increase in pressure would be identical when a massive decrease. The only difference is the direction the deformation moves and the final result. Massive collapse or massive expansion (material tearing, etc..)
You don't seem to have even a basic grasp of structural dynamics, fluid dynamics, or basic physics. You have the appeal to authority down pat, and a whole lot of BS.
No, you misunderstand. Pushing for Law Enforcement is well within the means of the public through the Democratic process. If President Trump does not end up being a "Law and Order" candidate then you get the next guy in office who hopefully will. What you are claiming is that your only option is submission.
Do your duty as a citizen instead of going belly up. I have been for decades. Educating your fellow citizens is a big part of that duty, nominating and voting is another. It's not my fault people are ignorant, but it is my fault if I refuse to try to educate them.
Instead of claiming some magical appeal to authority where you dislike the science presented, how about getting some science of your own to discount it. Namely, for the dozenth time in this thread, why does Conservation of Energy not apply to the Hyperloop. Understanding of course the amount of energy required to bring a massive single structure to a near perfect vacuum.
As to your claim about rail cars, they do have to test for partial vacuums. The test is not invalid at all, you are simply refusing (as you did with Phil Mason) to review actual science.
So you should never ever enforce laws that people break? Got it..
So when the majority of the country performs an act that you dislike, you simply ignore it. I see how you think, and it is quite pathetic.
Repeating propaganda you have heard since election day does not make it true. President Trump has already required all appointed officials to sign a contract preventing them from lobbying for 5 years after leaving office (for any reason) and a lifetime ban on foreign lobbying. President Trump has already signed an EO requiring 2 regulations be cancelled for every 1 approved by any Government Department. This is in addition to getting the budget done to submit to Congress, and passing immigration reforms (like it or not) which we have been promised since the 1970s.
While not directly related to President Trump, Senator Cruz has already submitted a bill requiring term limits for Senators and Congress.
It's been 50 days since he's been in office, and considering the amount of push back and shenanigans from the Media and Democratic party he has done quite more than most Presidents do in their first year.
FWIW, I was never pro-Trump and am still very skeptical. I voted for the lesser of two evils, which was Trump. I don't measure his success or failure by what propagandists say, I read what he does and measure from actions.
There was a recession when I hit the workforce after university. It was tough getting a job. REALLY tough. So I did manual labour for a few years before I finally got into my chosen career's industry. This happens. In retrospect, even fresh out of school I wasn't really ready. Too many expectations beyond what my worth as an employee could justify.
You don't happen to mention what your degree was in. Was it in a Liberal Art's degree, or something in STEM? The problem is, the education industry has sold people a line of shit. People have the perception that any degree should earn them 6 figures. There are only so many Mythology, Gender Studies, etc.. degrees which are useful to society. Journalism, Video editing, and blogging are a flooded market, PoliSci won't get you far unless you continue to Law School, and the majority don't. People don't, or can't, do the STEM degrees which would land them a better entry level job.
Now I'm seeing more or less the same situation with the current generation. The world doesn't owe you shit, life doesn't have to be fair, and no matter how recent your education, chances are there's a grumpy asshole who is of more practical use to an employer because they can handle social interactions in a workplace and understand the way work life works, with enough experience (in precisely what their employer requires!) to more than raise their net value above an inexperienced applicants'.
The problem isn't underemployment of the youth (suck it up, Buttercup, that's how almost everyone starts while they're learning all the things schools don't teach), the problem is the jobs where they can get their real world experience are drying up and it's only going to get worse.
However, as long as there are jobs to be done by humans and humans aren't immortal, eventually older people retire, lose it, or die off and have to be replaced. Hiring will happen. If kids aren't getting hired, it's because there are less jobs overall required to maintain our currently desired economic productivity.
That's a sociopolitical issue to be resolved not by minimum wage hikes or make-work programs, but by legislating shorter standard work weeks and nationalizing health benefits. Make it affordable for employers to hire more people to do the work, make it less life-affecting for people to work less.
While I agree that society does not owe people anything, I disagree with some of your other points. For example, it's an oxymoron to claim we should not increase minimum wage but claim we should reduce working hours. Without the disclaimer that wages drop, the insinuation is less work for more money so _WORSE_ than minimum wage.
Yeah, education is great if you want to do (and can do) the hard work for a STEM degree. If not, you should really weigh your options and consider trade school instead of college. The money required is much less, and job prospects are much better.
I realize I'm old and went to school long ago, but when I was going the first question I asked is "what degrees are needed most?". This question seems to elude many people today. I received my first degree in Math and my second was Philosophy. I enjoyed the latter but needed the former to start my career.
Since millions of people in this area just saw a monthly bill of 750.00 for 2 consecutive months to heat a 1,000sq/ft apartment, I believe an investigation is underway. I'll wait for the class action suit.