Sounds like pretty much everywhere I've worked which at one time seemed a dream job.
Microsoft is different, if only in scale. These employees work on products that bring in a billion per month for their employer. Yet, these same employees only make market wages. It was only a few years ago, these employees were all but guaranteed from their options to become millionaires. Now, Microsoft is trying to up their profits on paper, so they're squeezing employees for that money. Nevermind that Microsoft is still making around a billion a month. And nevermind that Microsoft's lack of profit growth is directly attributable to those managers who are making a million a year in salary.
The president signed emergency condition paperwork and orders before the hurricane hit... The governors of the states hold (as they should) enormous responsibilities for first response to emergencies that happen on their turf. The feds aren't supposed to muscle in until expressly asked to.
You are confusing the facts. The governor of Louisianna declared the emergency on the Friday before the hurricane started. The president didn't respond until the Friday after the hurricane. The governor of Louisianna told Bush to send "everything you got" the Saturday before the hurricane. What did Bush do? He got into a plane and flew to... San Diego.
This idea that the feds didn't have permission to go in is an outright lie. The idea that the governor didn't ask for her National Guard troops is outright deceiving. The troops are included in the "everything you got", which the president failed to respond.
Bush's appalling incompetent response was so public that he had to take responsibility for his errors, which he did yesterday. You coming in after the fact and saying that he wasn't responsible collides with Bush's statement. But then, facts and reality aren't Republican's strong suits.
Bush himself negates your whole argument.
...keeping people in grinding poverty by simply handing them a meager living, generation after generation, with no expectation that they can or should be self-sufficient is the height of cruelty and condescension, as polished to a fine art by liberals ever since FDR's time.
There are ways of spending money to prevent poverty other than just handing the poor money which, by the way, is exactly what Jesus did. So, this "liberal" idea is at least 2000 years old. And given what most Republicans think of Jesus, you don't have a leg to stand on calling it "cruelty and condescension," unless of course you want to argue with Jesus.
Fixing education and making sure elementary and high schools have enough money is one way to reduce poverty, something Bush has failed to do with his "No Child Left Behind" policy. Increasing student loan amounts is another way to decrease poverty, which Bush has failed by actually reducing student loan payments. Increasing the minimum wage is another. Securing our border and thus reducing competition for low-skill jobs with illegal immigrants is another. Shall I continue or do you get the point?
Previous:...how is Libertarian prattle (or even action and policy-in-place) causing anarchy, lawlessness, death, and neglect?
Me: Because it's Libertarian prattle that says big government is bad, nothing good comes of it, and must be removed at all costs... Spending money to send in the National Guard and Coast Guard is bad - we only want to do that when it's absolutely necessary... say, when black people start looting Wal-Mart for food.
You: The Guard troops work for the (in this case, Democrat) governor in situations like this, until she expressly turns that authority over to the feds - which she didn't do.
BS. As I mentioned above, the governor already filed the emergency paperwork the Friday before the storm and specifically spoke with Bush the next day for him to send "everything you got". The failure lies with the president, which he admitted himself when he took responsibility for the lack of a response.
Me: You're a moron...
You: Doesn't much help deflate your holier-than-thou, only us smart people, un-hindered by Bush, could know how to help those poor dumb people in New Oleans profile. Do you realize how patronizing you sound?
I hope I sound patronizing to you Republicans. Because of your president's stupid policies we've had far more deaths in New Orleans than would have otherwise occurred. A smart person should have been elected president, not some moron like Bush who can't tell his head from a hole in the ground.
You *do* pay twice, because you are paying licenses to use technology which was never previously patented because it grew out of the public domain and so there were greater barriers to patenting it because a bureaucratic approval process was required.
To put it clearly, US taxpayers pay twice from the taxpayer money the government earmarks for drug research AND the money that the taxpayer then spends on drugs.
What makes this even worse is that the drug companies then sell the drugs in countries such as Canada for less than what they sell it in the US. In that way, the US taxpayer is triple screwed over.
Walking speed is, what. . 3mph? So you've walked just over 1.5 hours to get your 5 miles. Let's take the day off work - and spend the next 7 hours (1 hour for lunch): walking. Congratulations! We've covered over 20 miles.
You're a moron. These people weren't just worried about themselves, but their families as well. Try walking a mile, let alone 20, with your 5 year old son and 80 year old grandmother with her walker. Try doing it in 90-100 degree weather. You're not going to get very far.
On top of that, you don't know exactly when the hurricane will hit. So, it might hit when you're 5 miles out, maybe when you're at 10. You could be in shelter, maybe not. Maybe you'll be in the middle of the road, trying to drag your 5 year old and your 80 year old grandmother with her walker another 5 miles to the next town. All the while, it's raining and the weather is getting worse.
My point is that people who found evacuation distastefully difficult and decided to rely on the government for their safety if things got really bad, were exercising a reckless disregard for personal responsibility.
Again, you're a moron. The people who stayed in New Orleans stayed not because it was "distastefully" difficult, but because they couldn't leave for the reasons I pointed out above.
The civil authorities said the Superdome was safe. It's interesting that you Republicans want people to listen to the authorities regarding looting or the fact that the hurricane is coming at all, but not listen to the authorities when it comes to safety.
The only thing "distasteful" in this whole argument is you wanting to blame the victims in this whole tragedy. Had the president actually done his job, then help would have come immediately instead of 4 days late. But, this particular president is never wrong, never makes mistakes, and never at fault for anything, so it can't be his fault.
Makes me wish Clinton was back in office. He would have actually responded on time since he actually worked instead of taking 5 week vacations (in the middle of a damn war). And the only complaint about his lies were over a BJ from an intern.
I would expect that most people who actually took to "hoofin' it" out of town would have been picked up by someone else more fortunate.
Right... I can just see the old, rich, white republicans driving their $50,000 SUV stopping to pick up some young, sweaty, black couple and their 2 year old in diapers walking on the side of the road... I can also see that nice, old black woman with the walker getting into the back of that beat up truck of that bald white boy with his confederate flag tattoo... Riiiight...
And now out of curiosity if you're reading this Vicissidude, how is Libertarian prattle (or even action and policy-in-place) causing anarchy, lawlessness, death, and neglect?
Because it's Libertarian prattle that says big government is bad, nothing good comes of it, and must be removed at all costs. (As a side note, no, the Republicans do not believe this. The Republicans only said they believed this at a time when they did not control the purse strings. Bush has not vetoed any spending bills that have landed on his desk. And Bush has expanded the government enormously over his rule.)
So, big government is bad. Spending money to prevent grinding poverty is bad. Spending on levees and emergency preparedness is bad. Spending money to bus people out is bad, better to save a few bucks and put them in the unused Superdome. Spending money to send in the National Guard and Coast Guard is bad - we only want to do that when it's absolutely necessary... say, when black people start looting Wal-Mart for food.
Wow...
Your grandfather worked his butt off in college.
Attended each and every lecture, making A's in every one. He had a 4.0 GPA and YOU feel you deserve the same. Another student is partying their ass off and only has a 1.75 GPA. Will you share a portion of your grandfather's 4.0 GPA to help this less fortunate student? Say perhaps 1.0 point, bringing his GPA up to a passing 2.75 GPA? Hmmm? That's not fair? Your grandfather worked hard for that GPA. He did it for him and your future.
Sorry.... You lost 1.0 points to the other student. He too needs that grade so he can better himself w/a better job, income, family, life...... etc., etc., etc.
Again you say "That's not FAIR!"
That's the Estate Tax.
This guy was talking about the Paris Hilton types, the sons, daughters, grandsons, and granddaughters of the rich and real innovators. These Paris Hilton types have done nothing to earn what they have. They are America's aristrocracy of worthless blueblood heirs.
First: People couldn't leave because they didn't have cars? If as a last resort people had to walk to safety, most people had ample warning to exercise that mode of transportation!
New Orleans is a large city. You could easily walk 5 miles and still be in... New Orleans. You could walk 20 miles and be in the suburbs of New Orleans. Either way, you'd be screwed since you'd be out in the open with a hurricane on the way!
That also doesn't address the elderly, sick, and families with children. Heaven knows they aren't walking anywhere in the 90-100 degree heat.
Society had better be careful that the measures we take to address the problem of poverty don't continue to further debilitate the poverty stricken by increasing their reliance and dependence on The State to run their lives for them. As an earlier poster asserted: much of the problems we face as a society boil down to a lack of personal responsibility.
Bullshit. Libertarian philosophy is complete nonsense in the wake of Katrina. Here we've seen anarchy, lawlessness, death, and neglect because of Libertarian prattle like this. Federal and state governments are the only organizations that are equipped to deal with problems on this scale.
Speaking of "personal responsibility"... While you may not like giving money to the federal government, you should consider it your "personal responsibility". Although the government may not always use your money wisely, they are the only group that can take care of huge problems like hurricanes and grinding poverty. While it may seem like a waste of money to you, they'll be the first to step up when a natural disaster hits your neighborhood. And there is nowhere in this country that is invulnerable to some sort of natural disaster.
I'll finish by stating that WE need to be careful of surrendering our liberties, freedoms, and responsibilities to a state that may or may not (as we've seen time and again) be qualified to take on those responsibilities.
GP: An exploding subway is annoying and scary, but it's not a serious threat to our way of life.
You: And neither is a collapsing skyscraper?
No.
A collapsing skyscraper does not fundamentally change our lives. Our reactions after the fact changes our lives. The current administration have done everything in their power to convert America from a free democracy to a police state. Just this morning, I read that Bush has been given the right to arrest a US citizen and hold them indefinitely without actually charging them with a crime. My god, that does more damage to 100% of our democracy than the downing of one building and the deaths of 0.001% of our population.
I propose that cannibal child molestors not be arrested nor prosecuted. After all, children die all the time. And canibals only eat a few every year. What the hell? It's not a serious threat to our way of life.
The problem with that statement is that you assume the grandparent post is saying that we shouldn't go after terrorists. That's not what I read at all. What I read is that we shouldn't be going around, removing freedoms from average citizens, and completely restructuring society for the worse over such a small threat.
To use your example above, it'd be like addressing cannibal child molestation by saying that only robots can take care of children because robots can't molest them or eat them. Screw all the normal people who want access to their children. They could be cannibal child molesters. Better to be safe than sorry!
If you don't think that radical islamic fundamentalists will take away your precious freedoms, then you're sorely ignorant of modern and recent history.
So far, no radical islamic fundamentalists have taken away any of our freedoms. The people that have been taking away our freedoms are American citizens that we've elected to high offices in the Presidency and Congress.
One needs look back no further than Afghanistan circa 5 years ago to find evidence of the hideous brutality of the terrorists' intent.
And now we are replacing our democracy with a police state. The Republican's view of America's future doesn't look that different from the terrorist's view.
The sore of islamic ignorance has been allowed to fester for forty years, unchecked and fueled by proceeds from drug trade and oil sale. Now, they've brought the fight to the Western World and we can either respond with fight or surrender. Radical islam is a threat to our way of life, even if cowards and fools such as you choose ignorance over courage.
The sore of republican ignorance has been allowed to fester for thirty-five years, unchecked and fueled by proceeds from drug trade and oil sale. Now, they've brought the fight to the middle east and we can either respond with fight or retreat. Radical christianity is a threat to our way of life, even if cowards and fools such as you choose ignorance over courage.
One blatant example of poverty causing death just came up last week: Hurricane Katrina. The majority of the men, women, and children who didn't leave New Orleans because they couldn't leave. The poverty rate there is 2-3 times the national average and many people in that group don't have cars.
Now, we're trying to bus them out of the hurricane area. But, where were the buses before the hurricane? We certainly knew well ahead of the time that level of a storm would devastate New Orleans. If leaving the area was the best option, then why wasn't this option given to the poorest citizens before disaster struck? The answer has everything to do with money and the fact that they don't have it. Certainly, the city, state, or federal government could have spent a little money to use local school buses and move those people out. I have a sneaking suspicion where that money actually went...
Me: It used to be that America was a farm society where everyone was self-sufficient and didn't rely on anyone else. Good luck trying to live that lifestyle today. Now, everyone works for corporations. You do what they say, when they say it.
You: But you're not really correct in saying the US started as "everyone was self-sufficient farmers". The American Revolution started in the cities: Boston, Philadelphia. The main pressures from Britain that colonists rejected were taxes on import/export (eg. Boston Tea Party, and the fascinating Philadelphia booklegger community). The leaders of the revolution were people with lots of interdependencies, even when farmers. Especially as exporters, most American farmers weren't self-sufficient: they were Industrial Age farmers, relying on manufactured goods.
Relying on manufactured goods is one thing. Relying on someone else is another. Just because you make horseshoes doesn't mean I rely on you for horseshoes since I could go the next town over and find another blacksmith. Conversely, just because you grow food doesn't mean I rely on you for food since I could go to another farmer and get food. Either way, that does not mean I lack self-sufficiency. I make my own goods and sell them for my own money. I am my own boss and don't count on anyone else for my welfare. I can freely speak my mind and do what I wish whenever I wish without having to worry that my boss will fire me and take away my livelihood. A person working in these times is in many ways more free than people living today.
By not shopping at Wal-Mart and going to Costco instead, you are still feeding into the corporate machine. Granted, Costco is a better store than Wal-Mart, but you're still funding all the companies that made the goods in the first place. All you're doing is hurting the few rich people who truely own Wal-Mart, while doing nothing about the hordes of rich people who own all the companies that sell goods to both Wal-Mart and Costco.
So, you end up feeling good about taking out one predatory corporation. But then, you've still been supporting all these other predatory corporations instead. The only way to take out these corps is to purchase most everything made 100% locally and purchase as little as possible from the corps. About the only way I see you successfully doing that is going Amish. Good luck.
As I've said for the 4th time now, taking care of the systems were our secondary duties. Our primary duties involved supporting the actual external business of the office. As it was, we didn't have enough people to do that.
HELLO?! This is not some academic forum. This is Slashdot. VERY FEW people here actually cite refences for ANYTHING they say. If you want to know something, then look it up in Google. In the combined time it took for you to write your first response asking for a reference and the time it took me to tell you to stop being lazy, you could have had the results you wanted. It's faster than me giving you the Google link for THE EXACT SAME INFORMATION.
Now, if you can't find it in Google after a ONE SECOND search that it took me to find it in Google, then that's something different. Then I would say you have the right to bitch. However, since this is obviously fairly well known information, then you don't have the right to bitch in this case.
Again, you didn't read the "angry and upset" part. There is nothing noble about that, I don't pretend it to be. YOU are the one bringing up nobility.
What I saw was a company potentially risking their employees in order to save a few bucks by offshoring. It then appeared that policy bit them in the ass by then potentially spreading that infection throughout the company, the local community, and my family - especially since I live 20 miles away.
The fact that he went to France was not brought up in the article I read. In fact, that came out later. And even then, that brings up certain questions because that worker was going home. That's right, this guy is a foreigner. So then, did Microsoft check his immunization record when he was hired? Was that immunization record verified for authenticity? As you mentioned yourself, there are far worse locations this guy could have been coming from. Microsoft certainly hires from those locations as well. Is Microsoft as lax checking the immunizations from those foreigners too?
This article was not about Microsoft bashing. I'm not looking to be sued. I didn't say anything negative about Microsoft at all except to point out the facts and mention that they probably didn't consider this when thinking about offshoring. If anything, it's a bashing to the whole idea of offshoring.
You obviously didn't read the "angry and upset" part. Here you have a company that, at the time, I believed was risking it's employees and the local community in order to save a few bucks from offshoring.
When I found this article on my local news website, I was completely horrified and shocked. My house is about 20 miles from Redmond. So, my first thought was had I or my family been anywhere near Redmond over that time frame. We luckily had not, so that wasn't an issue.
I previously worked at Microsoft, so my second thought was whether any of my friends and previous coworkers had been exposed. I still don't know that and I certainly hope they're fine.
Then, I became angry and upset. Here you have an article that states someone who obviously works at Microsoft caught a life-threatening disease from some overseas location and brought it home. Then, the article states they worked at Microsoft for 5 days, spreading that disease throughout the company and the local city.
Granted, the article does not say whether the trip was business or pleasure. However, I know that Microsoft sends people overseas constantly. And in fact, they hire foreigners quite often. It turns out from reading other articles that this guy was on a pleasure trip to France. He was a foreigner returning home. And he obviously didn't have his immunizations up to date.
So, this was not a case of offshoring gone awry. However, this does raise several issues. For one, we now know that people returning from overseas can and do bring back deadly diseases that could infect their entire company and the their local community. This case had the potential for a major breakout right here in Redmond and the Seattle area. Second, we now know that companies are lax in the immunization screening of employees they hire from overseas.
And then you get into the "what if" scenarios. What if this guy was on business? Does Microsoft check the immunization records of people they send overseas? Do they check the immunization records of people they hire from overseas? How do we know those foreign records are accurate? Who's liable for the medical expenses when an employee comes from overseas or returns on business and infects the company and surrounding community? Is this risk even being considered in the whole offshoring scenario? Or are we ignoring this possible hazard in the face of saving a few dollars, thereby endangering our communities and people who have nothing to do with the company in order to increase profit?
And yes, people going over on vacation, like this man actually was, also return with diseases. However, a company doing business with a foreign country has a much stronger connection with that country than a group of random tourists. Microsoft sends people overseas all the time, far more than they would go by themselves on vacation. Microsoft also hires people from overseas all the time. Microsoft should take the potential risk of overseas infection into account with their business practises and attempt to mitigate those risks. Otherwise, we could see more companies and local communities risk getting infected.
I was completely horried and shocked to find this article on my local news website. I live about 20 miles from the Microsoft campus and I recently worked there until a few months ago.
My first thought upon reading this was to wonder whether I'd been anywhere near Redmond from August 16-20. My second thought was wondering if any of my previous co-workers and friends still there had been infected.
Finally, I became angry and upset. If you read the KOMO article, they never mention that this is a Microsoft worker coming from overseas. They just say this person was in Microsoft building #40, all day, from August 16-20. I feel pretty safe saying they worked for Microsoft. Further, they don't say where this person visited overseas or whether that was business or pleasure. In fact, it appears to attempt to shelter Microsoft from any wrongdoing in this event.
I want to know if this person was working overseas or just visiting. If they were working, then why were they not vaccinated. And where did they go so we can warn other people and companies traveling to that area to get vaccinated beforehand.
As far as I'm concerned, it's Microsoft's and other companies' responsibility to check those vaccinations prior to sending their employees over. If not, then those companies are liable for the spread of the disease through their company and through their local communities upon their return.
However, the news station in this report is attempting to cover this up. We don't know if this employee was on business or pleasure. That is not at all surprising considering that Microsoft is loved by the Seattle community for being a home-town company. It looks like the news station and Microsoft wanted this to be hush-hush, so they only gave information important for potential infected people. Frankly, this is an important story that should be known outside the Seattle area. Companies should take potential risks like this into account and try to reduce those risks. Otherwise, we could see more companies and local communities get infected.
As I mentioned previously, taking care of our 30 person office were our secondary duties. Our primary duties were related to the business our office conducted. Even at 3 techies, we were very understaffed.
Actually, taking care of our 30 person office were our secondary duties. Our primary duties were related to the business our office conducted. Even at 3 techies, we were still very understaffed.
My rather verbose boss, head of IT, wanted us to come up with a contingency plan for ethernet. At first we looked at each other trying to figure out what he meant. Evidently, he wanted an alternative to ethernet that still provided networking just in case ethernet failed. We're not talking about a device failing or the network being down, we're talking about failure of the protocol itself. And he wanted us to find a way around that... Did I mention we were just a regular office of about 30 people with a sum total of 3 IT workers?
How about if I make the equivalent of $50,000 in the local currency...an amount which is enough to give me the purchasing power that $50k would fetch me in another locale?
You might be able to purchase the same kind food. You might even be able to purchase the same kind of house.
But, you're not going to purchase the same kind of car I drive. And you're not going to purchase the same kind of laptop I recently bought. And you're not going to purchase the same kind of air conditioner, washer, dryer, refrigerator, or stove that I purchased. And you're not going to purchase the same kind of medical care I buy. And you're not going to purchase the same kind of drugs. And because of that, you're likely to die 11 years before me. And you're not going to purchase the same kind of vacation I took in Tahiti where rooms in the hotel cost $1000 a night and we stayed for a week.
I'm sorry, but relative dollars don't cut it for things like this.
Way to go and completely misinterpret my arguments by introducing a tangential rent vs mortgage argument into the discussion.
I could say the same to you bringing up what you pay in rent.
You're still getting ripped off by accepting $40,000 less than your work is worth... But, I may be wrong. Perhaps you are incapable of doing my work for what I get paid. Heaven knows, if you were as good as me, you could demand what I get paid.
That seems to be what you're arguing.
I could spend some more of my time trying to explain where you're wrong, but I'd rather have you do it yourself. Please read up on some basic Economics.
Sorry, I did that enough in college for my first bachelors degree in business management.
If it's one thing I learned there, it's how people can screw with money through statistics. That appears to be exactly what you are trying to do.
Slashdot Mirror
They already did hire me, ass. And I left them about 3 months ago.
Sounds like pretty much everywhere I've worked which at one time seemed a dream job.
Microsoft is different, if only in scale. These employees work on products that bring in a billion per month for their employer. Yet, these same employees only make market wages. It was only a few years ago, these employees were all but guaranteed from their options to become millionaires. Now, Microsoft is trying to up their profits on paper, so they're squeezing employees for that money. Nevermind that Microsoft is still making around a billion a month. And nevermind that Microsoft's lack of profit growth is directly attributable to those managers who are making a million a year in salary.
The president signed emergency condition paperwork and orders before the hurricane hit... The governors of the states hold (as they should) enormous responsibilities for first response to emergencies that happen on their turf. The feds aren't supposed to muscle in until expressly asked to.
...keeping people in grinding poverty by simply handing them a meager living, generation after generation, with no expectation that they can or should be self-sufficient is the height of cruelty and condescension, as polished to a fine art by liberals ever since FDR's time.
...how is Libertarian prattle (or even action and policy-in-place) causing anarchy, lawlessness, death, and neglect?
You are confusing the facts. The governor of Louisianna declared the emergency on the Friday before the hurricane started. The president didn't respond until the Friday after the hurricane. The governor of Louisianna told Bush to send "everything you got" the Saturday before the hurricane. What did Bush do? He got into a plane and flew to... San Diego.
This idea that the feds didn't have permission to go in is an outright lie. The idea that the governor didn't ask for her National Guard troops is outright deceiving. The troops are included in the "everything you got", which the president failed to respond.
Bush's appalling incompetent response was so public that he had to take responsibility for his errors, which he did yesterday. You coming in after the fact and saying that he wasn't responsible collides with Bush's statement. But then, facts and reality aren't Republican's strong suits.
Bush himself negates your whole argument.
There are ways of spending money to prevent poverty other than just handing the poor money which, by the way, is exactly what Jesus did. So, this "liberal" idea is at least 2000 years old. And given what most Republicans think of Jesus, you don't have a leg to stand on calling it "cruelty and condescension," unless of course you want to argue with Jesus.
Fixing education and making sure elementary and high schools have enough money is one way to reduce poverty, something Bush has failed to do with his "No Child Left Behind" policy. Increasing student loan amounts is another way to decrease poverty, which Bush has failed by actually reducing student loan payments. Increasing the minimum wage is another. Securing our border and thus reducing competition for low-skill jobs with illegal immigrants is another. Shall I continue or do you get the point?
Previous:
Me: Because it's Libertarian prattle that says big government is bad, nothing good comes of it, and must be removed at all costs... Spending money to send in the National Guard and Coast Guard is bad - we only want to do that when it's absolutely necessary... say, when black people start looting Wal-Mart for food.
You: The Guard troops work for the (in this case, Democrat) governor in situations like this, until she expressly turns that authority over to the feds - which she didn't do.
BS. As I mentioned above, the governor already filed the emergency paperwork the Friday before the storm and specifically spoke with Bush the next day for him to send "everything you got". The failure lies with the president, which he admitted himself when he took responsibility for the lack of a response.
Me: You're a moron...
You: Doesn't much help deflate your holier-than-thou, only us smart people, un-hindered by Bush, could know how to help those poor dumb people in New Oleans profile. Do you realize how patronizing you sound?
I hope I sound patronizing to you Republicans. Because of your president's stupid policies we've had far more deaths in New Orleans than would have otherwise occurred. A smart person should have been elected president, not some moron like Bush who can't tell his head from a hole in the ground.
You *do* pay twice, because you are paying licenses to use technology which was never previously patented because it grew out of the public domain and so there were greater barriers to patenting it because a bureaucratic approval process was required.
To put it clearly, US taxpayers pay twice from the taxpayer money the government earmarks for drug research AND the money that the taxpayer then spends on drugs.
What makes this even worse is that the drug companies then sell the drugs in countries such as Canada for less than what they sell it in the US. In that way, the US taxpayer is triple screwed over.
Walking speed is, what. . 3mph? So you've walked just over 1.5 hours to get your 5 miles. Let's take the day off work - and spend the next 7 hours (1 hour for lunch): walking. Congratulations! We've covered over 20 miles.
You're a moron. These people weren't just worried about themselves, but their families as well. Try walking a mile, let alone 20, with your 5 year old son and 80 year old grandmother with her walker. Try doing it in 90-100 degree weather. You're not going to get very far.
On top of that, you don't know exactly when the hurricane will hit. So, it might hit when you're 5 miles out, maybe when you're at 10. You could be in shelter, maybe not. Maybe you'll be in the middle of the road, trying to drag your 5 year old and your 80 year old grandmother with her walker another 5 miles to the next town. All the while, it's raining and the weather is getting worse.
My point is that people who found evacuation distastefully difficult and decided to rely on the government for their safety if things got really bad, were exercising a reckless disregard for personal responsibility.
Again, you're a moron. The people who stayed in New Orleans stayed not because it was "distastefully" difficult, but because they couldn't leave for the reasons I pointed out above.
The civil authorities said the Superdome was safe. It's interesting that you Republicans want people to listen to the authorities regarding looting or the fact that the hurricane is coming at all, but not listen to the authorities when it comes to safety.
The only thing "distasteful" in this whole argument is you wanting to blame the victims in this whole tragedy. Had the president actually done his job, then help would have come immediately instead of 4 days late. But, this particular president is never wrong, never makes mistakes, and never at fault for anything, so it can't be his fault.
Makes me wish Clinton was back in office. He would have actually responded on time since he actually worked instead of taking 5 week vacations (in the middle of a damn war). And the only complaint about his lies were over a BJ from an intern.
I would expect that most people who actually took to "hoofin' it" out of town would have been picked up by someone else more fortunate.
Right... I can just see the old, rich, white republicans driving their $50,000 SUV stopping to pick up some young, sweaty, black couple and their 2 year old in diapers walking on the side of the road... I can also see that nice, old black woman with the walker getting into the back of that beat up truck of that bald white boy with his confederate flag tattoo... Riiiight...
And now out of curiosity if you're reading this Vicissidude, how is Libertarian prattle (or even action and policy-in-place) causing anarchy, lawlessness, death, and neglect?
Because it's Libertarian prattle that says big government is bad, nothing good comes of it, and must be removed at all costs. (As a side note, no, the Republicans do not believe this. The Republicans only said they believed this at a time when they did not control the purse strings. Bush has not vetoed any spending bills that have landed on his desk. And Bush has expanded the government enormously over his rule.)
So, big government is bad. Spending money to prevent grinding poverty is bad. Spending on levees and emergency preparedness is bad. Spending money to bus people out is bad, better to save a few bucks and put them in the unused Superdome. Spending money to send in the National Guard and Coast Guard is bad - we only want to do that when it's absolutely necessary... say, when black people start looting Wal-Mart for food.
Wow ... .... You lost 1.0 points to the other student. He too needs that grade so he can better himself w/a better job, income, family, life ...... etc., etc., etc.
Your grandfather worked his butt off in college.
Attended each and every lecture, making A's in every one. He had a 4.0 GPA and YOU feel you deserve the same. Another student is partying their ass off and only has a 1.75 GPA. Will you share a portion of your grandfather's 4.0 GPA to help this less fortunate student? Say perhaps 1.0 point, bringing his GPA up to a passing 2.75 GPA? Hmmm? That's not fair? Your grandfather worked hard for that GPA. He did it for him and your future.
Sorry
Again you say "That's not FAIR!"
That's the Estate Tax.
This guy was talking about the Paris Hilton types, the sons, daughters, grandsons, and granddaughters of the rich and real innovators. These Paris Hilton types have done nothing to earn what they have. They are America's aristrocracy of worthless blueblood heirs.
First: People couldn't leave because they didn't have cars? If as a last resort people had to walk to safety, most people had ample warning to exercise that mode of transportation!
New Orleans is a large city. You could easily walk 5 miles and still be in... New Orleans. You could walk 20 miles and be in the suburbs of New Orleans. Either way, you'd be screwed since you'd be out in the open with a hurricane on the way!
That also doesn't address the elderly, sick, and families with children. Heaven knows they aren't walking anywhere in the 90-100 degree heat.
Society had better be careful that the measures we take to address the problem of poverty don't continue to further debilitate the poverty stricken by increasing their reliance and dependence on The State to run their lives for them. As an earlier poster asserted: much of the problems we face as a society boil down to a lack of personal responsibility.
Bullshit. Libertarian philosophy is complete nonsense in the wake of Katrina. Here we've seen anarchy, lawlessness, death, and neglect because of Libertarian prattle like this. Federal and state governments are the only organizations that are equipped to deal with problems on this scale.
Speaking of "personal responsibility"... While you may not like giving money to the federal government, you should consider it your "personal responsibility". Although the government may not always use your money wisely, they are the only group that can take care of huge problems like hurricanes and grinding poverty. While it may seem like a waste of money to you, they'll be the first to step up when a natural disaster hits your neighborhood. And there is nowhere in this country that is invulnerable to some sort of natural disaster.
I'll finish by stating that WE need to be careful of surrendering our liberties, freedoms, and responsibilities to a state that may or may not (as we've seen time and again) be qualified to take on those responsibilities.
I couldn't agree more.
GP: An exploding subway is annoying and scary, but it's not a serious threat to our way of life.
You: And neither is a collapsing skyscraper?
No.
A collapsing skyscraper does not fundamentally change our lives. Our reactions after the fact changes our lives. The current administration have done everything in their power to convert America from a free democracy to a police state. Just this morning, I read that Bush has been given the right to arrest a US citizen and hold them indefinitely without actually charging them with a crime . My god, that does more damage to 100% of our democracy than the downing of one building and the deaths of 0.001% of our population.
I propose that cannibal child molestors not be arrested nor prosecuted. After all, children die all the time. And canibals only eat a few every year. What the hell? It's not a serious threat to our way of life.
The problem with that statement is that you assume the grandparent post is saying that we shouldn't go after terrorists. That's not what I read at all. What I read is that we shouldn't be going around, removing freedoms from average citizens, and completely restructuring society for the worse over such a small threat.
To use your example above, it'd be like addressing cannibal child molestation by saying that only robots can take care of children because robots can't molest them or eat them. Screw all the normal people who want access to their children. They could be cannibal child molesters. Better to be safe than sorry!
If you don't think that radical islamic fundamentalists will take away your precious freedoms, then you're sorely ignorant of modern and recent history.
So far, no radical islamic fundamentalists have taken away any of our freedoms. The people that have been taking away our freedoms are American citizens that we've elected to high offices in the Presidency and Congress.
One needs look back no further than Afghanistan circa 5 years ago to find evidence of the hideous brutality of the terrorists' intent.
And now we are replacing our democracy with a police state. The Republican's view of America's future doesn't look that different from the terrorist's view.
The sore of islamic ignorance has been allowed to fester for forty years, unchecked and fueled by proceeds from drug trade and oil sale. Now, they've brought the fight to the Western World and we can either respond with fight or surrender. Radical islam is a threat to our way of life, even if cowards and fools such as you choose ignorance over courage.
The sore of republican ignorance has been allowed to fester for thirty-five years, unchecked and fueled by proceeds from drug trade and oil sale. Now, they've brought the fight to the middle east and we can either respond with fight or retreat. Radical christianity is a threat to our way of life, even if cowards and fools such as you choose ignorance over courage.
One blatant example of poverty causing death just came up last week: Hurricane Katrina. The majority of the men, women, and children who didn't leave New Orleans because they couldn't leave. The poverty rate there is 2-3 times the national average and many people in that group don't have cars.
Now, we're trying to bus them out of the hurricane area. But, where were the buses before the hurricane? We certainly knew well ahead of the time that level of a storm would devastate New Orleans. If leaving the area was the best option, then why wasn't this option given to the poorest citizens before disaster struck? The answer has everything to do with money and the fact that they don't have it. Certainly, the city, state, or federal government could have spent a little money to use local school buses and move those people out. I have a sneaking suspicion where that money actually went...
Me: It used to be that America was a farm society where everyone was self-sufficient and didn't rely on anyone else. Good luck trying to live that lifestyle today. Now, everyone works for corporations. You do what they say, when they say it.
You: But you're not really correct in saying the US started as "everyone was self-sufficient farmers". The American Revolution started in the cities: Boston, Philadelphia. The main pressures from Britain that colonists rejected were taxes on import/export (eg. Boston Tea Party, and the fascinating Philadelphia booklegger community). The leaders of the revolution were people with lots of interdependencies, even when farmers. Especially as exporters, most American farmers weren't self-sufficient: they were Industrial Age farmers, relying on manufactured goods.
Relying on manufactured goods is one thing. Relying on someone else is another. Just because you make horseshoes doesn't mean I rely on you for horseshoes since I could go the next town over and find another blacksmith. Conversely, just because you grow food doesn't mean I rely on you for food since I could go to another farmer and get food. Either way, that does not mean I lack self-sufficiency. I make my own goods and sell them for my own money. I am my own boss and don't count on anyone else for my welfare. I can freely speak my mind and do what I wish whenever I wish without having to worry that my boss will fire me and take away my livelihood. A person working in these times is in many ways more free than people living today.
By not shopping at Wal-Mart and going to Costco instead, you are still feeding into the corporate machine. Granted, Costco is a better store than Wal-Mart, but you're still funding all the companies that made the goods in the first place. All you're doing is hurting the few rich people who truely own Wal-Mart, while doing nothing about the hordes of rich people who own all the companies that sell goods to both Wal-Mart and Costco.
So, you end up feeling good about taking out one predatory corporation. But then, you've still been supporting all these other predatory corporations instead. The only way to take out these corps is to purchase most everything made 100% locally and purchase as little as possible from the corps. About the only way I see you successfully doing that is going Amish. Good luck.
As I've said for the 4th time now, taking care of the systems were our secondary duties. Our primary duties involved supporting the actual external business of the office. As it was, we didn't have enough people to do that.
How about you go fuck yourself?
This article was brand new as of last night when I submitted it. No one else was reporting on it.
And as I mentioned previously, the fact that this guy got his disease from France doesn't change the argument.
HELLO?! This is not some academic forum. This is Slashdot. VERY FEW people here actually cite refences for ANYTHING they say. If you want to know something, then look it up in Google. In the combined time it took for you to write your first response asking for a reference and the time it took me to tell you to stop being lazy, you could have had the results you wanted. It's faster than me giving you the Google link for THE EXACT SAME INFORMATION.
Now, if you can't find it in Google after a ONE SECOND search that it took me to find it in Google, then that's something different. Then I would say you have the right to bitch. However, since this is obviously fairly well known information, then you don't have the right to bitch in this case.
No, taking care of the systems were our secondary duties. Our primary duties involved the actual external business of the office.
Again, you didn't read the "angry and upset" part. There is nothing noble about that, I don't pretend it to be. YOU are the one bringing up nobility.
What I saw was a company potentially risking their employees in order to save a few bucks by offshoring. It then appeared that policy bit them in the ass by then potentially spreading that infection throughout the company, the local community, and my family - especially since I live 20 miles away.
The fact that he went to France was not brought up in the article I read. In fact, that came out later. And even then, that brings up certain questions because that worker was going home. That's right, this guy is a foreigner. So then, did Microsoft check his immunization record when he was hired? Was that immunization record verified for authenticity? As you mentioned yourself, there are far worse locations this guy could have been coming from. Microsoft certainly hires from those locations as well. Is Microsoft as lax checking the immunizations from those foreigners too?
This article was not about Microsoft bashing. I'm not looking to be sued. I didn't say anything negative about Microsoft at all except to point out the facts and mention that they probably didn't consider this when thinking about offshoring. If anything, it's a bashing to the whole idea of offshoring.
You obviously didn't read the "angry and upset" part. Here you have a company that, at the time, I believed was risking it's employees and the local community in order to save a few bucks from offshoring.
When I found this article on my local news website, I was completely horrified and shocked. My house is about 20 miles from Redmond. So, my first thought was had I or my family been anywhere near Redmond over that time frame. We luckily had not, so that wasn't an issue.
I previously worked at Microsoft, so my second thought was whether any of my friends and previous coworkers had been exposed. I still don't know that and I certainly hope they're fine.
Then, I became angry and upset. Here you have an article that states someone who obviously works at Microsoft caught a life-threatening disease from some overseas location and brought it home. Then, the article states they worked at Microsoft for 5 days, spreading that disease throughout the company and the local city.
Granted, the article does not say whether the trip was business or pleasure. However, I know that Microsoft sends people overseas constantly. And in fact, they hire foreigners quite often. It turns out from reading other articles that this guy was on a pleasure trip to France. He was a foreigner returning home. And he obviously didn't have his immunizations up to date.
So, this was not a case of offshoring gone awry. However, this does raise several issues. For one, we now know that people returning from overseas can and do bring back deadly diseases that could infect their entire company and the their local community. This case had the potential for a major breakout right here in Redmond and the Seattle area. Second, we now know that companies are lax in the immunization screening of employees they hire from overseas.
And then you get into the "what if" scenarios. What if this guy was on business? Does Microsoft check the immunization records of people they send overseas? Do they check the immunization records of people they hire from overseas? How do we know those foreign records are accurate? Who's liable for the medical expenses when an employee comes from overseas or returns on business and infects the company and surrounding community? Is this risk even being considered in the whole offshoring scenario? Or are we ignoring this possible hazard in the face of saving a few dollars, thereby endangering our communities and people who have nothing to do with the company in order to increase profit?
And yes, people going over on vacation, like this man actually was, also return with diseases. However, a company doing business with a foreign country has a much stronger connection with that country than a group of random tourists. Microsoft sends people overseas all the time, far more than they would go by themselves on vacation. Microsoft also hires people from overseas all the time. Microsoft should take the potential risk of overseas infection into account with their business practises and attempt to mitigate those risks. Otherwise, we could see more companies and local communities risk getting infected.
I was completely horried and shocked to find this article on my local news website. I live about 20 miles from the Microsoft campus and I recently worked there until a few months ago.
My first thought upon reading this was to wonder whether I'd been anywhere near Redmond from August 16-20. My second thought was wondering if any of my previous co-workers and friends still there had been infected.
Finally, I became angry and upset. If you read the KOMO article, they never mention that this is a Microsoft worker coming from overseas. They just say this person was in Microsoft building #40, all day, from August 16-20. I feel pretty safe saying they worked for Microsoft. Further, they don't say where this person visited overseas or whether that was business or pleasure. In fact, it appears to attempt to shelter Microsoft from any wrongdoing in this event.
I want to know if this person was working overseas or just visiting. If they were working, then why were they not vaccinated. And where did they go so we can warn other people and companies traveling to that area to get vaccinated beforehand.
As far as I'm concerned, it's Microsoft's and other companies' responsibility to check those vaccinations prior to sending their employees over. If not, then those companies are liable for the spread of the disease through their company and through their local communities upon their return.
However, the news station in this report is attempting to cover this up. We don't know if this employee was on business or pleasure. That is not at all surprising considering that Microsoft is loved by the Seattle community for being a home-town company. It looks like the news station and Microsoft wanted this to be hush-hush, so they only gave information important for potential infected people. Frankly, this is an important story that should be known outside the Seattle area. Companies should take potential risks like this into account and try to reduce those risks. Otherwise, we could see more companies and local communities get infected.
As I mentioned previously, taking care of our 30 person office were our secondary duties. Our primary duties were related to the business our office conducted. Even at 3 techies, we were very understaffed.
Yeah, so what happens when the token ring fails? We have to come up with a contingency plan for that as well!
You see the problem with the pattern here...
Well, to use his logic, how do you know any of that stuff isn't going to fail either?
Actually, taking care of our 30 person office were our secondary duties. Our primary duties were related to the business our office conducted. Even at 3 techies, we were still very understaffed.
No, the problem with that is wireless networking gear still uses ethernet.
My rather verbose boss, head of IT, wanted us to come up with a contingency plan for ethernet. At first we looked at each other trying to figure out what he meant. Evidently, he wanted an alternative to ethernet that still provided networking just in case ethernet failed. We're not talking about a device failing or the network being down, we're talking about failure of the protocol itself. And he wanted us to find a way around that... Did I mention we were just a regular office of about 30 people with a sum total of 3 IT workers?
How about if I make the equivalent of $50,000 in the local currency...an amount which is enough to give me the purchasing power that $50k would fetch me in another locale?
You might be able to purchase the same kind food. You might even be able to purchase the same kind of house.
But, you're not going to purchase the same kind of car I drive. And you're not going to purchase the same kind of laptop I recently bought. And you're not going to purchase the same kind of air conditioner, washer, dryer, refrigerator, or stove that I purchased. And you're not going to purchase the same kind of medical care I buy. And you're not going to purchase the same kind of drugs. And because of that, you're likely to die 11 years before me. And you're not going to purchase the same kind of vacation I took in Tahiti where rooms in the hotel cost $1000 a night and we stayed for a week.
I'm sorry, but relative dollars don't cut it for things like this.
Way to go and completely misinterpret my arguments by introducing a tangential rent vs mortgage argument into the discussion.
I could say the same to you bringing up what you pay in rent.
You're still getting ripped off by accepting $40,000 less than your work is worth... But, I may be wrong. Perhaps you are incapable of doing my work for what I get paid. Heaven knows, if you were as good as me, you could demand what I get paid.
That seems to be what you're arguing.
I could spend some more of my time trying to explain where you're wrong, but I'd rather have you do it yourself. Please read up on some basic Economics.
Sorry, I did that enough in college for my first bachelors degree in business management.
If it's one thing I learned there, it's how people can screw with money through statistics. That appears to be exactly what you are trying to do.