"slightly more than one-third of students (1,147 children) are defined as homeless here, mostly sharing homes with other families because their parents cannot afford one of their own
When most people hear the word 'homeless' they imagine people living outdoors, maybe spending some nights in homeless shelters, but the majority of 'homeless' children described in this report have home to return to, they are just sharing their home with another family...
Is a 30 year-old living in his parents house 'homeless'? By the standards of this report the answer is 'yes', but to most people the answer is 'no'.
Carrier got $7M in tax benefits over the next 10 years in return for them investing $16M into upgrading the plant and keeping 300 jobs.
Yeah, NO.
$7M in tax benefits, yes, but at $700K/year over the next ten years.
That $700K/year for ten years keeps almost 1,000 (not 300) jobs in Indiana.
Carrier had a $68M payroll at that plant, and after improving the plant will keep north of $50M of that payroll in Indiana for the next ten years... $700K in concessions to keep $50M in the Indiana economy for ten years? That's a bargain.
"Companies are not going to leave the United States anymore without consequences," he said to workers at the Carrier plant. "These companies aren't going to be leaving anymore. They aren't going to be taking people's hearts out."
You do understand the fundamental difference between closing down a factory and moving the work overseas (Carrier) and bringing in foreign workers to work in America, keeping the jobs here (Carnival) - right?
It's not reasonable to hold up the lack of change as something that is just Obama's fault- the voters stopped him by putting in a conservative house, and later a conservative senate.
Your somewhat astute analysis ignores the reasons the voters put in a conservative House and then Senate the reason was growing dissatisfaction with Democrats. Obama's reelection numbers in 2012 were lower than his 2008 election numbers because of a growing sense of dissatisfaction with 'Hope & Change' across the electorate.
He also doesn't like H1B. This is evidenced by his hiring of straight up illegal immigrants to work his construction crews.
You seriously imagine The Trump Organization directly hires construction workers? Seriously? Any significant construction project includes a general contractor and any number of subcontractors, each of whom are responsible for the workers they hire, not the client.
The reality is that the current, highly-paid US worker has valuable skills and talents the foreign worker does not, that is why the US employer needs them to train their replacement.
When workers realize the only leverage they have is their exclusive posession of those unique skills and talents, the only answer is to immediately threaten to leave the employer without training their replacement - this whole abuse of H1B worker programs is based on the willingness of US workers to train their replacement for a few months more pay.
Other than that, I agree with the points raised in the parent post ("I'm sorry...").
Wait, so what? Human nature being what it is, there is always an amount of money they can offer someone to take a later flight - it works because people accept their offers when a flight is over-booked and everyone shows up.
The 700 superdelegates did what they were intended to do, keep a grassroots candidate (like Bernie Sanders) from being the DNC's candidate, as described by Debbie Wasserman Schultz, former head of the DNC.
There's a LOT of Republicans that don't like Trump, it's quite plausible that they could have chosen a compromise candidate.
They chose not to vote for Hillary, and they chose to vote for Trump.
On the Democrat side, millions of Obama 2012 voters chose not to vote for Hillary, as her total number of votes was lower than Obama's reelection numbers in 2012.
She did know that we don't elect Presidents based on the popular vote, we choose based on electoral votes, and trump won 30 states and over 300 electoral votes, making him President.
Presidential candidates are under no legal requirement to share their tax returns, federal administrations are required under law to respond to FOIA requests in a timely and complete manner.
Tax returns are private, can not be FOIA'd, but there is a huge department (called the IRS) which enforces tax code compliance - if there's a legal issue with trump's taxes I trust the IRS would have found it during one of his many audits.
Because fossil fuels have been subsidized by at least half a trillion dollars.
How silly. Those fossil fuel 'subsidies' tooke the form of deductible business expenses, the same as any other business is able to deduct, while the solar industry is subsidized with actual cash payments of taxpayer money to cover around 50% of all solar generation programs... no the solar generation plants get the same deductions for their business expenses as fossil fuel companies do.
Do you imagine that the federal government cuts checks to oil companies?
It wasn't that long ago that our current President promised to tax and regulate the coal industry out of existence...
The only people eligible for these payments are unemployed people, employed people get to pay taxes to cover the payments.
Described another way, the moment you become unemployed, the government will reward you with $14,000US paid over the next 24 months - find a job, don't find a job, it makes no difference, you'll keep getting taxpayer money for two years because, well, the government is curious if free money inspires you to make more money or try and figure out how to live on $585US/month...
Some worry the information could only be retrieved with a taxing Freedom of Information Act request.
Until the current administration FOIA requests were trivial, under the current administration it too-frequently requires a federal judge to order the timely release of information from the self-declared 'most transparent administration ever'...
The entire point of articles like this is for politicized scientists to draw attention to themselves and their imagined plight under an administration full of political 'others'.
They've likely lost easy funding reproving climate change using reams of carefully hand-edited climate data, and they are afraid they might slip into obscurity under Trump.
Let's imagine their worst fears are realized, and the next administration wipes their data from public resources - so what? Weren't these 'experts' smart enough to make backups?
The 'whole' mission accomplished fiasco was nothing more than a mis-represented sign signaling the carrier group's end to a successful mission... it was little more than a big red, white, and blue roscharc test.
So, now what? What does the sitting President plan to do in response to this 'attack' on our country by a foreign power?
AFAIK these 'attacks' were on-going for months, but only commanded Presidential attention when the election didn't go the way he hoped/planned/assumed it would.
But again, the question is, What will President Obama do in response to this attack during his administration?
You can bet that the various Republican counterparts to Podesta have written much, much worse in their own email records;
What a childish claim - why would the contents of RNC emails be 'much, much worse'? You could conclude that they likely have similar things in their emails.
the only reason you don't know for sure is because it suits Russia's purpose to withhold that information from you for the time being.
The most reasonable answer as to why so many Huma work emails were on a forgotten laptop is because she set her laptop to download work emails and store them instead of simply using it to access a webmail portal on the server...
But it turns out they fell for a common phishing scam written by some script kiddie. How does this make them look less incompetent?
Podesta used G-fucking-mail... HRC used a homebrew server for convienience... The DNC ran an UN patched Exchange server on Windows... I believe these are textbook definitions for incompetence!
Slashdot Mirror
When most people hear the word 'homeless' they imagine people living outdoors, maybe spending some nights in homeless shelters, but the majority of 'homeless' children described in this report have home to return to, they are just sharing their home with another family...
Is a 30 year-old living in his parents house 'homeless'? By the standards of this report the answer is 'yes', but to most people the answer is 'no'.
Yeah, NO.
$7M in tax benefits, yes, but at $700K/year over the next ten years.
That $700K/year for ten years keeps almost 1,000 (not 300) jobs in Indiana.
Carrier had a $68M payroll at that plant, and after improving the plant will keep north of $50M of that payroll in Indiana for the next ten years... $700K in concessions to keep $50M in the Indiana economy for ten years? That's a bargain.
You do understand the fundamental difference between closing down a factory and moving the work overseas (Carrier) and bringing in foreign workers to work in America, keeping the jobs here (Carnival) - right?
Your somewhat astute analysis ignores the reasons the voters put in a conservative House and then Senate the reason was growing dissatisfaction with Democrats. Obama's reelection numbers in 2012 were lower than his 2008 election numbers because of a growing sense of dissatisfaction with 'Hope & Change' across the electorate.
You seriously imagine The Trump Organization directly hires construction workers? Seriously? Any significant construction project includes a general contractor and any number of subcontractors, each of whom are responsible for the workers they hire, not the client.
The reality is that the current, highly-paid US worker has valuable skills and talents the foreign worker does not, that is why the US employer needs them to train their replacement.
When workers realize the only leverage they have is their exclusive posession of those unique skills and talents, the only answer is to immediately threaten to leave the employer without training their replacement - this whole abuse of H1B worker programs is based on the willingness of US workers to train their replacement for a few months more pay.
Other than that, I agree with the points raised in the parent post ("I'm sorry...").
OMG!
Wait, so what? Human nature being what it is, there is always an amount of money they can offer someone to take a later flight - it works because people accept their offers when a flight is over-booked and everyone shows up.
The 700 superdelegates did what they were intended to do, keep a grassroots candidate (like Bernie Sanders) from being the DNC's candidate, as described by Debbie Wasserman Schultz, former head of the DNC.
They chose not to vote for Hillary, and they chose to vote for Trump.
On the Democrat side, millions of Obama 2012 voters chose not to vote for Hillary, as her total number of votes was lower than Obama's reelection numbers in 2012.
She did know that we don't elect Presidents based on the popular vote, we choose based on electoral votes, and trump won 30 states and over 300 electoral votes, making him President.
Presidential candidates are under no legal requirement to share their tax returns, federal administrations are required under law to respond to FOIA requests in a timely and complete manner.
Tax returns are private, can not be FOIA'd, but there is a huge department (called the IRS) which enforces tax code compliance - if there's a legal issue with trump's taxes I trust the IRS would have found it during one of his many audits.
How silly. Those fossil fuel 'subsidies' tooke the form of deductible business expenses, the same as any other business is able to deduct, while the solar industry is subsidized with actual cash payments of taxpayer money to cover around 50% of all solar generation programs... no the solar generation plants get the same deductions for their business expenses as fossil fuel companies do.
Do you imagine that the federal government cuts checks to oil companies?
It wasn't that long ago that our current President promised to tax and regulate the coal industry out of existence...
The only people eligible for these payments are unemployed people, employed people get to pay taxes to cover the payments.
Described another way, the moment you become unemployed, the government will reward you with $14,000US paid over the next 24 months - find a job, don't find a job, it makes no difference, you'll keep getting taxpayer money for two years because, well, the government is curious if free money inspires you to make more money or try and figure out how to live on $585US/month...
No, you can't spell 'job'.
Want to guess why? Because one is subsidized and the other was successfully taxed and regulated out of existence.
Oh really? Have they stopped (or even slowed down) their construction of new coal-fired generators?
Until the current administration FOIA requests were trivial, under the current administration it too-frequently requires a federal judge to order the timely release of information from the self-declared 'most transparent administration ever'...
The entire point of articles like this is for politicized scientists to draw attention to themselves and their imagined plight under an administration full of political 'others'.
They've likely lost easy funding reproving climate change using reams of carefully hand-edited climate data, and they are afraid they might slip into obscurity under Trump.
Let's imagine their worst fears are realized, and the next administration wipes their data from public resources - so what? Weren't these 'experts' smart enough to make backups?
Why?
The 'whole' mission accomplished fiasco was nothing more than a mis-represented sign signaling the carrier group's end to a successful mission... it was little more than a big red, white, and blue roscharc test.
Assange is the only player in this game with a track record of telling the truth consistently, he deserves the benefit of the doubt.
So, now what? What does the sitting President plan to do in response to this 'attack' on our country by a foreign power?
AFAIK these 'attacks' were on-going for months, but only commanded Presidential attention when the election didn't go the way he hoped/planned/assumed it would.
But again, the question is, What will President Obama do in response to this attack during his administration?
What a childish claim - why would the contents of RNC emails be 'much, much worse'? You could conclude that they likely have similar things in their emails.
Or the RNC email server was secure?
Or the RNC emails weren't as 'explosive'?
Or the RNC simply wasn't targeted?
Or any of a hundred other reasons...
The most reasonable answer as to why so many Huma work emails were on a forgotten laptop is because she set her laptop to download work emails and store them instead of simply using it to access a webmail portal on the server...
Podesta used G-fucking-mail... HRC used a homebrew server for convienience... The DNC ran an UN patched Exchange server on Windows... I believe these are textbook definitions for incompetence!
Wow, Democrats keep using that word 'transparent' - I do not think it means what you think it does.
'Transparent' does not mean - take years to respond to FOIA requests.
'Transparent' does not mean - turning over hand-picked work emails two years after leaving office.
'Transparent' does not mean - anything embarrassing can be kept private due to 'executive privlege.'
'Transparent' does not mean - crying like a stuck pig because your embarrassing emails were made public against your will.