For everyone of you who claim that vaccines saves lives, tell that to the parents of children who develop autism for no reason and within days of getting a vaccination shot.
I would ask them whether they'd have a child with autism who is still alive, or a child that developed Polio. One of those children could still live a healthy, full life. The other one would be dead before they hit puberty.
Another thing, why is it that vaccinations that are given to children are the same dose that are given to adults? Is that really safe for children?
So people can get the equivalent knowledge of an undergraduate education.
There's more to a college education than the pure learning.
Re:Did Zuckerberg ever have to get past HR?
on
Just Say No To College
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Listening to others is some fields is a liability instead of an asset.
There is absolutely no field where this is true. If you don't have the comprehension to know what to do with what you listened to, that's a different problem.
I am really, really fucking tired of that stupid strawman "the only people who go to college are those there for art history" arguments. Why the fuck would you even bring up art history in this discussion? If you want to make a relevant point, then compare to an engineering degree.
No, it's not. I'm sorry, but you do not have the "freedom" to ignore facts. Especially when you agree to send your children to public school. If you wish to home school your children, that is different.
I'm sorry, but I really do not give two shits about this supposed "freedom" to be an idiot.
There are other solutions for those problems, most notably lawsuits
Unless you're willing to front the money to get those lawsuits going, shut the fuck up.
However, if for the child, a job that pays in exchange for 60 hours a week, represents a financial boost, that could be a good thing. It's better than languishing in poverty.
So children should be sent to work in dangerous factories, instead of getting an education. I'm sure that will totally help with the cycle of poverty.
It has never been illegal to neglect people and allow them to die.
But only a total and complete asshole would advocate doing so.
This is probably better handled through expensive high-profile lawsuits.
And I'm sure you'd be willing to front the costs of those lawsuits, yes?
They are damaging and tend to force companies to pre-emptively avoid infraction.
Part of the reason why I don't patronize Costco is because they overpay their employees. Why should I pay higher prices from a company unwilling to take competitive measures?
Who the fuck are you to say they are "overpaying" their employees? Further, given their performance, they very clearly are quite competitive.
If the answer to the problem is, "The worker can sue!", then you have no fucking answer. 1). It takes a fuckton of money and time to attempt to sue an employer. Lawyers aren't cheap, and the person still has to feed and shelter their family in the meantime. 2). Suing an employer, no matter how justified it was, tends to get you put on a blacklist, making you unable to find another job after you sue the person.
Also known as a "Health Savings Account". Basically, you get the shittiest, most barebones insurance, and you get a savings account that can be fed by an automatic deduction from your paycheck.
My former employer tried to institute that last year. They experienced major brain drain as a lot of people were pissed off and left for far less shitty companies.
which means that public debt soaks up cash that would otherwise have been available for investment in the private sector.
Not really. People put their money in government debt when they're too scared to put it anywhere else. Someone who wants to invest in government debt would NOT invest in a risky startup if they didn't have the option to buy government bonds.
Why is it that when the poor point out that something is not fair, it's "Class Warfare", but when the rich get policies enacted to benefit them at the expense of the poor, it's not?
Also, why the fuck should the poor subsidize the rich in the form of tax breaks for "capital gains"? Why should being rewarded for simply having money carry lower taxes than people who actually do the fucking work? None of those investors would have those "capital gains" if it wasn't for the people doing the work.
Slashdot Mirror
For everyone of you who claim that vaccines saves lives, tell that to the parents of children who develop autism for no reason and within days of getting a vaccination shot.
I would ask them whether they'd have a child with autism who is still alive, or a child that developed Polio. One of those children could still live a healthy, full life. The other one would be dead before they hit puberty.
Another thing, why is it that vaccinations that are given to children are the same dose that are given to adults? Is that really safe for children?
Show us your research that it's not.
It is far less prevalent in nations with Universal Health Care.
Those don't exist. No matter how good you are, there is someone else qualified to do your job too.
So people can get the equivalent knowledge of an undergraduate education.
There's more to a college education than the pure learning.
Listening to others is some fields is a liability instead of an asset.
There is absolutely no field where this is true. If you don't have the comprehension to know what to do with what you listened to, that's a different problem.
I am really, really fucking tired of that stupid strawman "the only people who go to college are those there for art history" arguments. Why the fuck would you even bring up art history in this discussion? If you want to make a relevant point, then compare to an engineering degree.
Economic behavior, for one.
So prior to the invention of writing, people violated their children's rights just by letting them exist?
That is quite possibly the dumbest fucking thing said on this topic.
There are reasons Americans don't take European pronouncements on human rights too seriously.
And almost none of them are good reasons.
But for anyone to say that this matter would amount to abuse is simply as anti-freedom and anti human-rights as possible
Horseshit. Are you saying that someone who agrees with this position is more anti human-rights than North Korea?
No, it's not. I'm sorry, but you do not have the "freedom" to ignore facts. Especially when you agree to send your children to public school. If you wish to home school your children, that is different.
I'm sorry, but I really do not give two shits about this supposed "freedom" to be an idiot.
There are other solutions for those problems, most notably lawsuits
Unless you're willing to front the money to get those lawsuits going, shut the fuck up.
However, if for the child, a job that pays in exchange for 60 hours a week, represents a financial boost, that could be a good thing. It's better than languishing in poverty.
So children should be sent to work in dangerous factories, instead of getting an education. I'm sure that will totally help with the cycle of poverty.
It has never been illegal to neglect people and allow them to die.
But only a total and complete asshole would advocate doing so.
This is probably better handled through expensive high-profile lawsuits.
And I'm sure you'd be willing to front the costs of those lawsuits, yes?
They are damaging and tend to force companies to pre-emptively avoid infraction.
If that were true, most of them wouldn't happen.
Part of the reason why I don't patronize Costco is because they overpay their employees. Why should I pay higher prices from a company unwilling to take competitive measures?
Who the fuck are you to say they are "overpaying" their employees? Further, given their performance, they very clearly are quite competitive.
If the answer to the problem is, "The worker can sue!", then you have no fucking answer. 1). It takes a fuckton of money and time to attempt to sue an employer. Lawyers aren't cheap, and the person still has to feed and shelter their family in the meantime. 2). Suing an employer, no matter how justified it was, tends to get you put on a blacklist, making you unable to find another job after you sue the person.
The point is all that degrees of quality of our labor have become more expensive through over-regulation.
No, they haven't. Unless you're talking about "executive talent".
You mean treating workers like PEOPLE increases costs?
Go fuck yourself with your "These things raise costs!" bullshit. You know what else "raises costs"? Clean air and water.
I would love to see you look for doctors that only make $35k.
If someone can't live well with that amount of money, they are spending money frivolously, have personal vices, or they are probably dumb.
Or they live in a large city with a high cost of living.
Yes, there was. That was the context the discussion was happening in.
Tell that to the executives first.
"Consumer Directed Health Plan"
Also known as a "Health Savings Account". Basically, you get the shittiest, most barebones insurance, and you get a savings account that can be fed by an automatic deduction from your paycheck.
My former employer tried to institute that last year. They experienced major brain drain as a lot of people were pissed off and left for far less shitty companies.
Horseshit.
American workers need to stop feeling so entitled to large wages and outrageous benefits.
Tell that to the people at the top first.
which means that public debt soaks up cash that would otherwise have been available for investment in the private sector.
Not really. People put their money in government debt when they're too scared to put it anywhere else. Someone who wants to invest in government debt would NOT invest in a risky startup if they didn't have the option to buy government bonds.
Actually in USA the top 5% of income earners pay 59% of all income taxes and the bottom 50% of income earners pay 3% of all income taxes.
And I'm sure that has nothing to do with the fact that the bottom 50% don't make shit for income.
it is jealousy based class warfare.
Why is it that when the poor point out that something is not fair, it's "Class Warfare", but when the rich get policies enacted to benefit them at the expense of the poor, it's not?
Also, why the fuck should the poor subsidize the rich in the form of tax breaks for "capital gains"? Why should being rewarded for simply having money carry lower taxes than people who actually do the fucking work? None of those investors would have those "capital gains" if it wasn't for the people doing the work.