And thus the large increase in help wanted signs is a unicorn.
Even if this "large increase" existed, it would not be evidence of causality. But the city leaders say there has been little impact on jobs: City manager Todd Cutts says there has been no impact on sales tax or property tax, and no change in the number of business licenses issued.
Every time the minimum goes up the economy gets a boost which leads to more jobs.
You say this, and then you provide citations with say the opposite. From your own citation: A review of 64 studies on minimum wage increases found no discernable effect on employment.
"No discrenable effect" is not "a boost which leads to more jobs".
The exec who signed off on it should get the pink slip. Not the person in procurement.
Why shouldn't BOTH of them lose their jobs? "Because my boss told me to" should not be an excuse for bureaucratic corruption, any more than it was an excuse at Nuremberg. Government employees have a fiduciary duty to the public, not just "the system".
bool
procurement.proccessIsCorrupt(void)
{
return (vendor == "Pearson" || vendor == "Oracle") ? CERTAINLY : PROBABLY;
}
And even now, the campus rape epidemic has taken on the tenor of the satanic ritual sexual abuse moral panic of the 80s.
The biggest similarity is that neither actually exists. The satanic ritual abuse is now believed to have had zero actual perpetrators or victims (other than the falsely accused). While there are certainly rapes on campuses, they are actually less common there than in society as a whole. So to talk about "campus rape" as if that is a specific problem, is misleading.
Yes, it's called the very low unemployment rate here. Which DROPPED after minimum wages were increased.
The unemployment rate dropped all across America, and in Europe as well. I doubt all of that was because the minimum wage was raised for 1500 workers at SeaTac.
Anyway, I appreciate your honesty in confirming that your "statistics" don't exist.
I'm assuming that the suit really means "against white people" (race is a protected class), and we just got a bad summary, as usual.
"National origin" is also a protected class. You can't legally discriminate against someone just because they are, or are not, an immigrant, or are, or are not, an immigrant from a particular country. There is an exception when the government mandates US citizens for national security reasons, like TSA inspectors.
But if you raise the minimum wage to say $15/hour like Seattle and other places, statistics show job growth of US citizens will increase and they will hire more Americans to work!
Can you provide a citation for these "statistics" that show mandatory higher wages lead to more jobs? I have seen studies (using a methodology that many economists dispute) that show no significant job losses from a higher minimum wage, but never one that showed actual gains. Since that defies common sense, and if your "statistics" actually existed, they would be widely trumpeted by advocates of a higher minimum, I hereby conclude that you are full of baloney and just making stuff up.
And who controls the people looking at the info?
The organization that owns the site.
And who controls the people looking at police reports? How is this any different, other than that the police are less trustworthy, less likely to consider victim privacy a priority, and more willing to leak/distort information for political purposes, as happened in the Duke case?
So why not grant total anonymity to the consipirators with an app like this
You might want to RTFA. There is no "total anonymity". It is hidden from public view, but the accuser is still asked to leave contact info. If there are multiple credible accusations about the same perp, from people that are willing to identify themselves, then the police are contacted.
This app prevents the victim from having to go public with accusations, and prevents the perp from being publicly accused before a credible case has been established. So your concerns seem completely backwards.
If "Jackie" had used this website instead of going to Rolling Stone, her false accusations would have gone nowhere.
Because NO ONE would ever think about getting all their friends to turn the same guy in that they are pissed at.
So what if they do? The information entered into this website is not public. The site owners would look at the info, and if they found it credible, would report it to the police. If none of the accusers entered any contact info, it would go no where. If they did, they would be contacted by the police, and asked to make an official statement. At that point, it would be NO DIFFERENT than if a group of people got together and made the same accusations directly to the police. The only thing this website changes, is that the accusers don't have to know each other, which is the opposite of your scenario.
They didn't even fire the reporter who wrote that bullshit story.
The reason she wasn't fired, it that the decision to go with the story was made at the top. The editors and management at RS were fully aware that the story had not been vetted, and that the "victim" had tried to retract. It would have been hypocritical of them to push all the blame onto Ederly. The problems at Rolling Stone go far beyond one author. Their recent cover story that tried to make a sympathetic sex symbol out of the Boston Marathon bomber was another egregious example of a poor editorial decision.
What he just did was remove all money worries from his staff.
But he could have used that money to hire more people instead, and expand the business. The result would have been broader income equality, more goods and services produced, and more revenue for the company that could then be used to pay even more people. He would have done more good if he had been greedy.
So many rape accusations boil down to a he said/she said situation
Well, that is the point of this app. If there is one he-said-she-said date rape situation, that isn't enough for a conviction. But if there are several women making accusations about the same guy, that is a lot more credible. If you look at a case like Bill Cosby, none of his accusers would have a lot of individual credibility, but taken together, I don't think anyone seriously doubts that Cosby is a serial rapist.
Worse than that, not one member of the Duke Lynch Mob has suffered any repercussions at all for their actions in demanding penalties against the accused before they were tried.
In the UVa case, "Jackie" has faced no repercussions for making false accusations, and neither has Rolling Stone Magazine. At least Jackie tried to retract the story before it was published, but RS went ahead even though the "victim" no longer stood by the story. But more significantly, the University of Virginia has suffered no repercussions, despite taking drastic and broad punitive action against the fraternities, before doing any fact checking, much less waiting for a proper investigation.
You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred. -- Superchicken
