Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re: Trickle Down? (Score 4, Interesting) 205

What exactly constitutes "passive welfare"? Since welfare was reformed under that reactionary libertarian President Clinton, everyone that receives cash assistance is required to either work or attend job training 30 hours a week, or lose their benefits. Which is awesome on paper if you want to fix the "problem" of welfare queens (which have not been proven to exist in significant numbers), but in reality it creates more problems, one of which is what to do with your kids while you're working or going to job training. Not everyone has a spouse or family that can watch the kids while you're off at your dead-end McJob making minimum wage.

Everyone who is able-bodied should work, in an ideal situation. In the real world, you can't always get a job when you need one, and if you have to pay for day care, sometimes having a job means you have LESS money to work with than if you were sitting at home on the couch like everyone on the right thinks welfare recipients do. Lots of people think the poor should be punished for being so, so the situation continues. There's a school of thought that providing cash benefits perpetuates a cycle of poverty, that it encourages dependence instead of personal responsibility. The truth is that most people on cash assistance are trying desperately to get a job so they can stop collecting benefits, and forcing an arbitrary work requirement on them does nothing more than 1) make the situation worse for the recipients and their children, and 2) provide Big Biz with a captive audience of low-wage workers who can't quit when you treat them like dogshit. When you factor in the low wages, lack of access to health insurance (as even under the ACA a lot of people have to make a sizable payment each month for even the lowest level of coverage), and cultural stigma (which, ironically, makes it HARDER to get a job due to the perception of welfare recipients being goldbricking leeches), welfare DOES make people dependent by perpetuating the vicious cycle of trapping low-wage workers in their jobs, not because they're lazy. The solution is not to end welfare, but to increase wages enough to shift the burden from public assistance to private wages. This is one reason why people want the minimum wage increased; a living wage gets people off welfare. But, since that eats into the profits (which are still at record highs), Big Biz just instructs their wholly owned "elected" representatives to perpetuate the myth of the lazy welfare recipient who leeches off taxpayers' hard work. After all, it's much better for the CEO to buy his third summer home with his six-figure bonus for keeping salaries low than for the workers at his business who do actual work to have enough money to live on.

Comment: Re:One (Score 2) 390

by BVis (#49619991) Attached to: The Programming Talent Myth

I can also recall a manager I had who, within the first month of him being brought in had 20% of his developers quit, referencing him as WHY they were quitting.

This is a win for management. The other 80% of developers that DIDN'T quit will have to do the work of the 20% who have left. That manager just saved the company approximately 20% on programmers' salary (assuming that those developers got paid roughly the same.) Since reducing costs is good for the profits, this manager will not be fired.

But he was a superstar, and last I checked he is now the CEO of the company, with 95% of the staff gone (and down to 1 or 2 developers), and he is credited with keeping the company afloat.

Sure, he saved 95% off salaries. It's easy to keep a company afloat when you don't worry about working people to death.

Comment: Re:The Perfect Bait (Score -1) 1048

by BVis (#49610669) Attached to: Two Gunman Killed Outside "Draw the Prophet" Event In Texas

That you know about. It's entirely possible that things went on in retaliation for Piss Christ that were not reported by the media. If the editor of the newspaper that would have run the story was a crazy fundie, he/she could decide that running the article would make it harder for them to retaliate the next time, so under the radar it goes.

Zealotry is zealotry, whether it be Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Athiest, Capitalist, Libertarian...

Comment: In other news.. (Score 1) 62

The major American AV vendors announced a joint task force today to respond to these results.

When asked how they would ensure that corporate members of the task force would be held accountable for this sort of cheating, their spokesperson responded with the following:

"Accountable for cheating? No, no, no, the point of the task force is to keep from getting caught like this."

Comment: Re:Progressive Fix 101 (Score 1) 622

by BVis (#49568285) Attached to: Cheap Gas Fuels Switch From Electric Cars To SUVs

It's not a "crappy" car. I quite like it. It gets better mileage than any SUV, it's fun to drive, and it has all the toys that I want.

Using less gas helps others. Driving a car that doesn't weigh 3 tons helps others. Driving a car that doesn't block others' view helps others. Not driving a car that overcompensates for any physical shortcomings helps others.

But you're convinced it doesn't matter what car you drive so long as you like it. Our choices affect others. I wish you could see that.

Comment: Re:Fairly easy way to protect data. (Score 1) 77

by BVis (#49544703) Attached to: Good: Companies Care About Data Privacy Bad: No Idea How To Protect It

If the policy in place is dumb, make it obviously so. This way it can be solved, if you don't do it, you are part of the problem.

In my experience, the dumbness of the policy is directly proportional to the difficulty in making anyone understand how dumb it is. It's also directly proportional to the likelihood that someone whose job title starts with "Chief" wrote the policy and will not change it, no matter what.

It's also dumb to allow the CEO to have a non-expiring password that is the name of the company. But good luck telling the CEO he can't have it. I'll see you at the unemployment office.

Receiving a million dollars tax free will make you feel better than being flat broke and having a stomach ache. -- Dolph Sharp, "I'm O.K., You're Not So Hot"