That's called the dead sea effect - the people with mobility evaporate, leaving the office stuck with the workers who can't leave.
Even worse is that OP's premise doesn't match the actual statistics.
Workplace stress is up. 80% of US workers work 48+ hours a week. Etc.
That is OP's premise. That we're spending more and more time at work, without making significant increases in productivity. This stresses people out.
The problem is that if the improvement were above board - i.e, merely being cheaper - they would have changed the model number and discontinued the old version.
The fact that they kept the original model number and made it very very difficult to tell that there had been any change except for the switch's physical characteristics indicates that something shady was going on.
What's funny is that a lot of them end up dying of AIDS for some reason (e.g, Christine Maggiore). Weird, huh?
The fact that Slashdot would even consider running such a blatant propaganda piece says a lot about where they're going.
USPS makes money. It makes a lot of money, in fact. The only reason why it appears to be in debt is because of the other parts of the government forcing it to take on debts most businesses don't have to.
And I have no idea why you think "automation" is something the USPS hasn't thought of before. Do you really think a person sorts your mail? As long as it's legibly written in the standard format, your letter is OCR'd without human intervention.
Hell, why do you think those mobile POS thingers are any better for automation? They're exactly the same as a normal table-based register, they're just mobile.
I think Marx's Capital has aged somewhat better, in part because it's less a proposal of what to do, and more just a detailed analysis of how capitalism works.
I remember reading somewhere that Marx was a great diagnostician, but a terrible doctor. He had a really good idea of what was going to happen to the working classes and where society was going to go, but his prescriptions for what to do about it were completely unrealistic.
First, I don't see why Ayn is expected to not create fantastical characters in a work of fiction. Nobody would read it if it were just a mirror image of society.
Do you really not see the difference between Frodo Baggins and Dagny Taggart? Frodo is a fantastical character - he's a short-statured member of a race of hairy-footed little men who live in hills, have eleventy-first birthday parties and possess a strange resistance to magic. But despite all this, he's understandable as a person: he hopes and struggles, he gives up and sometimes he wins. The actions he takes are ones we could see ourselves taking, if we happened to be in his fantastical situation and under the stresses he's under.
Dagny Taggart is a fantastical caricature - she's a human, but not as we know it Jim. Everything she ever wanted sort of just happened to her, and she just does random insane shit because that's what the author needs her to do in order to move the plot along. It's really hard for an actual human being to identify with her, because she's the barest sketch of one.
This misinterpretation of criticism as "shit[ting] on other people's art (figuratively)" is what leads to comments like OP's.
Real criticism isn't just taking a verbal dump on the piece and saying "I'd have been ashamed to admit creating it". It's saying why you'd be ashamed to admit you created it, explaining what's gone wrong with the piece.
This was just seagull criticism - OP swoops in from nowhere, shits all over everything, and disappears. Nobody knows why, nothing is improved by it, that's just how OP rolls.
While I would not buy a current Tesla, it may be possible in the next few years to buy a hybrid that meets my needs and costs less than 25k.
Teslas are PROVEN to be very good cars as long as the mileage constraint doesn't impact you.
Actually, it's 30 fires in under 150,000 vehicles - the 12 you're talking about are 12 that made it to consumer's hands. There were a total of 30 that caught fire due to this defect, but a lot of them were still owned by dealerships when it happened.
Actually, yes, it does have some electrolytes.
They were well do e ports, east to install and run, same price as windows games though not what we would call "new" releases.
That's exactly the problem - year old games don't sell systems.
Think about it in terms of consoles - people don't buy the PS3 or the Xbox360 because they wanted the console, they buy the console because there's a specific game they want to play. That's exactly the reason why the WiiU has done poorly so far; there's no system-selling games for it.
Basically, if Valve can release Linux-exclusive game (even if it's Linux-exclusive just for a little while) with wide appeal, it'll encourage a ton of people to actually install SteamOS or maybe buy a SteamBox. The problem is getting your foot in the door, and so far Linux hasn't had anything like that.
The worst part is that the Hastert rule isn't even a procedural trick; the Speaker for the House (currently, Boehner) has sole authority over what comes out on the floor. That's the procedural trick: Boehner doesn't want it to happen.
The Hastert rule itself is literally just something Hastert came up with in order to provide a vaguely plausible reason for fucking up other people's legislation when he felt like it. It's got almost no precedent, and there's literally zero reason to follow it; Hastert himself didn't.
That's because it's not in the Constitution, much like the Hastert rule which Boehner claims is causing the impasse. The difference is, the House holding the power of the purse is an old and established tradition, whereas the Hastert rule is just some crap that's been disowned by its namer.
Like a lot of government-in-practice, the House holding the purse strings is just something that's accrued over time. Budgets originate in the House. That's what they do, one of their major functions in modern American politics. It grants them a lever against the Senate and the Executive branch, either of which would otherwise outclass them.
The Senate could come up with their own budget and try to pass it, but that would simply never happen - no one in the House would ever vote for a budget that originated in the Senate, because it would be basically agreeing to let the Senate steal some power from them.