Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re:Not this shit again... (Score 0) 433

Anything with a double-blind requirement falls well short of settling an issue because it is subjective. It might be the best we can do for investigating certain complex issues but it most definitely is not conclusive or concrete data.

The hair on the back of my neck stands up near high powered fluxing fields. The RF noise during the power up of most devices and during operation of many causes a "whine" that I can both hear and feel that is distinct from any actual sound.

This doesn't actually normally bother me unless I already have a head/am nauseous, etc. But given that where I feel this "whine" is my ear I don't think it is a stretch that it could be causing dizziness and nausea in others in fact is seems likely.

Comment Re:Containing labor costs (Score 1) 414

I think you are missing his point. It's fundamentally different because it is fundamentally much more difficult and expensive. Offshoring results in a net gain on labor costs WHILE providing the quality needed in far fewer cases than bringing in H1-B workers.

There is likely nothing barring an H1-B worker from taking over your own position and reducing labor costs for instance. Since this is happening industry wide you will at first trade in terms of work/life balance and then salary and then have to switch fields to one that hasn't picked up on the trend yet. You'll have to hunt for outliers where a powerful executive doesn't want to deal with H1-B's he can't understand on a conference call and has the power to drive that decision or companies with a client that fits that bill.

Comment Re:Cost of labor is always a problem for companies (Score 4, Interesting) 414

Manufacturing is a bit different especially unskilled. Workers can simply shift to other professions if demand for US talent slows. Our general economic strategy as a nation is to shift those less skilled jobs out and replace them with higher level and more skilled positions.

Tech is the fastest growing and one of the highest paid job sectors and requires substantial investment in terms of time and education on the part of the workers. These are the jobs those losing jobs in manufacturing are supposed to be able to learn skills for and take on as a career. There is nowhere to go from here.

In the company I'm working for now I'm considered to be at the highest rank an engineer can obtain. This is a massive telecom/service provider/cloud company who will not be named. Every tier below has either been moved offshore or replaced by H1-B workers. With regard to my peers all full time US hiring is frozen and contracts are filled with a preference for H1-B's only resorting to US talent when no H1-B is available (this is the opposite of how it's supposed to work). In tech your salaries generally don't go up so upward mobility comes from shifting positions. Someone who stays in positions for a year or two is equivalent to 20 year+ in positions in the financial industry. When anyone shifts out they are replaced with an H1-B if at all possible regardless of why they left. In the last 1.5yrs my team went from being entirely US staff (mostly full time but a few contractors who were routinely converted once they'd proven themselves) to 50% H1-B Contractors.

We are talking about thousands of jobs. But hey, on the up side the difficulties with accent are disappearing because client organizations are filling with the same H1-B workers and they all have the same accent.

Comment Re:dump trump (Score 1) 686

"WTF do you think bonds are other than debt?"

I should have been more clear. I meant dissolving all existing debt not preventing any in the future. I also meant internal and private debt, not national debt owed to foreign nations.

This redistributes wealth instantly but largely based on merit. SBA Loans, Student Loans, Mortgages, Credit Card debt, and Car Loans all get forgiven immediately and the underlying property transferred from banks back out to the people. People who were responsible, had the income and the credit history to be given those loans and purchase those items but not the accumulated wealth. Or in the case of SBA Loans and Student Loans people who are proactively adding value to our nation.

From there on anyone should get the same deal the fed gives banks and borrow at the fed rate. No regard need be given to credit history with anyone but the now fully public, transparent, and almost entirely automated federal reserve. Trying to buy a home to live in? You get fed rates. Trying to buy a second? You'll have to try a bank and banks will have to operate in the old saving and loan fashion, only able to lend funds they actually have.

Comment Re:dump trump (Score 1) 686

"OTOH, poverty, hunger, and simply enabling and doing valuable activities is."

Yeah, because 85% of the money and goods and services like food and valuable activities going to 25% of the population couldn't have anything to do with the other 75% who only get 15% being hungry, impoverished, and unable to afford services.

The current system works at less than 15% efficiency for 75% of the population. And since 60% of the wealth goes to 1% of the population, it works at 6000% efficiency for them.

By and large that 1% doesn't contribute anything (beyond merely having wealth and selecting who has the most aptitude for utilizing it to take wealth produced by others). In a merit based system that 1% would have zero wealth. They do nothing but leech on the system and leech a majority share at that. And since they continue to have the same or larger a share year on year they are managing to gain 60% of our new wealth year on year.

What is the advantage of paying 1% of the population, who contribute nothing, 60% of the wealth we generate each year? Any corporation would eliminate this inefficiency immediately if they identified it. The accounting department may hold the purse strings for the company but if they start charging other departments interest for using those funds in a complicated scheme that results in 60% of all gross profits going to the accounting department that would be fixed immediately when discovered. And you can absolutely be certain that it would result in other departments being starved for resources.

Comment Re:dump trump (Score 1) 686

A single person or partnership yes. I'm suggesting we would be better off with a larger quantity of much smaller businesses which are owned by real people.

Private stock which can't be exchanged is fine, the only gains being through dividends. The important point is that passive investors would buy performance based bonds that again could only be exchanged privately and not via any sort of public exchange.

Comment Re:dump trump (Score 1) 686

"Finally, the point of taxes/fees/tolls on public services is so that the people who use the service, pay for the service. It doesn't get any fairer than that."

It absolutely gets fairer than that. Money requires public infrastructure to generate. Every dollar that is generated has an equal public service cost. Every employee at a company needs to eat and be in good health, needs to transport to work, needs to utilize public education to have the requisite knowledge and skills. They also depend on the protection of the police and fire department and the resources needed for those organizations and the people who staff them require.

Unless the employees are getting 100% of the dollars generated by their efforts the cost of that public infrastructure needs to pass along with the dollars. Just because you opt not to use public education does not mean the wealth that affords you that option didn't require the existence of a public servant who did. The only reasonable way to make sure those costs pass fairly which allows no loopholes, tricks, offshoring of funds, siloing via incorporation of wealthy neighborhoods or school districts, etc is to devalue the dollars with those costs.

It isn't fair at all to expect someone who received $0.15 of a dollar they worked to create to pay a whole dollar of the public infrastructure costs required to allow them to generate it. Whoever ended up with the other $0.85 needs to pay their share. If the distribution isn't so lopsided as that then everyone will still magically pay their fair share because they either will or won't have ended up with those dollars.

Comment Re:dump trump (Score 1) 686

"I simply don't care that there is this level of wealth and income inequality. You haven't give a reason it should matter."

You do know that inequity comes from somewhere right? The wealth generated by the nation grows while the inequity does not shrink.

"There's all this concern over income inequality, but there's not equal concern over much more serious issues like poverty."

You seem to have this odd idea they are different things. 60% of the wealth generated by 100% of the population goes to 5% of the population. 85% of wealth to 25% of the population. Mental illness aside, that is why people are poor. Give that 60% of the stuff back to the other 95% of the population and there is more food, more clothing, more homes, more cars, more everything we make to go around 60% more in fact.

"For example, you propose a transfer of wealth from people who know what they're doing to people who don't have a clue."

If by know what they're doing you mean systematically exploit the efforts of others for disproportionate gain you are right. Those are exactly the people I think should not ever have any wealth.

What I propose is a not a handout. What I propose is abolishing all debt, dismantling the private banking and credit system by limiting it to loaning funds which are actually in deposit, and instead of generating inflation via nearly free money for private banks generating it by providing public services. Healthcare (including care for all the mentally ill wandering the streets), Housing, Transport, Banking (everyone pays the inflation rate only for credit). Publicly accessible labs and research facilities for the advancement of science and medicine, roads, the total elimination of all taxes/fees/tolls from public services and infrastructure.

I contend the people who "know what to do with it" are the ones producing the goods and services that drive our economy. Let other forms of "knowing what to do with it" burn along with those who engage in them.

Comment Re:dump trump (Score 1) 686

87% of US Wealth is in the hands of 25% of the population.

"Redistribution of wealth to the 325 million Americans would pay out above $248,307.6923076923 a person." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_in_the_United_States

But if we look more closely we see the figures are more skewed than that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_in_the_United_States#/media/File:U.S._Distribution_of_Wealth,_2007.jpg

63% of wealth is in the hands of 5% of the population. Multiplying out that $248,307.6923076923 net wealth per person we get over $80 trillion but the GDP is actually $118 trillion. But 63% of that is $50.841 trillion. 5% of 325 million people is 16.25 million people. That gives a mere $3,128,677 per person for the top 5%. Do you know 100 people? Does being top 5 out of two school buses worth sound like rich to you? But 34.6% (27 of 80 trillion) of our nations wealth is held by 1% which is more than 27.3% of the other 4%. 1% of the population is 3.25 million people which comes to a per capita of $8,591,446.15 to be the richest guy on two randomly mixed bus rides.

This pattern continues. The top .1% have more wealth than the remaining .9%, and so on until you get to about 3250 people who have more money than you can imagine and you can imagine a lot. Forbes determined the wealthiest fictional character during the 2007 recession was scrooge mcduck with his massive vault of gold and silver when gold and silver were at their high (something like 50 billion if I recall). At that point they determined Scrooge would fall well short of making the top 100 list of the most wealthy.

The average return rate from the S&P 500 from inception is 10%. However, adjusted for inflation (by most accounts vastly under adjusted) that is 7%. Of that 7% only 40% is dividends which is all you can safely take and the S&P 500 beats almost all investors and firms.

Your million safely invested across the S&P 500 would get you $28,000 a year. That would be tax free of course but is only about half the GDP per capita. Hardly qualifies as rich let alone wealthy.

If you step it up to top 1% money that becomes $240,560.49 which is suspiciously close to the net wealth per capita figure. Of course, if you are married you'll need to double that for it to count. $441,121 per year. You'll have to pay 18.8% capital gains tax on it vs the 35% someone working for that money would pay but luckily for you, if it doesn't actually cost you $441,121 per year to live you can simply buy some real estate and avoid those taxes or you can reinvest the dividends. Sure you'll still pay the tax on dividends now but if you ever sell any stock all the tax you paid becomes a deduction. Think of it as accumulating wealth via accumulated debt owed to you by the government.

There is minimal correlation between income as reported by the IRS and wealth. That should tell you a lot. Do not ever confuse having an issue with the top 1% by wealth and having an issue with the top 1% by income. An engineer or doctor making that same $240,560/yr would need to accumulate their entire salary as wealth plus make inflation for 35.5 years to accumulate that much wealth. Even with compounded interest it isn't going to happen with a safe and distributed investment portfolio the only way it's possible is gambling with high risk investment which isn't much different than blackjack.

Comment Re:dump trump (Score 3) 686

Don't confuse income with wealth. By shifting around and reinvesting equity and property the wealthy can avoid actually having much income.

Rather than giving everyone else that wealth I'd propose dissolving all debt along with income taxes. Dissolve the current banking system. Instead pay for all public services via fully transparent inflation and let that be the only way new currency is generated.

Of course I'd also be a big fan of eliminating incorporation and stock. Ditch the whole corporations as people discussion outright and actually make those who own businesses be liable. Need capital? Fine, issue bonds and pay interest. The interest can be variable with business success (as determined by gross profit).

Comment Re:dump trump (Score 1) 686

That is a different scenario. We didn't lose in Iraq, we conquered Iraq pretty much immediately. The perpetual war is because we were fighting not the nation of Iraq but the vague concept of a "terrorist"

Between those who died from our bullets and those who died from our destruction of infrastructure we easily slaughtered 10k-100k Iraqi's for every US Soldier who died.

Oh yeah, when we occupy wallstreet or discover the FISA courts automatically say yes to everything and declare themselves not subject to the rulings of higher courts that are actually part of the judicial I'm sure the powerful are just shaking with fear at our anger.

Their only concern is a disruption in production.

Crazee Edeee, his prices are INSANE!!!

Working...