Wished I had quit much sooner. I got a huge pay increase, equally large workload decrease, and now have to tolerate minimal 'execuspeak'.http://news.slashdot.org/story/15/09/30/133216/ny-times-temporary-visas-to-import-talent-help-copycats-take-jobs-abroad#
This one hits close to home for me. Having worked for Accenture for a number of years, I saw the H-1B visa scam play out over and over. The campus I was staffed at originally hosted several thousand employees, then Accenture started bringing in the visas. Every year Accenture would grab as many visas as possible, train those people in at an existing jobs, then send those people back to their home country with someone else's job and make a round of layoffs locally. By the time I quit, those thousands of jobs had been cut to hundreds and the campus was a ghost town.
Having seen this repeat so many times, the whole political theater over illegal immigrants seems ridiculous. If our representatives aren't trying to save good paying jobs that require government approval to be shipped away, it's clear that the whole immigrant debate is just a political red herring.
To be clear, I have no problem with immigrants who come to stay and make what they can in this country. Pretty much all of our ancestors did this at some point. People that come here to swoop up a job and bring it home, however, that's another story.
Did anyone else cringe reading the summary? "...rovers have scraped away a few inches at a time, but the real paydirt may lie a meter or two below the surface"
If it's not in furlongs, the unit is meaningless to me.
Of course not all coal miners will want to be coders, but why can't you teach a coal miner to code? And why do people assume that coal miners are not interested in coding. And why do people assume they don't have the intellectual ability to handle it.
Maybe I'm being arrogant, but I'm guessing coal miners chose that life because they weren't suited for much else. I'd wager that most of these guys are below average intelligence, where as most programmers are above average intelligence.
Of course, (from a quick google search) the pay looks surprisingly decent, so maybe I'm wrong. The pay is probably accounting for a dangerous, unhealthy, and miserable line of work. Still, I have to believe that if you can do something else, you'd already be doing it.
I've trademarked black writing on a white background. Please destroy any materials that infringe on my IP
Everyone is making broad generalizations.
You realize the irony in that statement, don't you?
Middle income earners get to deduct health care expenses
Not really. Not unless you have some crazy high medical expenses.
According to the IRS (irs.gov): "You may deduct only the amount by which your total medical care expenses for the year exceed 7.5% of your adjusted gross income"
There's too many examples to list that refute your claim that everybody will pay their share eventually. There are many companies that are given a low to 0% taxation rates to lure them into a particular state/city. Just ask Walmart. How is the poor guy going to get that same break?
In 2004, the Lafayette utilities system decided to provide a fiber-to-the-home service. The new network, called LUS Fiber, would give everyone in Lafayette a very fast Internet connection, enabling them to lower their electricity costs by monitoring and adjusting their usage. Push-back from the local telephone company, BellSouth Corp., and the local cable company, Cox Communications Inc., was immediate. They tried to get laws passed to stop the network, sued the city, even forced the town to hold a referendum on the project — in which the people voted 62 percent in favor. Finally, in February 2007, after five civil lawsuits, the Louisiana Supreme Court voted, 7-0, to allow the network.
The service has saved Lafayette citizens millions of dollars."
Interesting correlation to that drop in violent crime...
Leaded gas, known to mess with development, was banned in 1978. Roughly 20 years later, about the time it takes for a new born to fully mature, violent crime begins to suddenly drop.
Not saying it's the cause, but it might be a factor.
Or if this article has any merit...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1229857/How-16-ships-create-pollution-cars-world.html
We could stop shipping crap across the ocean, as it's apparently causing more pollution than all of our cars combined...
Tasers are anything but a humane alternative. Consult Youtube for about 15 seconds for an example.
The thought behind the taser, is to use the weapon in a situation that would have otherwise necessitated lethal force (i.e. a gun). In practice, however, police just zap anyone that they find annoying. Worse still, because it's not a gun, these idiots don't consider tasers to have lethal consequences. There have been numerous serious injuries and even deaths as a result of the abuse of a weapon.
Consider the folks who have heart conditions, or who have been struck by multiple tasers.
Tasers should be banned.
Wow, lot's of hostility to my comment, and a few good points too.
Boats - I stand corrected, boats have some modest emissions controls. We could definitely stand to see something stronger though:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/apr/09/shipping-pollution, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1229857/How-16-ships-create-pollution-cars-world.html
Planes - Yes, I understand that the U.S. is large, but we can start with modern trains that connect smaller distances, like Milwaukee to Chicago, L.A. to Vegas, etc. Trains are more efficient than planes, and can actually travel very fast. I'm also speculating that trains suffer from fewer delays, have quicker security checkpoints, and require less maintenance.
Coal power plants: There is no such thing as clean coal plant. Look at the destruction caused just to GET the coal, let alone burn it. It's dangerous for the workers and disastrous for our environment. Search for images before and after mining, it's unsettling.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_power_in_the_United_States, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centralia,_Pennsylvania
Lawn Mowers - Operating a mower for an hour is the pollution equivalent of driving a car 200 miles. Consider how many lawns are in the U.S. alone. That is not insignificant: http://www.epa.gov/oaqps001/community/details/yardequip_addl_info.html.
Excessive Water Consumption - Too many people underestimate the value of clean, fresh water. It takes energy and costly equipment to clean and deliver fresh water to your home. Water is also a limited resource. If/when our rapidly draining aquifers run dry, the consequences will be disastrous to our food supply and economy. We can do some simple things to reduce our usage, without much effort. Front load washing machines save ~20 gallons per use. Low flow toilets can save ~2 gallons per flush. I have no regrets switching to either, and I have a lower water bill. http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/freshwater/water-conservation-tips/
I understand that there are many arguments as to whether global climate change exists, and/or how sever it is. I also understand that trying to reduce our emissions significantly can come at some economic cost. But there are still many low hanging fruits that we could easily tackle as a compromise, at very little cost.
To name a few:
- Boats - No emissions controls at all currently
- Planes - Trains should be a better option (particularly in the U.S.)
- Coal power plants - Outdated tech
- Lawn mowers - Electric mowers could replace most people's mowing needs
- Excessive water consumption - Top loading washing machines are a colossal waste of fresh water
Additionally, there have been numerous studies linking various forms of pollution to cancer and other serious health effects. So we stand to gain healthier people and lower health care costs by reducing our emissions as well.
Terms like this and mandatory arbitration clauses should be illegal. It's a very slippery slope to when people can forgo their legal rights, and we're already slipped too far.
RADIO SHACK LEVEL II BASIC READY >_
