This one gets it. I wish I had mod points.

More importantly, it's usually not the developers who make the schedule.

Because nodbody they know has built what they are building. If someone did, they would just copy it. That's the thing non-programmers don't understand - software is effortless to copy (right click, copy & paste). So compared to other fields, software development runs into new problems more often that most other "building" projects (IT or otherwise).

I'm surprised that nobody has yet suggested that women be forced to study a STEM degree in college. If you want to 'fix' the 'problem', why not go back to the source? "Oh, you wanted to do gender studies? Too bad, we need more women in STEM so enjoy EE"

Here's a better idea ... make those studying humanities take the in-major STEM classes, not the watered down version. What they gain is less the knowledge of the course but more new ways of thinking. One does not get that in "rocks for jocks". If the in-najor STEM classes are too hard, perhaps the problem is with what they're being compared to ... perhaps it's the in-major humanities courses which are not rigorous enough?

This guy gets it. Unless you've been to NYC lately AND understand a bit about the building practices here vs the rest of the US then the potential for savings might not be so obvious. I would also add that the reliance on PTAC units is also a huge issue (basically, think of a hotels through-wall ac & heating unit). The extensive use of PTACs in new construction is because of labor costs to run ducting and to a lesser degree because of permitting costs: http://amp.gothamist.com/amp/a...

Young Johnny just graduated from "Bob's School of Typewriter Repair and Information Technology" and your telling me I can't filter him out? While your degree doesn't matter as much after a certain point, it still matters. You want people to have a solid foundation and a mastery of the fundamentals. I don't really care what school, but I do care if it was in the top 10, 20, 50, or 100 for relevant degrees. Of course, if the resume indicates that they have the right skills and the overcame obstacles (no degree, non-technical degree, unranked school, etc) then that's a great candidate!! I just dont trust HR to make that call and I can't sift through all the resumes to find that diamond in the rough when there are diamonds right in front of me.

This guy gets it. Savings often don't get passed to the consumer.

TL;DR: caveat emptor applies to hiring. At the heart of the issue is an overall inability for the job market to price the economic output of "developers" of different skill levels, not to mention the delta between economic value and market value based on the developers skill. A lot of developers' economic value is actually lower than market value (they get paid more than their worth) while for some, the opposite is true. The inability of the labor market to consistently align economic and market value, and the variance in that gap, is what's really causing the angst. What we need to do is devise a better way to demonstrate economic value and work to tie market value to it.

I have another idea for you - how about we hold decision makers accountable for their decisions? I would help to make sure those in authority have sufficient expertise in the area they're making decisions about. I fully expect a structural engineer to base his persuasive argument around the physics and engineering issues and then frame those in terms of cost/benefit. If the person who is making the decision can't understand that type of argument, then I don't want them making the decisions. Expecting an engineer to get up and make a persuasive argument like a professional orator or politician completely completely misses the point around the cold hard facts and associated judgement calls that it takes to engineer complicated projects.

They also grow bored....

This ia obligatory at this point: http://assets.nydailynews.com/...

With military service being an exception huh? I'll just assume you're ignorant so here's a quick list to enlighten you. Infantry, Military Police => Police Military Intel => National Intel, Public Policy Military Mechanic => Aviation Mechanic Military Food Service => Catering, Restaurant Mgr Military Transportation => FedEx (drivers through corporate planning) .... I could go on and on

I RTF but I didn't see anything in there that indicated the income tax wold be levied on tech employees who earn leas than $250, but the title sure makes it sound that way. If that is the case, there's no way that passes legal review. Given that the city council knows what they're doing is currently illegal (b/c of the state constitution), I wonder if there is a case for damages to he levied upon the city by those impacted by this illegal tax.

We actually put blood and sweat in for society. What about disabled veterans who, in that vast majority of cases and despite service related injuries, continue as productive members of society? I hate to be that guy, but this really sounds like "from each according to their ability, to each according to their need".