Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Is more education, better education . . . ? (Score 1) 473

No, if 100% of the population had college degrees and those degrees actually helped them work better, that would increase each person's economic productivity.

This is a pretty common fallacy. Even if you have a degree that's reasonably useful there are only so many jobs in which you'll benefit from having it. That is, employers only need so many electrical engineers, and your engineering degree will not add to anybody's productivity if you've been hired to push a broom.

Comment Re:Well Trump has one thing right (Score 4, Insightful) 517

This. If you can hire a local for $90k, you're not going to pay $100k to bring someone in from another country unless he has a skill you can't find locally. And by that I mean you actually can't find, not the wink-wink-cover-your-eyes can't find employers are doing today.

Comment Re:Is more education, better education . . . ? (Score 4, Insightful) 473

Beyond that, having a credential only gives you an advantage in the job market if other people don't have it. It should be obvious if 100% of the population had college degrees total compensation wouldn't go up one penny, and your degree would be completely worthless.

Comment Re:Obviously... (Score 1) 368

Anyone who believes that a Trump presidency isn't a larger disaster than a Clinton presidency has clearly skipped their meds and their opinions can safely be ignored, although they cannot safely be ignored as they are probably some kind of spectacular nutjob and you shouldn't turn your back on them, even for a second.

Yeah, yeah, anyone who disagrees with you is a nutjob. All 100 million plus. Have you ever stepped back and listened to yourself?

Comment Re:Obviously... (Score 1) 368

Then again, they get Trump, too.

True, though it will work out better for them than the alternative.

You seem to view elections as a kind of a competition sports game, but it isn't.

You seem to build elaborate fantasies about other people who leave comments. How about we stick to what's written?

It sets policies for the next few years, hence voting out of spite is stupid. And given that Trump's policies will harm his voters way more than they will harm prosperous urbanites - and seriously, worst thing that might happen to a typical well-off city dweller during Trump years would be living with the thought that the president of their country is a goddamn clown - a hillbilly having voted for Trump out of spite is, in fact, double stupid and pretty much proves GP's point.

Well, I suppose that's one way you can look at it, if you think that's the case. Personally, I think Hillary Clinton would have been a disaster of epic proportions. Trump wasn't my first choice for the Republican nomination by a long shot, but by election day he was the second worst. I don't think anyone voted for Trump out of spite, though you could hardly blame them if they did, since the attitude that seems to be permeating the government-media-academia axis holds that people who don't live within a few hundred miles of an ocean are somehow both safe to ignore and too stupid to look out for their own interests. Neither is true, by the way, as the Democrats (and a lot of Republicans) discovered in November.

Comment Re:Translation (Score 1) 368

My great uncle had a heart attack and drove himself forty miles to the nearest hospital, because the ambulance wasn't running that day. Shit happens.

On the other hand, when I was living in Southern California you could show up to the emergency room and wait six or seven hours to be seen on a Friday night because of all the shooting and car crash victims that skipped past you.

Comment Re: Conclusion: (Score 1) 368

This. Pointy heads at NYU or some other urban college periodically come out with studies showing how much more money is spent per capita in rural areas. But what they seem to be unable to realize is that money is spent on infrastructure that ultimately benefits the urban crowd. People who live in BFE don't need a four lane highway to get from one small town to another. That highway is there for goods that go to populated areas and for people travelling between populated areas. Otherwise it would be a two-lane road without traffic control.

Slashdot Top Deals

I consider a new device or technology to have been culturally accepted when it has been used to commit a murder. -- M. Gallaher

Working...