Politics Thread: 13 Ghosts

[Malcador]

 

To elaborate, it would be doable here assuming the both of them aren't unskilled labor because they're mentally challenged. In which case there's a number of engineering or business night schools available for free to proceed from unskilled to skilled labour and the option of negotiating for educational leave with your employer. Which would be a government handout: You retain your job on a certain amount of unpaid leave while the government picks up your expenses, within reasonable limits. In return you need to bring proof of successful course work and can then proceed to better paying job opportunities (with your old employer, assuming they exist).

 

Granted both require a period a couple of years of intensive studying and working at the same time, but that's doable. 's not easy, but doable. There's also the option of picking up an apprenticeship which would come with three or four years of reduced pay and the humiliation of doing work with 14 to 18 year olds for a while but the end result would be skilled labour in your chosen field just as well.

That's pretty cool! Why wouldn't everyone, that needs it, do it?

 

And unrelated to above, has the conversation now shifted to; "most people aren't living as well at the top earners are"? We've now established that its totally "doable" to live on single or dual incomes and have most of life's "luxuries". BUT! Dude over there has a nicer house and that's not fair! Well, not all people are equal. That's the plain unvarnished truth. Not all people have the same mental acuity or intelligence. Not all people have the same physical capabilities. So is the discussion really that all people should have the same success? Of course there are going to be haves and have not's. I cant even really understand how that's not a basic understanding of life.

Is interesting to see how differently fair is being interpreted

[Gfted1]

Elaborate please.

[Malcador]

Friend referred this to me, apropos of nothing - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/17/upshot/income-inequality-united-states.html

 

Almost makes me believe in synchronicity

[Malcador]

Elaborate please.

Just that I don't really see anyone arguing that "it isn't fair" that someone is doing better than others. Not really sure how we got on to the topic of why the poor are such from talking about why flat taxes are the best idea, either, heh. But fair to some is everyone is equal (and them poor people gettin' hand outs) but to others it's a narrower gap between rich, middle and working classes. Even in that hypothetical GD posed for whatever aim he had, have to agree luck is a bigger factor than it should be.

[smjjames]

Friend referred this to me, apropos of nothing - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/17/upshot/income-inequality-united-states.htmlAlmost makes me believe in synchronicity

What do you mean by synchronicity?

[Malcador]

 

Friend referred this to me, apropos of nothing - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/17/upshot/income-inequality-united-states.htmlAlmost makes me believe in synchronicity

What do you mean by synchronicity?

 

Well, not a proper reference to the Jungian idea, but wasn't being entirely serious

[majestic]

That's pretty cool! Why wouldn't everyone, that needs it, do it?

 

There are a number of reasons - adults may find it difficult to find an apprenticeship outside of fields that experience a lack of applications. There are, however, government subsidies for companies that train adult apprentices. It's basically a win-win situation: Apprentices are paid peantus and the adult gets a decent education and possibly a better perspective (well unless you're apprenticing as coiffeur or retailer, the pay is... terrible).

 

The apprenticeship replaces what you would know as senior high school and with an exam or two also allowes to studying in your field.

 

Evening/night schools are hard. Doubly so because you can't spend your day studying when you have to work to pay the bills, but it's doable. They're the adult education offshoots of a type of school that would also replace senior high in the course of a regular education. That's what I did (the regular way though, started at 14) - a five year course on IT and economics. To put that into perspective, combined with some experience in the field those courses net you at first a level 5 and later a level 6 on the EQF.

 

Educational leave is fairly new and well received. It's more specialized than the other options because it usually doesn't end with a formal educational status or rank but with specialized qualifications that the company you work at needs from you right now (say, to replace someone retiring). It's part of an ongoing effort to incentivize skill enhancement. You just might not get the opportunity to do it. Especially if you part-time in retail, that's a dead end job if there ever was one.

[Gfted1]

Awesome! That's a program I could get behind being implemented in the US at taxpayer expense. I also like the concept of a "qualification framework". Btw, what's your EQF, if you don't mind my prying.

[Bartimaeus]

In other news, in addition to disbanding net neutrality laws, the FCC will also block states from implementing their own versions of net neutrality.

 

https://www.theverge.com/2017/11/22/16691344/fcc-preempt-block-state-local-net-neutrality-laws

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

In other news, in addition to disbanding net neutrality laws, the FCC will also block states from implementing their own versions of net neutrality.https://www.theverge.com/2017/11/22/16691344/fcc-preempt-block-state-local-net-neutrality-laws

FREEDOM YES

[ShadySands]

 

In other news, in addition to disbanding net neutrality laws, the FCC will also block states from implementing their own versions of net neutrality.https://www.theverge.com/2017/11/22/16691344/fcc-preempt-block-state-local-net-neutrality-laws

FREEDOM YES

It's about time the ISPs can throw off the oppressive yoke of their tyrant customers

[Ben No.3]

http://m.dw.com/en/ratko-mladic-found-guilty-at-bosnian-war-crimes-trial/a-41475978#fromDesktop

 

This is why a strong international official body is something good.

 

Seriously, every nation should submit to the internal court of justice already.

Edited November 23, 2017 by Ben No.3

[Ben No.3]

 

http://m.dw.com/en/ratko-mladic-found-guilty-at-bosnian-war-crimes-trial/a-41475978#fromDesktop

 

This is why a strong international official body is something good.

 

Seriously, every nation should submit to the internal court of justice already.

International

its early

[Zoraptor]

http://m.dw.com/en/ratko-mladic-found-guilty-at-bosnian-war-crimes-trial/a-41475978#fromDesktop

 

This is why a strong international official body is something good.

 

Seriously, every nation should submit to the internal court of justice already.

 

Not really, an unbiased strong international body is a good idea, what we have now is an abject joke. Mladic is a maggot to be sure, but selectively applied justice is not necessarily better than no justice at all as it ends up justifying and making precedents for all sorts of things based on current convenience. Ethnic cleansing being OK because Operation Storm was done by a now NATO and EU member and them being convicted would be embarrassing or Kosovo's secession (without even a vote, in contrast Crimea voted to secede from Ukraine twice prior to 2014 they just got gazumped by the USSR breaking up then crushed by 70k Ukrainian soldiers) being legal set precedents if you have international laws yet were done for pure convenience. You're also not going to see Bush, Blair, Sarkozy, Muhammed bin Salman who's busy starving Yemen (or the Mays, Trudeaus, Merkels, Trumps, Macrons etc who are arming and supporting him); or Putin or even Assad so long as he has Putin's backing in The Hague. You'll just see ossified current irrelevancies like Mladic and those like Gbagbo who pissed the French off but didn't have Russian or Chinese protection instead.

[Malcador]

 

 

In other news, in addition to disbanding net neutrality laws, the FCC will also block states from implementing their own versions of net neutrality.https://www.theverge.com/2017/11/22/16691344/fcc-preempt-block-state-local-net-neutrality-laws

FREEDOM YES

It's about time the ISPs can throw off the oppressive yoke of their tyrant customers

Still not understanding the reason why this change will make things competitive. Have heard NN is bad because some traffic deserves to be prioritized and NN will block that, but not sure I buy that.

 

Corporations like people, need a gun to their head to be honest

[Ben No.3]

 

http://m.dw.com/en/ratko-mladic-found-guilty-at-bosnian-war-crimes-trial/a-41475978#fromDesktop

 

This is why a strong international official body is something good.

 

Seriously, every nation should submit to the internal court of justice already.

Not really, an unbiased strong international body is a good idea, what we have now is an abject joke. Mladic is a maggot to be sure, but selectively applied justice is not necessarily better than no justice at all as it ends up justifying and making precedents for all sorts of things based on current convenience. Ethnic cleansing being OK because Operation Storm was done by a now NATO and EU member and them being convicted would be embarrassing or Kosovo's secession (without even a vote, in contrast Crimea voted to secede from Ukraine twice prior to 2014 they just got gazumped by the USSR breaking up then crushed by 70k Ukrainian soldiers) being legal set precedents if you have international laws yet were done for pure convenience. You're also not going to see Bush, Blair, Sarkozy, Muhammed bin Salman who's busy starving Yemen (or the Mays, Trudeaus, Merkels, Trumps, Macrons etc who are arming and supporting him); or Putin or even Assad so long as he has Putin's backing in The Hague. You'll just see ossified current irrelevancies like Mladic and those like Gbagbo who pissed the French off but didn't have Russian or Chinese protection instead.

the problem you are pointing out is that of an international institution not strong enough to act effectively against strong nations. I’m all for making them stronger, which will go hand in hand with an increasing number of nations submitting an increasing amount of their power.

[Guard Dog]

Going back to Micheal and Jeanette I heard a lot of good advice for them. What I didn't hear, that I was hearing a lot of previous to that post is "you're born poor, you die poor because you live in a (mostly) capitalist country. So just give up". If they listen to any of you their situation will improve. If the listen to Majestic and Sharp One they will likely reach their goals. They are not going to make it unless one (or preferably both) find higher paying jobs. Doing that is easy, you just acquire the skills the higher paying jobs require. They need to go to school. And it does not have to be Penn, Temple, LaSalle etc. Britghtwood, UTI, Philadelphia Community college will all do fine. Just because you can't go to an Ivy League school does not mean you can't get an education. Atoms still have protons, neutrons, and electrons when you lean about them in a community college. 

 

The other thing I heard was get out of Philadelphia. Yes. The absolutely should look at that. 1. You need to go where the work is. If you can't find suitable employment where you are you need be ready to look elsewhere. 2. Cost of living is absolutely a consideration. 

 

It's just baffles me the rank defeatism I'm hearing from KP, Number guy, and others that it's impossible to better yourself in a capitalist economy. It's not. It's not even all that hard. You decide to do it and you do it.

 

Becoming a millionaire is a lot harder that becoming affluent if that's your goal. That does require a bit of luck. There are two good paths to it. First off is you will need an advanced education. You are looking at grad school in all likelihood to find a career where salary and basic investments alone can get you there. It's a long and hard road to walk and it requires a commitment but it's open to anyone and can even be done without a great deal of cost if you're smart about it.

 

The other is to start a business. This is a riskier road because the initial investment is the once you can least afford to lose. In my most recent business venture I re-mortgaged my home for the max amount to cover my share of the start up costs. Had our company failed I likely would have lost everything. All of my assets were tied up in my home at the time. I literally pushed every chip I had to the center of the table. That is often what it takes. And if we missed it I likely would have tried again at some point once I recovered. Success is sometimes an act of pure will. Yes I was lucky that I knew people who could invest and help pull this thing together. But my entire career I made a point of networking and staying in touch with business contacts. Is that really luck then or just being smart? Once your business is off the ground you need to work hard and run it carefully. Forget holidays, forget weekends, vacations, etc. All you are going to do is work. It was not unusual for me to work 100 to 120 hours a week. Literally every waking moment at times. In the beginning. Once we stabilized and began to grow steadily that pace did ease up because we were in a position to hire employees to help. But that first year one of the partners and myself literally did every single task from design, purchasing, installation, contract negotiation, everything. That is what it takes. The people who commit like that have a good shot at succeeding. It's still not a guarantee. You can still do everything right and fail. Like I said, this is life, it isn't fair. 

 

Yes there is a big disparity of wealth. If Micheal and Jeanette were the children of wealthy parents they would not have to worry about the same problems they do. Their task would be easier. But starting at a disadvantage in terms of money is NOT a show stopper. It's a problem to be worked around. People do it every single day. 

Edited November 23, 2017 by Guard Dog

[Malcador]

Have either of them said it's impossible to better their station, though ?  Seems they have a pessimistic view (usually the correct one in things to have) but not defeatist.  Again, it goes back to the curious way people like you see 'fair' vs their's, heh.

[Zoraptor]

 

 

http://m.dw.com/en/ratko-mladic-found-guilty-at-bosnian-war-crimes-trial/a-41475978#fromDesktop

 

This is why a strong international official body is something good.

 

Seriously, every nation should submit to the internal court of justice already.

Not really, an unbiased strong international body is a good idea, what we have now is an abject joke. Mladic is a maggot to be sure, but selectively applied justice is not necessarily better than no justice at all as it ends up justifying and making precedents for all sorts of things based on current convenience. Ethnic cleansing being OK because Operation Storm was done by a now NATO and EU member and them being convicted would be embarrassing or Kosovo's secession (without even a vote, in contrast Crimea voted to secede from Ukraine twice prior to 2014 they just got gazumped by the USSR breaking up then crushed by 70k Ukrainian soldiers) being legal set precedents if you have international laws yet were done for pure convenience. You're also not going to see Bush, Blair, Sarkozy, Muhammed bin Salman who's busy starving Yemen (or the Mays, Trudeaus, Merkels, Trumps, Macrons etc who are arming and supporting him); or Putin or even Assad so long as he has Putin's backing in The Hague. You'll just see ossified current irrelevancies like Mladic and those like Gbagbo who pissed the French off but didn't have Russian or Chinese protection instead.

the problem you are pointing out is that of an international institution not strong enough to act effectively against strong nations. I’m all for making them stronger, which will go hand in hand with an increasing number of nations submitting an increasing amount of their power.

 

 

You can't make it stronger. Firstly it won't be allowed to get stronger- it's only there in the first place because it's weak and controllable- and secondly even if it did it won't deal with itself if the 'International Community' is the one to overstep the mark. The UN even specifically excludes itself from liability, as seen with the Cholera epidemic in Haiti and the spate of UN peacekeepers caught diddling kids in Africa and not being able to be prosecuted for it.

 

And it will have to deal with the consequences of their poor decisions effectively forever due to their precedent setting nature. If they try to get anyone for, say, the ethnic cleansing of Rohingya in Burma they have to deal with the Operation Storm verdict.

[Bartimaeus]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/23/us/politics/flynn-mueller-russia-trump.html

 

Word on the street is that Flynn may be flipping for Mueller against Trump as a result of Mueller targeting his son for various crimes he was involved with alongside his father.

[smjjames]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/23/us/politics/flynn-mueller-russia-trump.html

 

Word on the street is that Flynn may be flipping for Mueller against Trump as a result of Mueller targeting his son for various crimes he was involved with alongside his father.

I've read other sources saying that he may be flipping to Mueller, but no mention of it resulting from !ueller targeting his son. Which is a normal lawyer tactic, even if it seems like a dirty trick sort of thing. There's also other reasons why his lawyer would stop communicating with Trumps team (which is what's generating the speculation) that wouldn't mean he is talking to Mueller. However, if he is talking to Mueller (perhaps in exchange for a plea deal as he's already in some legal trouble) that's a pretty major milestone.

 

Trump and his team seem to keep expecting it to wrap soon, but this kind of thing generally takes years.

[majestic]

Awesome! That's a program I could get behind being implemented in the US at taxpayer expense. I also like the concept of a "qualification framework". Btw, what's your EQF, if you don't mind my prying.

 

Level 6, in theory. In practice it's more like an Anakin Skywalker situation. It just means my qualification level can be expected to equal a bachelor's, but I have no access to studies or other activities that specifically require being an actual BSc (e.g. Master courses or jobs that specifically require a university degree).

 

Still not too shabby considering I was done with it when I was 19.

[Ben No.3]

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-40669239

 

Thoughts?

[Hurlshort]

My salary is public record as well.

[ShadySands]

In the military we all knew what everyone makes because all the pay scales are public but it seems taboo to discuss it in the corporate world. Might be because it can vary so much between people doing the same job.