Political Discussion

GritNGlitter said:
This is why I support expanding the Supreme Court. If we're being held hostage by the right, we must act accordingly.
Click to expand...

I don't think that this is even possible. Like with the election reform bill, there is 0% chance of the democrats being able to pass this. They would need 60 votes. And I guarantee the republicans will be 100% united behind a no vote and there not being enough votes to even allow the debate of this proposed change on the senate floor. Same would go for ending the filibuster so something like this could be shoved through with the narrowest of margins the democrats currently have.

It's something that needs to be done if the republicans are holding us hostage. But I believe they can and will hold any change that is not in their favor hostage.
 
Indymisanthrope said:
I didn’t know much about DeSantis outside of his headlines as FL governor until I googled him recently and I was stunned, STUNNED, to learn that he is a Yale & Harvard Law alum who served as a Navy JAG. Stunned.
Click to expand...

TenderLovingKiller® said:
I mean Tom Cotton and Josh Hawley have similar bona fides if I am not mistaken. DeSantis just does a better job of feigning “Everyman” rage than the other two who usually just come off as phonies.
Click to expand...

I mean in my experience there are plenty of dummies at Ivy league schools just as there are anywhere... although their money and privilege may make the ivy version more dangerous.... will never forget the Wharton (Trump is an alum) Sr. asking me what latitude and longitude were.
 
Indymisanthrope said:
DeSantis has always just struck me as more of a total dumbfuck. And projecting that image seems to work to his advantage.
Click to expand...
yes, yes it does

which I think ties into the education, schooling, curriculum discussion.

The celebration of unknowing - narrowmindedness and the bashing of facts, sciences, literate and considerate thinking as elitist is of course common in every culture for various reasons, but the American version simultaneously being defined by the right who also bashes socialism as communism for the same political gain is confounding... usually it's the other way 'round.
 
I just learned something I didn't know and it angers me. Most insurance companies / policies do not cover bariatric surgery.

Bariatric surgery is essentially weight loss surgery, things like a gastric bypass.

I find it surprising that they don't consider these surgeries to be medically necessary and classify them as cosmetic like you were getting plastic surgery. If your health is at risk because of your weight and you are having complications, why wouldn't they cover the surgery?

I was just reading someones story who had a gastric bypass. He found out early on that his insurance would not cover this and it was not negotiable. So he got a quote from the on what this would cost.

Anesthesia: $685
Surgeon: $5,780
Hospital: $13,000

These numbers are not negotiable and include the 50% off self-pay discount for the Hospital.

The surgery lasted a little longer than they initially anticipated lasting just under 2 hours and he had to stay overnight for one night for observation.

Then came the bill from the hospital. Even with the 50% self-pay discount, the end bill was $25,214 more than the quote. So pretty much double what he was quoted. He's still waiting on the bills from the Anesthesiologist and Surgeon.

It just boggles my mind at how expensive our healthcare system is and how unpredictable the pricing can be. Not to mention having great medical insurance didn't help squat here.
 
At least it angers me for a good reason. Such as being outraged in a are you kidding me kind of way with hour our medical / insurance system works.

Most things republicans learn and are outraged over I can't say the same for.
 
The vote is in on whether or not to allow the voter reform bill to be debated on the senate floor. As expected, the vote was 50/50 down party lines, short of the 3/5 majority required.

The bill went to the senate to die by being blocked by senate republicans.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
I just learned something I didn't know and it angers me. Most insurance companies / policies do not cover bariatric surgery.

Bariatric surgery is essentially weight loss surgery, things like a gastric bypass.

I find it surprising that they don't consider these surgeries to be medically necessary and classify them as cosmetic like you were getting plastic surgery. If your health is at risk because of your weight and you are having complications, why wouldn't they cover the surgery?

I was just reading someones story who had a gastric bypass. He found out early on that his insurance would not cover this and it was not negotiable. So he got a quote from the on what this would cost.

Anesthesia: $685
Surgeon: $5,780
Hospital: $13,000

These numbers are not negotiable and include the 50% off self-pay discount for the Hospital.

The surgery lasted a little longer than they initially anticipated lasting just under 2 hours and he had to stay overnight for one night for observation.

Then came the bill from the hospital. Even with the 50% self-pay discount, the end bill was $25,214 more than the quote. So pretty much double what he was quoted. He's still waiting on the bills from the Anesthesiologist and Surgeon.

It just boggles my mind at how expensive our healthcare system is and how unpredictable the pricing can be. Not to mention having great medical insurance didn't help squat here.
Click to expand...

The insurance industries, medical, life, home, rental, auto, whatever, are the people that police and control our lives... other than the police.

The algorithms, the faulty data, the massive assumptions that are all made for profit at the expense of the individual and society and fundamentally discriminatory... burn that shit down.
 
Where has Biden been with trying to get the Election Reform bill to pass in the senate? Protecting voter rights was part of his campaign promises.

Yet Biden has been noticeably absent from the fight. He did not play any of the cards presidents have to work the otherside of the aisle. No attempts at bipartisan talks. All he has done is publicly criticize the Republicans.

An analyst at CNN said this could be the legacy of the Biden presidency. Getting nothing done. Biden pretty much resigned himself to the fact that no matter what he did, he would not get any Republican support on this bill. So he didn't even try.

The way our government currently works, all the power is with the minority party if their goal is to get nothing done / block. And the Republicans agenda is to "block the extremist Biden agenda".
 
RenegadeMonster said:
Where has Biden been with trying to get the Election Reform bill to pass in the senate? Protecting voter rights was part of his campaign promises.

Yet Biden has been noticeably absent from the fight. He did not play any of the cards presidents have to work the otherside of the aisle. No attempts at bipartisan talks. All he has done is publicly criticize the Republicans.

An analyst at CNN said this could be the legacy of the Biden presidency. Getting nothing done. Biden pretty much resigned himself to the fact that no matter what he did, he would not get any Republican support on this bill. So he didn't even try.

The way our government currently works, all the power is with the minority party if their goal is to get nothing done / block. And the Republicans agenda is to "block the extremist Biden agenda".
Click to expand...

The voting rights bill was just for political posturing. The blues get to do nothing and blame it on the reds. The blues knew it wouldn't pass and put the bill forward. The calculated risk is voters will blame their political enemy for inaction instead of their own party... or so says the times.

www.nytimes.com

Lessons from the Demise of a Voting Rights Bill

A sweeping election overhaul bill was blocked in the Senate. What does its failure teach us about the fate of other Democratic priorities and future of voting rights?
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com
 
jaycee said:
The insurance industries, medical, life, home, rental, auto, whatever, are the people that police and control our lives... other than the police.

The algorithms, the faulty data, the massive assumptions that are all made for profit at the expense of the individual and society and fundamentally discriminatory... burn that shit down.
Click to expand...
I've read several very depressing articles on the AI that rules our lives, the algorithms behind that AI and how it's deeply flawed based on what was inputted into the model. But don't you worry, these companies are going to do everything they can to get data to enhance their algorithms, even if it's not exactly legal or ethical.
www.newsweek.com

Feds Probe Google Medical Data Project Citing Possible HIPAA Violations

Project Nightingale, a medical data collection project between Google and health care provider Ascension, will be the subject of an announced federal probe.
www.newsweek.com www.newsweek.com
 
For the first time since COVID, we are at full swing hiring people again at work. There's lots of work and we are busier than ever. We have been working with a do more with less mentality for a few years now. And it's been stressful. So bringing on more help is desperately needed.

Sadly it's only brought out the evils of capitalism. We just had a large company wide layoff. I'm safe thank god.

Pretty much what was done bring in more people so we can work on more projects at the same time was balanced with staying competitive and making shareholders profits. For every 2 to 3 junior level people they hired they laid off one senior level person across departments. Pretty much they can have 2 or 3 people for the same salary expense as one senior level person.

They didn't layoff anyone in management or VP/ Director level or higher. It was all senior level people who's next promotion would land them at a VP / Director level. People with 10+ years experience.

In terms of web development. They replaced someone making a little over 6 figures in our department with 3 junior level people making 40k.

This really make me questions if I have a career path for growth in my field as this has been an industry trend in recent years. Not unique to us. There is an everyone can code mentality and it's cheaper to offshore work than do it ourselves. That our clients just aren't willing to pay for our rates.

As of right now I'm currently being paid 2/3rds of what I should be for my experience and what I do if you look at salary figures from 10 years ago. Now most people are in my pay band and only a few people in cities like NYC or do work as a contractor make that much.

And with the trend of laying off senior level / higher salary developers in favor of having more people for the same salary I fear that if I get the senior level promotion, which would be my next career growth step, that I could be facing job security issues. That I could be the first on the cutting block the next time they have layoffs.


I'm just feeling depressed. Will I ever make enough money to not live paycheck to paycheck in my current career. Will I ever pay off my student loans and be a homeowner.
 
The SCOTUS just handed a very very rare victory for a student against public schools when it comes to freedom of speech.

Back in 2017 a student posted a snapchat story laced in profanity. She had an outburst after failing to get a spot on the schools varsity cheerleading squad and posted this to snapchat "Fuck school fuck softball fuck cheer fuck everything". This snap was done outside of school off of school grounds. Yet the school still suspended her from the JV team for having violated school rules.

When it comes to free speech cases against public schools, historically the SCOTUS has almost always ruled in favor of the school.

This ruling is the first to define that there is a line, though narrow. This is the first time a line has been defined by the SCOTUS.

Breyer disagreed with the reasoning of a lower court opinion that held that a school could never regulate speech that takes place off campus, but at the same time he declined to set forth what he called "a broad, highly general First Amendment rules stating just what counts as 'off-campus speech."

Instead, he allowed that while the cheerleader's post were "crude" they "did not amount to fighting words." He said that while she used "vulgarity" her speech was not "obscene."

In addition, her post appeared "outside of school hours from a location outside of school" and they did not target any member of the school community with "abusive" language. He added that she used her own personal cellphone and her audience consisted of a private circle of Snapchat friends. Breyer said "these features of her speech" diminish the school's interest in punishing her.
Click to expand...


www.cnn.com

Supreme Court sides with high school cheerleader who cursed online

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of a former high school cheerleader who argued that she could not be punished by her public school for posting a profanity-laced caption on Snapchat when she was off school grounds.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com
 
RenegadeMonster said:
For the first time since COVID, we are at full swing hiring people again at work. There's lots of work and we are busier than ever. We have been working with a do more with less mentality for a few years now. And it's been stressful. So bringing on more help is desperately needed.

Sadly it's only brought out the evils of capitalism. We just had a large company wide layoff. I'm safe thank god.

Pretty much what was done bring in more people so we can work on more projects at the same time was balanced with staying competitive and making shareholders profits. For every 2 to 3 junior level people they hired they laid off one senior level person across departments. Pretty much they can have 2 or 3 people for the same salary expense as one senior level person.

They didn't layoff anyone in management or VP/ Director level or higher. It was all senior level people who's next promotion would land them at a VP / Director level. People with 10+ years experience.

In terms of web development. They replaced someone making a little over 6 figures in our department with 3 junior level people making 40k.

This really make me questions if I have a career path for growth in my field as this has been an industry trend in recent years. Not unique to us. There is an everyone can code mentality and it's cheaper to offshore work than do it ourselves. That our clients just aren't willing to pay for our rates.

As of right now I'm currently being paid 2/3rds of what I should be for my experience and what I do if you look at salary figures from 10 years ago. Now most people are in my pay band and only a few people in cities like NYC or do work as a contractor make that much.

And with the trend of laying off senior level / higher salary developers in favor of having more people for the same salary I fear that if I get the senior level promotion, which would be my next career growth step, that I could be facing job security issues. That I could be the first on the cutting block the next time they have layoffs.


I'm just feeling depressed. Will I ever make enough money to not live paycheck to paycheck in my current career. Will I ever pay off my student loans and be a homeowner.
Click to expand...
As a data analyst, the trend I'm seeing is that once you get to about 55, they cut you loose, because you're considered past your prime. Why do you want an analyst that isn't sharp? I have seen mass layoffs of people right around 60. It really sucks that I probably won't have enough money to retire and then on top of that, I'll have to take a lower level, lower paid job to finish out my career since no one hires an analyst who's pushing 60.
 
nolalady said:
As a data analyst, the trend I'm seeing is that once you get to about 55, they cut you loose, because you're considered past your prime. Why do you want an analyst that isn't sharp? I have seen mass layoffs of people right around 60. It really sucks that I probably won't have enough money to retire and then on top of that, I'll have to take a lower level, lower paid job to finish out my career since no one hires an analyst who's pushing 60.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't that be age discrimination? I thought that was a protected status.

In the case of the trend I'm seeing it has to do with seniority / higher paid employees, which are not a protected status. This is where a union would be beneficial.
 
nolalady said:
As a data analyst, the trend I'm seeing is that once you get to about 55, they cut you loose, because you're considered past your prime. Why do you want an analyst that isn't sharp? I have seen mass layoffs of people right around 60. It really sucks that I probably won't have enough money to retire and then on top of that, I'll have to take a lower level, lower paid job to finish out my career since no one hires an analyst who's pushing 60.
Click to expand...
I would also assume a noob 23 year old data analyst is much cheaper to employ (and rightfully so) than a DA with 35 years experience. They use the “isn’t as sharp” thing to cover their ass.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
Wouldn't that be age discrimination? I thought that was a protected status.

In the case of the trend I'm seeing it has to do with seniority / higher paid employees, which are not a protected status. This is where a union would be beneficial.
Click to expand...
They don't tell you that's why they aren't hiring you or letting you go. But every analyst I know has noticed and pointed out this trend. The other issue is that analysts can be paid very well for not having management duties, which is something that the corporates aren't big on. They have no problem paying managers, but paying non management professionals, is tough for them to do/justify with shareholders. And yes, to @TenderLovingKiller® 's point, a 23 y/o analyst is way cheaper than someone with 20+ years under their belt. So often they let go of older analysts to hire a couple cheaper, much less experienced analysts.
 
minnesota.cbslocal.com

Many Restaurant Job Applicants Aren't Showing Up For Interviews

While fully open, many Twin Cities bars and restaurants are having trouble filling their staff.
minnesota.cbslocal.com minnesota.cbslocal.com

A growing trend across the country is job applicants for hospitality / restaurant jobs as well as other low wage jobs are not showing up for interviews ghosting the business. One restaurant owner in Minnesota described the situation as for about every 200 interviews he sets up, only about 12 people show up for those interviews. The rest are no call no shows. And this is why it's so hard to fill staffing shortages right now. Hotels are complaining about doubling their opening salary to $15 an hour to clean rooms and still can't get anyone to show up for interviews.

I took no sympathy to business owners complaining about people ghosting them. As that's exactly what they do to many people who apply for jobs.

It's unclear what is causing this trend. Is it states requirement to show proof of job search activities to be eligible for unemployment? Or are people just not interested in these jobs and don't think they are worth their time for the pay they would get.

Likely, it's a combination of both.

But it's becoming clear, we will not see low wage jobs return to normalcy post pandemic. The staffing shortages are likely to remain until wages are better. People want good paying jobs. Not be front line workers that get paid very little.

This is very much turning into backlash of 40 years of keeping wages depressed and growing wage inequality. People just are not interesting in jobs that don't pay enough.

A study in Washington State showed that if wages were increased to liveable wages where someone could only work one job and not 2 or 3 to get by that all open positions that they could not fill would be filled. People who previously passed on the job openings and did not apply because they didn't think the wages were worth their time were now suddenly applying. And they found good hard workers. The problem is, corporations do not want to pay these types of wages. It eats into shareholder profits and they can't have that.

One of the things I have heard is we are due for a major correction of wage suppression over the next 10 to 20 years. And this will include huge amounts of inflation because corporations will pass on all the higher wage expenses to the consumer.

We could be looking at a situation in 2040 where $30 an hour is equivalent to a $15 an hour job today if the feds don't keep inflation under control and corporations aren't able to keep wages depressed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top