Without condoning this, I think it’s important to be very clear about what this is: it’s an automation improvement to a decades-old existing system. Most retail stores already keep (and share!) photos of suspected shoplifters, with the work being done by printing screenshots from security camera footage. The goal is to discourage them from shoplifting by constantly having an employee nearby, and to only kick them out if they’re caught in the act. Personally, I don’t think increased surveillance is a worthwhile use of resources, and I think it could lead to abuses like you’ve described, but from the POV of the people building this, they’re taking an existing labor-intensive task and making it easier. From their perspective, it’s easy to argue that this won’t lead to blanket bans and lists of undesirables because those could already exist, but they don't.
My grandparents lived north of Salt Lake City, close enough that I’ve been there at least half a dozen times over several decades. Last time I did,I drove across a bridge with no water under it to an island that was fully connected to the mainland by dry land. It was very melancholy to reflect on how the natural world I grew up with is disappearing.
I apologize if I’m missing the point you’re making, but trench foot and vaccines are completely unrelated.
Vaccines fundamentally impact viruses. Trench foot is not caused by a virus, or any infection. It’s more akin to frostbite.
We’re really pushing the boundaries of what we can do with vaccines, but the root cause of trench foot is poor circulation, and a vaccine can’t really fix that.
It reflects incredibly poorly on management, bordering on incompetence. If those 10% of employees were needed, then management obviously shouldn’t fire them just to make the stock price go up. If they weren’t actually needed, then management shouldn’t have hired them in the first place. If they’re only sorta needed, then that means management wasn’t able to come up with any ideas to grow the business.
Furthermore, regardless of what expectations are set, it’s not the remaining employees’ job to figure out how to do 111% of the work. That’s literally the job of management.
That’s also true of companies that AOC wants to raise taxes on. She’s not forcing anyone to pay those taxes. Companies that don’t want to pay those taxes are free to relocate away from America, abandon selling to the US market, and cut themselves off from the American labor supply. Of course every company wants to be successful in big cities in America. But taxes are very low in dying small countries in the middle of nowhere.
“…for energy is the lifeblood of this society and when the chips are down he who controls the energy supply controls Planet. In former times the energy monopoly was called ‘The Power Company’; we intend to give this name an entirely new meaning.”
1) because there aren’t enough teachers in-state + coming out of the lower 48 to meet demand.
2) Pay alone can’t make people happy, which is why there’s a very high alcoholism/suicide rate among oil workers, despite it typically being a more temporary gig than teaching and paying considerably more. I also hold teachers to a different standard for on-the-job demeanor than oil workers.
3) Per my brother in law, they’re happy to be in Alaska for the American experience.
4) Foreign teachers in Alaska aren’t suppressing wages. That would be true for free market jobs where schools can simply decide not to teach students if it’s not profitable, but teaching isn’t like that.
At a general level, it is a simple fact that there are more qualified/happy candidates globally than there are just in the United States. For the second part, no, I assume that money/opportunity are WHY they’re happy to teach up there. If that’s the motivation that keeps qualified teachers from turning to alcoholism or suicide, that’s a good thing for the kids.
My sister was a schoolteacher in Alaska. They pay a premium, but it’s still not a life that most Americans are cut out for, including me. That means the schools have to choose between giving these kids subpar teachers who are happy to live up there, or miserable teachers who are only doing it for the money. Or, we can hire foreign teachers who are qualified AND are happy to teach up there.
Since Bari Weiss took over CBS News, there’s been a number of controversies involving corporate interference to nix or promote politically-charged stories. Most recently, at 60 minutes, a lot of senior journalists were fired. The touchpoint seems to have been that they pushed for journalistic independence and maintaining the long-form “gather all the facts” investigative journalism that the show was known for, while corporate leadership was pushing for them to “get with the new way of doing things.”
> The index is intended to follow the all of the largest large-cap U.S. equities, not pick and choose which ones to invest in.
This particular piece is incorrect. S&P has preexisting rules to pick and choose which large-cap equities to follow. They had a discussion about whether to drop those rules in order to become a more accurate benchmark, and they chose to stick with what they had been doing.
Regardless of what they say they were doing (or what they’re trying to do), the fact that they changed nothing means that what they had been doing is the same as what they are doing now, ie, picking and choosing stocks at the risk of diminishing their benchmark capabilities.
They aren’t. The US built monitoring infrastructure there because it’s our project, and that’s where the science needs to happen.
It’s the same reason that many more countries than just Argentina built the Pierre Auger observatory, or that the Vatican built the Pope Scope in Arizona.
> If these rules go into effect, is it not true that individuals, state governments, and non-governmental organizations could still fund scientific research that the federal government won't fund?
This administration’s actions towards Harvard and other schools would suggest not. If a state or university is doing verboten research, the federal government can make them stop. Previously, that didn’t happen - it was unthinkable. Now, it’s forever on the table.
The good news is that people have looked into it! And not just in a modern-slop-journalism kind of way, but in a serious, rigorous kind of way. And many of the resulting scientific papers are published online and available for you to read!