That is again reiterating their point that it is favorable only to the small portion of insanely wealthy shareholders and does not even favor the overwhelming majority of shareholders too who are not insanely wealthy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variar
Is a caste who have traditionally rendered temple services. it is not related to the english word or meaning warrior.
The caste name also differs from region to region. I am not sure if the person you mentioned is the same caste or a different one.
Caste does not say your ancestors did that job, caste meant a person from a particular caste could only do that job and could not take up other jobs, people from other castes could not take their jobs and were disqualified because you were not born in a particular list of families.
Some castes were prohibited from getting an education and were killed for this.
If they have used resources to block password sharing by checking and comparing location , devices and network the resources and cost for this edge case must me a high enough percentage.
Else they should just be ignoring password sharing as a concern altogether rather than causing negative press.
I see the usual exercise and other self improvement activities listed which are all good for your physical and mental health. What I see is among the self improvement and tasks most forget to take time to enjoy the day or reward themselves, this mostly comes as an afterthought or compensation for some heavy task done.
I would suggest to add this to your list of tasks and make sure you take a certain amount of time everyday to indulge in any activity that brings you pleasure or makes you happy. This is often neglected, so make this a priority equal to the other things. Make sure you don't miss out on this more than a few days.
This may be listening to music which you enjoy, watching some funny show, enjoy some great food on some days, if you enjoy trekking or other physical activity ; just make sure you make time in your schedule to indulge in something that makes you feel happy or satisfied.
>Not really, because I saw too many software companies go out of business because not enough people wound up upgrading to the next major version -- the ownership model of software can be awfully feast-or-famine for developers' income, it's a very tough/risky business model.
If the Monthly Recurring Revenue is a make or break for companies that provide the software, then inversely the Monthly Recurring Expense would also be a make or break factor for customers or business using the service.
Buy once may reduce the overall cost for customers and allow them to invest in upgrades only when their revenue is better.
There has to be balance and empathy for the customer too..
All or nothing approach to quitting leads to quitting completely or going back to the same state, When I quit smoking I used to quit for a week then a month, later I quit for a long time and I did smoke once after a year, I did not treat it as a failure and just a break in my quitting, have not smoked since, I may some time if there is a special occasion ,but I don't think that would get me back to regular smoking. I have seen some quit and then once they smoke or have a drink resign thinking their attempt to quit has failed and then going back to the habit.
You may have breaks in your quitting , but that's ok get back to the quitting state as soon as possible.
I have the same question.
Definition from Wikipedia "Free will is the capacity of agents to choose between different possible courses of action unimpeded."
If your actions and decisions are a result of chemical and electrical activity in your brain, it does still mean that you are in control and unimpeded.
Free will seems to exist in a middle state where you do not think of yourself as a soul separate from your physical form and where you accept yourself as a carbon based organism reacting to processes.
I see this as a chicken and egg situation. Even within any country if you see the salaries are higher in cities where you also have most job opportunities. This attracts workers who seek more opportunities and higher rewards. Those who are not able to compete or not interested to compete would not migrate to the city. Companies that operate in these places have to offer more to get the best among those available. Companies that need to get the best talent have to be ready to bear these higher costs to operate from these cities.
Reading up on the history of California, I see from a long time back since the times of the gold rush it has been a place which attracted people seeking more opportunities and the best people would stay there when they are rewarded for moving there. There may be multiple such cities and locations in the US , but even within the US salaries would differ in different cities.
I think the best answer may have to come from an economist who would understand these better.
I think the negative content about the employer was the fact that her employer was monitoring their employees through the webcam, anything directly said about the company I see is other users reacting to the employer's surveillance.
The employee is just stating a fact about their employer which everyone feels is scandalous or negative including the employer themselves.
I agree, the company in total loses value when it shuts down, the employees are left without any jobs causing loss of livelihood , investors are left with a loss in share value.
Employees can get another job , investors can diversify and manage their portfolio better, there usually higher risk inherent when higher growth and dividends are expected.
What I am saying is everyone is affected when a business shuts down, its not something which affects only investors, employees are also affected, but when the company has record profits in most cases it is provided exclusively to investors and no portion on the profits are shared with employees.
I see salary as a way of booking the employees time, a share in profits is what they should get for how productive they are in the booked time.
The investment of shareholders is at stake irrespective of whether they share the profit with the employees, success of the company is a different function altogether.
>For the shareholders, on the other hand, a company taking losses doesn't just impact future income. Their entire investment is at stake.
Investors who do not get more returns in the companies compared to a debt instrument will take their investments to companies which can offer better returns, that is how they should manage their risk without getting bankrupt.
There is a chart above where some companies have profit/employee close to a million dollars, intellectual property of the employees is not valued enough, value is only attributed to the capital invested , which if you look at companies which are overvalued is not the rarest commodity; employees are not a rare commodity but good employees are.
I usually see this argument about the utopian company which shields employees from the losses in debates. In the real world a company making losses cuts down on employees, wages, increases working hours for same pay ; all negatively affecting the employees in a desperate attempt to survive, failing which the company shuts down causing loss to all employees.
They are however not sharing the increased profits with the employees when they are highly profitable, they don't hire more people than required because profits are more.
I see there is a market value that the company has to pay for labor. The additional profits are generated due to the performance of the employees, they should get a share in the profits for their contribution, the investors putting in the capital are currently taking 100% of the profits. There should be a share in this for those putting in their sweat and brains.
I had read about a woman from a Brahmin family who first started practicing Bharat Natyam in the 1900s , and had huge opposition from other brahmins as it was considered low for a brahmin lady to practice . This was only practiced by Devadasis during that time.
Now when the dance is popular , brahmins have myths about how the dance form belongs to the brahmins and was granted by god. I think this is the wiki link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rukmini_Devi_Arundale The related links have more details about the transformation from an art form of the lower class to gods gift to the upper class. This is true of almost every claims of the so called upper castes.
Propping up the caste system required blind faith and belief, just dig a little and you see how stupid it is to believe.