Sure there is. I've seen them. They wear back suits, black sunglasses, and drive big black oil guzzling SUVs that move in tight groups travelling at the exact same speed. I've also seen their leader too: http://bit.ly/1Y5Irgs (whom is shown reading this thread).
It would just be replaced with a new shiny organization having a new name, more freedom to do more harm (given its lack of baggage) and probably end up employing the same people.
Sadly being on the brink of destruction is likely going to be the only motivator for real change.
People who "actively" avoid churches often do so for reasons other than their personal life challenges.
Also, you're painting a picture as though you can come for the other benefits and not have to deal with their primary purpose of existence; kinda like a time-share salesman who offers $500 and a free lunch provided you listen to the 3 hour brainwashing session. It's a disingenuous statement. I know this from being sold the same free lunch - many times :)
Maybe I'm lacking imagination, but how do you account for the renter and Airbnb having vastly different sets of information to work from? Also your sample size would have to be huge to rule out coincidental outcomes, which I dare say would rarely be found for the average property.
For example my property gets about 100 customers per year. I'm guessing in the last 4 years I've had 3 black customers, all accepted by the way, but if I rejected all 3 can an algorithm reasonably rule out coincidence having such a low sample size? It just seems like it would be the kind of algo doomed to fuck it up.
There's a huge flaw in there. When I rent a unit, I will do some client research and to the extent I can I will block the rental based upon my findings. For example if I read their blog and they come across as a risky customer (a profile photo with machine guns, money, and drugs or postings showing a they have a lack of character). Now it could be they also happen to be black, but when they create a fake profile and then get accepted it does not mean I blocked them due to race.
At a minimum you would need to make sure you fake both profiles to ensure everything but skin color is the same.
> ... entire category of jobs became obsolete fast enough...
I don't see how this is an 'entire category' replacement nor do I see how it will happen any faster than say automated checkouts that also replaced droves of clerks. Sure people complain, but it happens so gradually (or gradually enough) that people will just eat crow like they always do.
However it is possible that the perfect machine ends up being largely the same as human beings with a built in evolutionary path for advancement. Such machines would then face the same problems.
Side question: what prevents a basic income from being a driving force behind an inflation jump making the system less stable?
For example: rent. Wouldn't landlords managing properties at the low end of the market price, raise those prices knowing people both 1. have more distribution control over their money (cash vs. coupons for things) and 2. More people in their target market have cash to pay.
Welcome to corporate America. I agree with you, but the people on this forum are not writing comments defending the old boys club when they suggest her pay is not abnormal in the market. If we want to change these things it requires changes in government and regulation so we need to lobby for that change.
I see it as defending the free market economy. I don't think any of them deserve hundred million dollar pay checks, but really the supply/demand of talented CEOs is so out of whack that the pay scales have ballooned. Welcome to capitalism. What I don't understand is why this general problem with CEO pay has to degrade into targeted Mayer bashing.
Her severance would be due to a sale. There are lots of regular employees that get severance packages when they're let go due to a sale.
What's her severance in proportion to her annual salary along with tenure? The norm for my area/role, as an engineer, is 4 weeks per year of service. So 6 years would get me half a years salary, but you know what - it's only two weeks per year for "lesser" roles in my company such as support.
The comment has context. So read: adopts much more responsibility than an engineer. On a day by day basis she makes decisions that have a more significant impact. She has to cover much more territory for understanding aspects over the whole organization.
I agree people should get rewarded for performance and that there are people often taking advantage, but still the entire ballpark area of pay that she gets is guided by market comparisons. There are other comparable compensation packages out there, she's just getting hammered for hers because of the fall. I don't think it's uncommon for failures to result in compensation packages that cause a public outcry.
I agree they are paid generously and even overpaid, but they deserve to be paid more than an engineer. How much is debatable, but that's really established by the market. I just don't get the engineer comparison.
But maybe she did a great job responding to the crises and swerved the ship in the right direction, out of harms way, but just not enough to prevent the crash. Maybe she did a better job than many others would have done. What would you expect them to do... give up?
I don't understand the engineer comparison at all. Every person in her role adopts much more responsibility, takes on a huge risk of failure that can be career ending and they can face a media frenzy that attempts to bash them into the ground. Why would anyone try to compare her salary to an engineers?
One more tip. Finding substitutes really helps. Soda stream is awesome provided you don't add the syrups. I do 90% soda water with 10% orange juice or grape juice and I love the stuff.
Everyone has different priorities and there's no shortage of companies putting a priority on profits/growth over taking the time or risking costs associated with looking out for others within our company or communities. I've avoided discussing Talias case because I think the problem is bigger than that. Even McDonalds shouldn't pay poverty like wages for their area. Even McDonalds can spend the time to find out if they're hiring a person just looking for supplemental income.
Also, maybe the turnover wouldn't be so high if they paid better.