> The recipient is the one who needs to pay income tax
That's only in some countries like US. There are many HackerOne bug hunters from e.g. Russia where your company is responsible for paying all taxes including employee income tax.
But do we really need those C*O jobs and increased shareholder value? Probably keeping many of rocket science jobs could have been cheaper for taxpayers. But no one cares about that today, our children will be paying our debt, not us.
Lawyers are expensive only if _you_ have to pay for them. In English law (UK/EU) loser pays most lawyer's fees. This also disincentivizes businesses to start unwinnable cases in order to ruin other businesses with legal fees.
It's kind of dividends but without approval from majority of shareholders and bondholders. Company draws down credit line, shareholders receive cash, lawyers receive their %. Shareholders still have same amount of shares, win-win for everyone.
> because they probably interacted with Joe in produce at some point recently
> because I pulled a shift with him recently
It's more likely they are scared of their customers rather than Joe.
Because Joe is just a person who contacted with contagious clients and they will never contact him again. They've probably already sanitized their store.
But they will have to contact other clients who infected Joe and there is nothing they can do to avoid that.
9/11 is not a good example here. It allowed US to pass important PRISM-like PATRIOT acts without much opposition from US citizens, just in time for the rise of the Internet.
It also provided a great narrative to start Iraq war and forced them to accept USD for their oil, strengthening the economy.
So it clearly was in both government and (some) citizens interest for 9/11 to happen.
It's not easy to find any Coronavirus-related political narratives for China or any other country yet, because nothing has changed in China politics, but we will wait and see.
> Have you jumped into a large old codebase with no access to its previous authors or maintainers?
Written by juniors, who doesn't really understand their codebase and writing ugly hacks all over the code? With code regularly failing at critical moments?
And you are suggesting to hire a bunch of new juniors who would finally fix this mess? I would rather fire half of the developers and hire new seniors instead who will refactor the codebase.
Maybe because they started testing early? Their first cases were in January and they screened everyone in airports since then [0], they performed 639606 tests with 4731 positives. [1][2]
Why do they call them investors? People who haven't even briefly read financial filings for the company they are going to buy? They are called speculators, not investors.
Those distances haven't been considered until real electrical shorts happened, safety standards are written in blood:
> The regulation was introduced in 2009 following study of two fatal crashes: TWA 800 in 1996, in which an electrical short is believed to have caused a spark in the fuel tank and an explosion; and Swissair 111 in 1998, when an electrical short caused a fire in the cockpit.
Runaway Stabilizer / MCAS cases can be mitigated by the pilots (they can use cutoff switches and do manual trim), but not this kind of electrical short:
> Furthermore, the electrical power in that wire could circumvent the cutoff switches in the cockpit that, in the event of such a stabilizer runaway, are used to kill electrical power to the tail. Theoretically, the pilots could be unable to shut it off.