If DHS had evidence to the contrary maybe in the many many steps between soliciting investment, campaigning on it, confirming the factory, and breaking ground on that factory, the elected officials should have said something.
We could also give them a clear, short path to citizenship if we didn't have enough. Instead we do our best to keep it as chaotic as possible so that those SWE we need can't push for 175/225k
>
We could also give them a clear, short path to citizenship if we didn't have enough.
The USA currently potentially hasn't enough programmers. If the market tide changes, one of course wants to be able to send these superfluous work migrants back to their home countries.
The direction is great. The communication and customer support leave a lot to be desired.
The thing is, its hard to have a product thats important to you and does cool things but also you don't rely on for anything crucial. Esp when its file storage.
> you don't rely on for anything crucial. Esp when its file storage.
Crucial and sensitive are different things. I trust them with the files I actively and regularly use, but I don't trust them with anything that needs encryption, which is a tiny sliver of what I have in terms of files.
Keeping things backed up is an entirely different conversation, though.
Your argument smacks of insincerity due to its limited scope of viewing SAHMs as moms providing childcare.
1/ You haven't mentioned how that SAHM must get a cooking credit, healthcare, retirement or house management credit or anything else in the litany of jobs required outside of immediate childcare and costs incurred by simply existing as a woman. Just a voucher for the hours, I assume, at which childcare would be open and none of the other hours
2/ A SAHP (thats stay at home parent) should be incentivized by raising wages and allowing life to be more affordable but your argument seems to be very focused on "moms" and "capitalist enterprises" and does not consider the reality that when SAHMs were more economically viable, it was not viable for all families.
Are men "leaving their children and working all day"? Should we not pay them to stay home?
This view is either fully gendered or assumes that all families are made up of two people and one person's wages should support a family. Neither are the conversation on this table.
The conversation on this table is:
Our current economy, in nearly every state and for every metro requires more than minimum wage to rent not own, an apt and live, not save for the future. Childcare has gone up 30% in the last few years alone and wages, as you have likely experienced, have not.
We cannot continue to expect people with choices to have children given this economic situation.
Trust me. You want people to continue having children, and you'd prefer them to be positive additions to society, for your own well-being in old age.
Sorry if I wasn’t clear initially. The point is that women should not stay home. Yes, this is “fully gendered” because reality is fully gendered. Far and away the majority of childcare is performed by women. Always has been. Always will be.
The emphasis on jobs over children as where we want women’s energy, time, and attention to go is what is being demonstrated by this policy. We will pay you to leave your children with others. We will not pay you to take care of your children.
Why anybody thinks this will result in more children being born is beyond me. Sure, it might make it “easier” in some sense to have children, but what it teaches is job > children, and that is going to result in people learning to deprioritize children. As intended.
"We want women's energy and time" seems to indicate "not women" want women's energy in time.
If you will not pay "women" to take care of "their children" rather than, say..."the future of society" or "our children" then women will not have a child.
And that is exactly what you're seeing happen. Women worked in all times. Every single time period you can think of. Population is dropping because
a/ we have rights as women and are outstripping men on every measurable term within just a couple generations of access
b/men are not stepping up to create something more equitable
Men have been offered the chance to step up and change the current (and yes its current, not a "natural state" of affairs) dynamic.
The idea that you're striking on is defining my life for me and quite frankly, with your benefit in first position.
> Childcare has gone up 30% in the last few years alone and wages, as you have likely experienced, have not.
This is a major statement, and I don't think it's fully qualified.
Why have childcare expenses imcreased by 30% in the past few years? There should be an arbitrage opportunity if costs have stayed fixed. If costs have increased, is it due to general economic pressures or increased regulatory burden? If the former, wages should catch up (and flooding the market with additional labor likely will exert downward pressue market wages). If the latter, then why on earth are we passing such nonsense regulation?
In either case, moving out of a major metro is always an option.
According to a quick google and the census:
|| Approximately 3 in 4 Americans (or about 86%) live in a metropolitan statistical area (MSA), with the percentage of the U.S. population in these areas reaching an all-time high. As of 2024, nearly 294 million people—or about 86% of the total population—resided in a metro area, a trend that continues to grow.
If we think the wage differential will keep up in less populated areas, that is no longer occurring either. We do not live in a perfect capitalist system and many trades, activities and services are given benefits and protections for a variety of reasons.
There are other places - outside of the US - that have provided this tax credit. Its not shameful to learn from other countries and adopt things that are going well and are beneficial both to the freedom of people and the economy.
Well, we know that tracking "everyone" would only lead to tracking a subset of everyone. A subset with a lot less money and power than those in charge of the tracking. Much like the guard or observer in the panopticon.
The trains are new. The wires etc they run on aren't. When there's funding to update those, the trains will run faster.
If this was done in the opposite way, we likely would still be working on infrastructure (it's a bigger project) and the trains would still not run faster cuz they would be old.
We need to hold the fourth estate to better account.
Software devs jobs getting less cushy is no biggie. We can afford to amp up the efficiency.
Teachers jobs got "less cushy" -> not great for users/consumers or the ppl in those jobs.
Doctors jobs got "less cushy" -> not great for users/consumers or the ppl in those jobs.
Even waiters/ check-out staff, stockists jobs at restaurants, groceries and AMZ got "less cushy" -> not great for users/consumers or the ppl in those jobs. at least not when you need to call someone for help.
These things are not as disconnected as they seem. Businesses are in fact made up of people.
This feels like you don't actually have experience with consulting.
The amount of hierarchy and peer review is extensive and apprenticeship was core to my experience in multiple consultancies. One might say post-covid, in a pro-hybrid world, this has been hard. Still, as a new hire couldn't introduce myself to a group of clients without sharing my intro with the associate partner first and getting notes on my literal 3 sentence bio and then feedback afterwards. Every deck I've ever presented has been through multiple hands above and below me in the hierarchy. That 22 year old usually if not always has had a discussion, notes, notes reviewed, questions listed that need answers etc.
This feels like you’re applying absolutes to a massive industry with wildly varying standards for peer review and work product.
I was a consultant for years at a Big4 and I can personally attest to a lot of the stuff I was producing as a 22 year old going straight to the client leadership with zero oversight or review from my higher ups. Whether something got extensive quality checks was dependent on the type of work, notoriety of the client, and of course personal management styles of the partners involved.
In several of my projects, nobody on the team had experience with a particular topic, including the senior management, but the client was all told we did. The juniors on the project were then expected to put together product and deliver it, and none of it was reviewed by the higher ups (not like they had any expertise in it to provide feedback anyway).
reply