Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Again, fictional hyperbole. The City Council decision does not do this.
It's smoke and mirrors. They want to do it to satisfy their voters/supporters but know that it'll cause major backlash. So they try the next best thing which is to weaken the existing protocols/practices that prevent it from happening. In your opinion what do you think are the goals and motivations of the decision?
It's smoke and mirrors. They want to do it to satisfy their voters/supporters but know that it'll cause major backlash. So they try the next best thing which is the weaken the existing protocols that prevent it from happening. In your opinion what do you think are the goals and motivations of the decision?
I do not disagree. Most of our current world stands firmly in the realm of smoke and mirrors.
I do believe the goal and motivation here is to employ more people and accomplish a kind of socialization as well. It is anyone's guess how this will work itself out.
It is not altruism, either, even though this if often used to sell such policies to the greater public. Much like Obamacare. The goal there was to cut very low income medical costs by integrating them into the insurance dole. The enormous profiteering of the drug companies went untouched, another assumed and too-little discussed goal that was accomplished. The problem is, of course, that this has visited much higher costs on everyone else.
Point is, integration of all into the big system is always the interest. My husband complains bitterly about the service at the 99th Street Whole Foods. They are trying to draw on the community surrounding for employees and many of the candidates have little experience in an environment even that professional. At the same time, he will complain about our taxes going to support people who do not want to work ... surprising, because our tax bill seems to decrease every time around - not good but a different topic. In any case, I have often pointed out that one cannot complain about people not working and then complain when they do work.
There is something similar here in the drive to integrate everyone (employment, insurance, what-have-you) and the major sorts of compromises that must be made. There is a predatory interest for sure, again the importance of not seeing this as social altruism. That which cannot be translated to the imperatives of value extraction will not be allowed visibility.
Global context - consider Greece and the Germans. We should admire the Greeks and their tenacity, protecting this older way of life and protesting seamless integration - good for them. Yet they are painted as criminals and anti-socials in many circles.
I do not disagree. Most of our current world stands firmly in the realm of smoke and mirrors.
I do believe the goal and motivation here is to employ more people and accomplish a kind of socialization as well. It is anyone's guess how this will work itself out.
It is not altruism, either, even though this if often used to sell such policies to the greater public. Much like Obamacare. The goal there was to cut very low income medical costs by integrating them into the insurance dole. The enormous profiteering of the drug companies went untouched, another assumed and too-little discussed goal that was accomplished. The problem is, of course, that this has visited much higher costs on everyone else.
Point is, integration of all into the big system is always the interest. My husband complains bitterly about the service at the 99th Street Whole Foods. They are trying to draw on the community surrounding for employees and many of the candidates have little experience in an environment even that professional. At the same time, he will complain about our taxes going to support people who do not want to work ... surprising, because our tax bill seems to decrease every time around - not good but a different topic. In any case, I have often pointed out that one cannot complain about people not working and then complain when they do work.
There is something similar here in the drive to integrate everyone (employment, insurance, what-have-you) and the major sorts of compromises that must be made. There is a predatory interest for sure, again the importance of not seeing this as social altruism. That which cannot be translated to the imperatives of value extraction will not be allowed visibility.
Global context - consider Greece and the Germans. We should admire the Greeks and their tenacity, protecting this older way of life and protesting seamless integration - good for them. Yet they are painted as criminals and anti-socials in many circles.
OK fair enough, integrating people from all backgrounds is an admirable goal. What a lot of middle and upper middle class people have problems with is that they feel like they did everything right and yet the govt is favoring people that did everything wrong. The rules of the game wasn't written yesterday. There was a path that people could have followed to integrate themselves into the broader economic system. Not everyone got stuff handed to them. Many of us actually worked and continue to try to improve ourselves.
With the shift in the economy towards knowledge based workers i dont see this divide in achievement, perceptions and opinions subsiding. Clearly one group will benefit more than the other. The unfortunate thing is that the divide is somewhat along racial lines.
As for Greeks I respect their tanacity, but don't admire the way they handle their finances. Clearly they should have never joined the currency union. The union largely benefits countries that are culturally industrious by keeping their currency low relative to their economic prowess.
OK fair enough, integrating people from all backgrounds is an admirable goal.
...
As for Greeks I respect their tanacity, but don't admire the way they handle their finances. Clearly they should have never joined the currency union. The union largely benefits countries that are culturally industrious by keeping their currency low relative to their economic prowess.
Hard to know if comprehensive integration is good ! that was one of my points. What happens to dissent and diversity of opinion if we are all the same.
Looking critically at the Greek situation, they are actually poster child material for what goes wrong with too much and far too tenacious left. This can and often has devolved into corruption and cronyism.
Opinions about whether they should have joined or not involve deciding how victimized they were. I personally believe that there are financial interests at the top in Greece as well and that they saw an opportunity for profiteering even while knowing full well that the Greek economy could not sustain inclusion without major cultural changes - which did not happen, but they do not care. Take the $$$$ and run as is common.
Hard to know if comprehensive integration is good ! that was one of my points. What happens to dissent and diversity of opinion if we are all the same.
Looking critically at the Greek situation, they are actually poster child material for what goes wrong with too much and far too tenacious left. This can and often has devolved into corruption and cronyism.
Opinions about whether they should have joined or not involve deciding how victimized they were. I personally believe that there are financial interests at the top in Greece as well and that they saw an opportunity for profiteering even while knowing full well that the Greek economy could not sustain inclusion without major cultural changes - which did not happen, but they do not care. Take the $$$$ and run as is common.
This is nothing new. The Greeks have been doing this for 3000 years.
In point of fact, as much as I think this law is completely wrongheaded, there's no way they can enforce it. Arrest records are public, and very easy to check on the web. Any employer can just take applications, check them on-line for criminal history, and circular file those that come up positive. There's no need to ask applicants whether they have a criminal record or not.
Read comments elsewhere on several NYC and other sites about this law and large part stated the same; businesses/employers will simply front load background checks at time of initial application/contact.
The more jobs they kill, the more votes they get. Its a conflict of interest.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
