Isn't it the norm for elected officials to want to keep tax dollars in their district? This Dush guy might be misguided somehow in the larger scheme of things, but wouldn't he just be reflecting his constituents' desire to directly benefit from the taxes they pay?
There are huge benefits derived from economies of scale that can be built at the appropriate levels of government. You can end up wasting a lot of resources by trying to do things too locally or not locally enough.
I live in a rural area and it would bankrupt our county if we had to maintain all the miles of road (far more per taxpayer than urban areas) if the state wasn't doing so much of it. The state uses expensive machines to do much of that work efficiently. It wouldn't make sense for our county to buy that equipment and have it sit unused much of the time. So the county would be less efficient at it. And that's before we get to things like duplication of administrative roles around that work.
Sometimes that means urban areas are helping fund some of my local roads. And sometimes that means I'm helping fund their public transport. When done well, we all get far more for less tax money.
The most affected counties (Bucks, Montgomery, and Delaware) have average incomes twice that of the counties Dush represents (Crawford, Erie, Washington, Greene).
So Dush's voters aren't paying much in the way of taxes.
Yes, they're in two comparably large and affluent German cities (although each of these cities has numerous clubs), but when it comes to sport club success I think city details is just one factor. Ownership wealth and dedication, current management issues, and recent luck are important factors.
For example, Boston has way more championships in US "big four" sports than every US city except NYC, but there are 24 larger cities in the country. There are just a ton of factors at play (pun intended).
It's nice to think about how there are millions of people in Mexico who speak indigenous languages to one degree or another. Years ago I visited my grandfather who was in a nursing home in Mexico City, and there was a young girl working as an aide who must have been no more than 18 years old. My aunt told me that the girl barely spoke any Spanish. Noticing my immediate confusion, my aunt replied with one word I had never heard before: Zapotec.
He must have been a very intelligent and determined man. Not only did he assimilate into a completely foreign culture and marry into their aristocracy, but he did so after starting as a slave of said culture.
Not taking any sides other than that of conservation, do you think it's possible that the Greens have already saved many artifacts from nutty religious types like ISIS, and that their efforts will continue to do so in the future?
No they did not. They are just encouraging and creating an illegal market. The US also lacked proper laws against the importation of antiquities. For all we know it could have come into the states on a military plane and ISIS would have nothing to do with it. No museum worth its salt, with professional curators and staff would have accepted such a "loot" and as a matter of fact also reputable auctioneers. In any case it is important to study artifacts in the context where they were found, stratigraphy, nearby archaeological sites etc.
I mean I’m not a conservator of ancient artifacts, but the pictures [0] of them dunking mummy masks in dish water to decompose them so they could check whether they were made with scrap bible papyrus… those did make my stomach turn a little. Felt a little closer to desecration that preservation.
I pretty much see them on a daily basis in the Driftless Area of Wisconsin and Illinois these days, which is great because I don't think I had one sighting for the first 30 or so years of my life.
Yeah, don't have high expectations for things you pay for but don't own. It's a sad truth, but I've accepted it (I also bought some dvds in 2024 which is something I never thought I'd do again).
Not sure about DVDs, but CDs weren't designed to last longer than 10 years. Most of my CD collection has physically rotted. Because I was using Windows Media Player and iTunes, I ripped most of collection in M4A format, which, at the time, was better than MP3. A couple of years ago, I decided that I wanted to re-rip my CD collection (some 200 odd CDs) in FLAC format instead of m4a format (don't ask). And some significant portion (50%?) of the new FLAC rips were missing tracks due to physical read errors on the original CD media.
Completely unrelated and misleading comparison. A proper comparison to the issue with apps is if Amazon employee would walk into your house and physically destroyed CDs. CDs rotting is a force of nature, not corporate greed/incompetence.
Perhaps, but I'm of the opinion that if a sentence is unjust, or if the means to convict violated the defendant's rights, then the defendant should walk. While this may seem unreasonable, it's the only way to check the state which has unlimited resources when it decides to go after somebody.
I don't really have an opinion on this case because I'm not completely familiar with all the details. It's certainly going to be contentious.
HR is to protect the company, first and foremost. Sure, they'll discuss protecting the worker's rights, but that's in order to protect the company from a scenario where a worker's rights have been violated and they have a legitimate complaint against the company.
Which is why I thought this line of reasoning from the article is extremely disingenuous
> Tim Glowa, the founder and CEO of HR Brain, says that "rather than venting online, reporting helps build a proper case while ensuring confidentiality and protecting your professional reputation," adding, "What you post online can follow you indefinitely."
If you read between the lines on this it’s clear as day that they are saying speaking up is bad for your career, without saying those words explicitly.
Executives, VPs and SVPs hate being held accountable by their workers, that’s my main takeaway here
There’s more nuance. When you go public with an accusation or problem, you can’t control when, who or how it is used. It’s unlikely that you’re going to be able to frame the narrative effectively to get something of value.
For example, an issue related to something that you expressed in your public can be picked up, embraced and extended and turned into a racial or other high attention/impact issue. The press can run with it and create a mess. More likely, nobody cares, and you’ll be painted as a crazy person, and crazy people go away.
