Overtime pay should be normal for everyone that works more than the 8 hours. Being on call is a travesty. Just have shifts like every other industry does.
I mean, if George Soros or the Koch Brothers want to fund a chain of libraries, then perhaps they can be hubs and platforms for whatever flavor of social justice that their funding demands.
But municipal libraries are a public resource funded by taxpayers, and as such, all taxpayers deserve to benefit equally from such a resource, regardless of who they vote for, or who the librarians vote for.
Carrying extremely biased, social-justice oriented events and collections in a municipal library is an exclusionary practice. It repels and alienates those with different beliefs, and thus reduces community diversity by cleaving off a large portion of taxpayers who have no use for this resource that they're supporting, thereby causing an imbalance and inequity in access to information and community resources.
Just build free housing for the homeless. Build a large camp style rehab center. If you’re sleeping on the street you get arrested and get a choice to go to one of these two places. These homeless bums are currently provided with housing but since they can’t shoot you there they refuse to use them.
I don't think the homeless deserves to be corralled up in one place like cattle.
One of the best ways to help the homeless become less homeless is to firstly make them feel like a functioning human being again. Treat the issue (poverty, unemployment, depression, lack of self-worth) itself, not the symptom (homelessness, drug use).
Vast destruction is almost never used because of the consequences and collateral damage. Surgical, cheap attacks would be used on an everyday basis. This is what makes it terrifying. It doesn’t even have to be murder, even surveillance would be the end of a way of life.
There is a vast difference between the 'surgical' precision footage pushed through regime media such as CNN, and the reality of undiscriminate carnage in the actual warzone.
If my needs were taken care of then so many things. An operating system, a productionized AI and LiDAR powered drone/submersible to continuously map every inch of the earth and the oceans, a way to perfect safe total gene replacement etc.
It mostly doesn’t. Historically there have been lots of mass conversions to other religions the first one being Buddhism in 600BC. Buddhism came about primarily as a response to Hindu orthodoxy and the caste system.
>Buddhism came about primarily as a response to Hindu orthodoxy and the caste system.
AFAIK, it did not. It came about from the Buddha's teachings, which were not about caste, but about suffering and its cessation via attaining nirvana (but I am not an expert on Buddhism; we only learned some about it in school).
My guess is that, instead, later, many people may have converted to it, maybe some due to orthodoxy.
I am talking about olden times. In recent times, neo-Buddhists definitely may have converted due to the caste system. I have read something about that earlier. See Dr. Ambedkar.
I can go into great detail on the back and forth between Hinduism and Buddhism, mostly surviving as dueling literature for centuries. I would prefer you just look it up though.
I would prefer you to understand that, in the absence of any objective measure, my sources are as good as yours, or, equivalently, yours are as bad as mine. But, based on what you wrote above, I doubt you can (understand).
Your above point itself proves what I said: "dueling literature"! Heh.
Muslims so, despite being not covered by India's caste system, are heavily discriminated against so. A situation not helped by decades of war with neighboring Pakistan.
That’s a severe bit of historical revisionism from Europeans who tried to analogize it to the Protestant reformation. If anything Buddhists were probably more concertedly discriminatory towards lower castes and Hindu Brahmins were more likely to be socially reformist.
Groups like the Veerashaivas were concertedly anti-caste discrimination but the Buddhists were decidedly not. They’d be more like a Kshatriya revolt against Brahmins but that’s just upper-caste infighting, not anti-caste. Similarly with Muslim and Christian converts, the first ones were predominantly, if not almost entirely, Brahmin.
You’re right that it was more of a kshatriya revolt against the Brahmins but the Buddhists welcomed all castes, even the shudras. They did discriminate against anyone that wasn’t a part of the caste hierarchy- dalits.
What does "doesn't" mean? Would I, random Dutch person of christianity or no religion as you will, be treated equal to the highest of castes or to an average one for example?
You’re a foreigner/outsider. You’re not part of the caste system. Brahmins are technically not even permitted to leave India. But if you’re white you would probably be treated very well, just wouldn’t be considered a part of society.
If nothing else then because it works. Immigrants have founded 51% of our top 500 billion+ unicorns. Indian entrepreneurs alone account for 66 out of 500. How many jobs is that creating? Millions at the very least. At 1% of the population, Indian immigrants pay 6% of all taxes. These people also will become/are American citizens.
You have to be a hardcore racist and/or an idiot to argue with data that overwhelming.
It basically costs nothing and it's a huge advantage for a country to be the dominant sink for international talent migration. Most countries have net brain drain where their smartest people leave... to go to the US. That the US has the opposite problem is really a trivial issue to complain about, and anyone invested in its success should want the imbalance to continue.
And frankly if you're an American high-skilled worker who is concerned about foreign talent "replacing" you (an absurd idea in a labor market where demand continues to outpace supply, and will continue to do so as long as technology advances), then are you actually as highly skilled as you think you are? If you're being outcompeted by foreign talent then you need to "get good" - it's a skill issue.
The argument for foreign workers replacing domestic workers in unskilled jobs makes more sense, because the demand is for commoditized labor and there's negligible difference between employees beyond how little they're willing to be paid. But for high skilled work, by definition, it's your skills that should differentiate you. If they don't, then that's your problem to solve. It shouldn't be up to the rest of society to lower the floor of high-skilled work to accommodate your lack of skill.
For now, H1Bs don't replace truly highly skilled workers. What they do have an impact on is companies not investing in hiring junior employees and training them up. Thus, the disadvantaged people that can't attend college, who would customarily be trained by their employers, are left out in the cold when you can just import already trained people from overseas.
Your comment is very atypical in this thread. It is the only one that puts the impact of the visa in perspective. The displacement of risk from company to employee.
This is my main concern of H1B's impact, lack of training or opportunity for existing candidates. It is telling how a few other comments mention the skills gap but all of them focus on it being a employees problem and to solve it they just need more college or training. While I can't argue with the positive impacts of H1B's creating value there is a continuing cost imposed on society to make the individual take the risk of training instead of the company cultivating a workforce. I think individuals do need to have some skin in the game when they receive a investment from a company but by completely displacing the cost on to workers and making up for lack of investment by allowing more H1B's seems to be a shortsighted solution.
You argument is hinged as a defense against anti-immigration.
I’m not anti immigration. I am against simply making it easier for software developers to get visa’s, that doesn’t make America any better (than giving visas to non-developers)
Creating jobs that only go to skilled tech workers, and/or tech workers who live in tech hubs isn’t much of a benefit to America.
Create well paying jobs that any american can do with tradeschool or on the job training—those are jobs we need.
Not workers willing to make an internet enabled juice machine.
And if you have a great idea, have funding and customers, sure we can give you a visa, but in exchange the US tax payer gets 20% stake.
You seem to be acting with a malicious intent here, trying to attribute the success of Indian immigrants to them exploiting others in India?
In your flagged comment, you mention "migrants are almost all Brahmin elite who amassed their riches thanks to the deeply exploitative Indian caste system". By your logic, the migrants path would've been a EB-5 investor visa.
Yet, if you look at most successful indian immigrants, they usually work their way up to top grad schools in the US, worked their way up in companies, or at some point depart the company to start their our company, and in almost all cases with American capital and investment.
Wrong. You are the one making strange assumptions.
For one, your narrative fails to explain why such a drastically disproportionate number of Indian migrants are from upper castes. This is difficult to overstate since nearly all Indian-American migrants are from upper castes that collectively make up only a few percentage points of the total population of India. If you can't explain this, you're obviously missing something or choosing to ignore it.
A college-aged upper class Indian whose parents are alive would have significant wealth and mobility without having investment funds, obviously. As such, their expected path would be through attending American colleges and work visas.
The cost of migrating from India to the US is tremendous. In addition to the more obvious tuition costs and practical costs of uncertainty/risk, the corrupt market for work visas is favored by upper class Indians specifically because it allows them to leverage their family's wealth in what is effectively a black market for access to US employers interested in hiring Indian migrants, and in-turn access to work visas.
I didn’t really mention any “inherent” qualities. Just pointed out facts that buttress an argument to increase immigration. The right wing loves to point out cultural discrepancies in minority populations they vilify but apparently pointing out effective culture is anathema.
I’m American. India is a country that has been growing at an average rate of 7% for more than two decades and has plenty of billion dollar unicorns and a strong culture of entrepreneurship. It’s the 3rd largest economy in the world by PPP, it just takes a couple of decades to recover from two centuries of outright looting.
> The right wing loves to point out cultural discrepancies in minority populations they vilify but apparently pointing out effective culture is anathema.
It's not "effective culture". It's just wealth and everybody knows it. Indian-American migrants are almost all Brahmin elite who amassed their riches thanks to the deeply exploitative Indian caste system. There is absolutely nothing impressive about that. It's hideous.
> India is a country that has been growing at an average rate of 7% for more than two decades
Literally who cares? Why should any Indian or American worker give a single shit about this? Why would this make American workers want more Indian migrants moving to America? Because India's elite have a lot of money and oppressed masses? You have no point to make as far as I can tell.
> and has plenty of billion dollar unicorns and a strong culture of entrepreneurship
The only source I could find on the tax discussion was a Georgia senator. When doing the math, on just income and not even payroll taxes, taking 6% of the Individual Income Taxes collected in 2022, 2,632 billion, and dividing it by the estimated number of Indians, 4.5 million, gives me at least about 35k collected in taxes per Indian. If I bothered to exclude kids and include appropriate payroll taxes, that number would be even higher. Anyways, since the IRS doesn’t collect the info, I think he might be doing some napkin math.
To address the crux of your point, America should continue to be a place where the best and the brightest head towards to start companies. However, I think it’s fair to value quality over quantity. We only need to look up north to see the potential pitfalls of loose migration policies.
$35K taxes implies about $120K salary, which in tech circles is a very reasonable salary. In places like Northern California, most people on H-1B pay much more than that in taxes.
> You have to be a hardcore racist and/or an idiot to argue with data that overwhelming.
Your argument hinges on natives not achieving similar results with I’m not sure is true.
Given history, I’d say it’s likely the natives would succeed (as there’s precedent for their ancestors succeeding). However it would come at a higher cost to the “business” - really, the few at the top who are disproportionately profiting.
Furthermore, given the state of the import’s homeland it’s likely the immigrants only succeed because of environment in America, not because of anything unique they bring. And there’s no precedent for them maintaining - much less creating - the culture that allowed them to immigrate to a new land and be so wildly successful.
On top of that, investing in a native population has long term benefits that vastly outweigh importing talent for immediate gain. Unfortunately our politicians are choosing the opposite and sacrificing long term health for short term profits.
It doesn’t work like that. This isn’t like racism where differences are immediately superficially apparent. You need to have conversations bordering on light interrogations to determine who is what.
Just because people from outside the caste system cannot spot it, and it is much jarder to spot than say discrmination against people of color or women, doesn't mean caste based discrimination isn't every single bit as racist as all other forms of racism.
Race is an ambiguous delineation of a tribe someone might belong to.
Sex, age, etc are more defined delineations.
Who is to say the 1.3B population of Indians does not have multiple races? They might all be the same tribe in the eyes of a person with ancestors from Europe, born and raised in the US. But for someone in India, they very well could view the other 1.29B Indians as being in tribes as different as “white” and “black” tribes in the US.
Note that racism is not skin color-ism, since a very light skinned descendent of a darker skinner person is also, commonly, referred to as being “black”, especially if they have obvious physical traits that display they have “black” ancestors.
Race in the US (and other parts of the developed world) is about the socioeconomic tribe that the one belongs to, or that one’s network (including ancestors) belong to. That seems very similar to castes in India.
Indian populations also have similar differences in physical traits that they use to discriminate, but they also correlate with socioeconomic status. Including lighter and darker skin.
I guess that depends on your definition of racism. Can people from the UK be racist to the Polish? If yes, fine. But technically it’s different from racism and more nationally based bigotry.
The was a race in Europe that faut a genocidal war against East Europeans, based on perceived race.
Playing semantics during discussions on discrmination always has some undertones of trying to justify said discrimination, because of course it is something different...
Semantics may not be the most helpful during a discussion of this but neither is application of modes/solutions learnt from other forms of bigotry. The best way to kill the caste system is to forget about it which is in the process of happening. It’s not further entrenching yourself in that identity that may be necessary in more superficial forms of bigotry.
There’s already a 30-50% quota in most public institutions that is very successful at giving lower castes an advantage. No bootstraps required.
Will those affirmative actions extend how long the caste system stays around? Probably but they’re meant to be in place for a couple of generations (40-80 years) which should be an acceptable amount of time to level the field.
That only applies to Northern part of the country. In south each state has it's own language and there is no way an outside state person can know your caste without asking
My google search results now have a section on the top that an LLM generates along with the rest of the results. I don’t think they have to be separate.
