|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
here's the facts about the emails
-hillary clinton is an old lady with minimal tech know how who wanted to use her blackberry and depended on other people to make it happen -theres a record of government officials using non-government approved channels to communicate. see the bush admin using a RNC server for emails and straight up deleting everything as well as colin powell's own setup -state department IT sucks balls
was it against regs? no doubt. but no one gave a shit until now.
|
On December 09 2016 08:20 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2016 08:17 Doodsmack wrote: Hamas was also democratically elected... And? Are you saying someone should save the Palestinians from themselves because they make the wrong choices? Or what are you saying?
I'm saying the mere fact of being elected does not always justify carrying out the wishes of the populace.
|
the populace does not truly wish for social security to be fixed. If it truly did, it would've been done by now. they know intellectually it should be; but their feelings are otherwise. One of the great problems of democracy; which is why we need better forms of government.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On December 09 2016 12:42 ticklishmusic wrote: here's the facts about the emails
-hillary clinton is an old lady with minimal tech know how who wanted to use her blackberry and depended on other people to make it happen -theres a record of government officials using non-government approved channels to communicate. see the bush admin using a RNC server for emails and straight up deleting everything as well as colin powell's own setup -state department IT sucks balls
was it against regs? no doubt. but no one gave a shit until now. Another fact: she hid it poorly and did what guilty people do, didn't take responsibility until well after Comey made his initial statement, and made what could have been a moderate breach in protocol into an issue that dogged her campaign through and through.
|
On December 09 2016 11:13 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2016 11:10 GoTuNk! wrote:On December 09 2016 10:55 Tachion wrote:On December 09 2016 10:22 Nebuchad wrote: I never understood the appeal of the Trump 7d chess narrative. If he's playing 7d chess, you're the pawns. People like to think there is some hidden, underlying reason for the ridiculous things he says and does. Unfortunately he is simply just a ridiculous man with little foresight for his actions. He won the nomination and became President elect by sheer luck. I know you are being sarcastic but let me correct you anyways. Sheer instincts.
It's a combination of both, it doesn't matter; it would be akin to dating a beautiful woman, it's both instinct and deliberate behavior. Being tall and rich also helps in both :p
My point is that by now he is one of the most successful men on earth but some people can't see beyond the fog of their leftist narrative and keep calling him an "idiot". Opposing his ideas would be reasonable, calling him an idiot is not; he is a caricature of winning by now, who accomplished pretty much everything he wanted, "idiots" don't do that.
How much of an ass would I look like if I critized Obama for his public speaking all the time because I dislike him? I strongly disagree with his policies, but he is obviously a great orator. On the same token, Trump is clearly not an idiot.
|
On December 09 2016 10:40 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2016 10:22 Nebuchad wrote: I never understood the appeal of the Trump 7d chess narrative. If he's playing 7d chess, you're the pawns. I know you guys don't want to hear this, but y'all on the left are badly underestimating Trump. Trump is going to keep winning politically until y'all wise up and start looking at him with a real critical eye as opposed to through the lens of the stupid the caricature that the media and democrats have provided y'all with. Believe me when I say that I hope y'all stay the course.
Your refusal to even consider the content of the news stories, rather than simply read them with a critical eye and discount the sensationalized part, shows that you are the one who is closed off to information. Instead you invent justifications and explanations for Trump's actions (Trump supporters have been doing this for 18 months) so as to align his actions with what is acceptable to you.
Yes Trump is going to win politically right now because there's a Republican Congress, but he's still a buffoon who got elected on the basis of political theater acted out on TV.
|
On December 09 2016 12:42 ticklishmusic wrote: here's the facts about the emails
-hillary clinton is an old lady with minimal tech know how who wanted to use her blackberry and depended on other people to make it happen -theres a record of government officials using non-government approved channels to communicate. see the bush admin using a RNC server for emails and straight up deleting everything as well as colin powell's own setup -state department IT sucks balls
was it against regs? no doubt. but no one gave a shit until now. Yep. All of that is true. It was still a mistake. The response to it was probably a much larger mistake - she just never seemed to understand why it was a big deal to people with even moderate knowledge of IT.
IT knowledgeable people hold the keys to social networks online. There's a reason why Clinton's online presence started out as garbage compared to Sanders or Trump - she lost the trust of computer savvy individuals with her awful defenses. Yes, misogyny may also play a role as those people tend to be male, but it isn't like they were really a natural audience for Trump either.
If it had been a placeholder solution while the state department IT was updated that would have been completely acceptable to me. Because the thing is, tech changes fast. What wasn't a big deal when Colin Powell or the Bush Admin did it a decade ago are now because computer knowledge is that much more widespread. People not caring in 2007 or 2008 about the technologies that they did in 2016 isn't some huge partisan conspiracy.
Clinton was hurt by her massive incompetence on the issue of information technology, basically. Her entire image was based around being an immensely competent individual - which she was, on most other issues. But it only takes being demonstrably incompetent on one issue to ruin that image. What was a ruthless technocrat became a doddering fool.
Trump, on the other hand, was never presented as competent. He was presented as a sort of entertaining buffoon. This is why no one gave a shit that he literally has no idea how to use a computer- he never gave them any reason to think that he could, or that he was competent on any issue at all.
If Clinton doesn't want to give Trump an 8 year term, she should go quietly into the shadows.
|
On December 09 2016 12:42 ticklishmusic wrote: here's the facts about the emails
-hillary clinton is an old lady with minimal tech know how who wanted to use her blackberry and depended on other people to make it happen -theres a record of government officials using non-government approved channels to communicate. see the bush admin using a RNC server for emails and straight up deleting everything as well as colin powell's own setup -state department IT sucks balls
was it against regs? no doubt. but no one gave a shit until now.
That's kinda the point isn't it? It's an intentional workaround for FOIA susceptible record keeping?
|
Canada11279 Posts
We are actually in a weird world, where technology has rapidly advanced in online communication. However, politics favours old people and old people, unless they are very intentional tend to be quite bad with technology. Not until we have only tech savvy Boomers, Gen Xs and Millenials dominating political and bureaucratic positions will this huge discrepancy go away. And who knows, maybe we also will be left behind. In the meantime, we are stuck with some woefully ignorant people (in regards to technology) running our countries. I don't know that Trump will be any better, but at least he won't make Hillary's mistake. I just can't imagine very many people of my grandparents generation (give or take) make online security decisions. Hopefully their advisors are good, because oh boy if they aren't.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
She lost the Bernie Sanders base. There need not be more to it than that; the states she didn't win that she needed to, other than Florida, were the states where Sanders did the best. And ultimately those voters were the ones who tipped the election.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On December 09 2016 13:06 Falling wrote: We are actually in a weird world, where technology has rapidly advanced in online communication. However, politics favours old people and old people, unless they are very intentional tend to be quite bad with technology. Not until we have only tech savvy Boomers, Gen Xs and Millenials dominating political and bureaucratic positions will this huge discrepancy go away. And who knows, maybe we also will be left behind. In the meantime, we are stuck with some woefully ignorant people (in regards to technology) running our countries. I don't know that Trump will be any better, but at least he won't make Hillary's mistake. I just can't imagine very many people of my grandparents generation (give or take) make online security decisions. Hopefully their advisors are good, because oh boy if they aren't. Our government has a really shitty time recruiting high-quality software people. The need surpasses the ability of the government to properly fill its ranks.
|
On December 09 2016 13:08 LegalLord wrote: She lost the Bernie Sanders base. There's little more to it than that; the states she didn't win that she needed to, other than Florida, were the states where Sanders did the best. And ultimately those voters were the ones who tipped the election. Yep. Failing to appeal to Sander's voters was basically an entire category of mistakes she made. The DWS thing, making Tim Kaine VP, these were such awful decisions because it showed she had no intention of appealing to them herself. That the DNC rewrote its platform was nice, but that wasn't actually Hillary.
On December 09 2016 13:09 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2016 13:06 Falling wrote: We are actually in a weird world, where technology has rapidly advanced in online communication. However, politics favours old people and old people, unless they are very intentional tend to be quite bad with technology. Not until we have only tech savvy Boomers, Gen Xs and Millenials dominating political and bureaucratic positions will this huge discrepancy go away. And who knows, maybe we also will be left behind. In the meantime, we are stuck with some woefully ignorant people (in regards to technology) running our countries. I don't know that Trump will be any better, but at least he won't make Hillary's mistake. I just can't imagine very many people of my grandparents generation (give or take) make online security decisions. Hopefully their advisors are good, because oh boy if they aren't. Our government has a really shitty time recruiting high-quality software people. The need surpasses the ability of the government to properly fill its ranks. A large part of this is that you can't get some government IT jobs if you've ever pirated anything
|
On December 09 2016 13:09 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2016 13:06 Falling wrote: We are actually in a weird world, where technology has rapidly advanced in online communication. However, politics favours old people and old people, unless they are very intentional tend to be quite bad with technology. Not until we have only tech savvy Boomers, Gen Xs and Millenials dominating political and bureaucratic positions will this huge discrepancy go away. And who knows, maybe we also will be left behind. In the meantime, we are stuck with some woefully ignorant people (in regards to technology) running our countries. I don't know that Trump will be any better, but at least he won't make Hillary's mistake. I just can't imagine very many people of my grandparents generation (give or take) make online security decisions. Hopefully their advisors are good, because oh boy if they aren't. Our government has a really shitty time recruiting high-quality software people. The need surpasses the ability of the government to properly fill its ranks.
go make 6 figures at a tech company where you can wear whatever and get free snacks
work government IT for 50k a year with... job security?
HMM
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On December 09 2016 13:14 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2016 13:09 LegalLord wrote:On December 09 2016 13:06 Falling wrote: We are actually in a weird world, where technology has rapidly advanced in online communication. However, politics favours old people and old people, unless they are very intentional tend to be quite bad with technology. Not until we have only tech savvy Boomers, Gen Xs and Millenials dominating political and bureaucratic positions will this huge discrepancy go away. And who knows, maybe we also will be left behind. In the meantime, we are stuck with some woefully ignorant people (in regards to technology) running our countries. I don't know that Trump will be any better, but at least he won't make Hillary's mistake. I just can't imagine very many people of my grandparents generation (give or take) make online security decisions. Hopefully their advisors are good, because oh boy if they aren't. Our government has a really shitty time recruiting high-quality software people. The need surpasses the ability of the government to properly fill its ranks. go make 6 figures at a tech company where you can wear whatever and get free snacks work government IT for 50k a year with... job security? HMM I mean, there are plenty of problems with Silicon Valley and friends that would make working for the government better (snacks and wearing whatever are vanity perks that mostly immature people care about). But it's simply not there right now. Just more hassle than payoff.
On December 09 2016 13:11 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2016 13:09 LegalLord wrote:On December 09 2016 13:06 Falling wrote: We are actually in a weird world, where technology has rapidly advanced in online communication. However, politics favours old people and old people, unless they are very intentional tend to be quite bad with technology. Not until we have only tech savvy Boomers, Gen Xs and Millenials dominating political and bureaucratic positions will this huge discrepancy go away. And who knows, maybe we also will be left behind. In the meantime, we are stuck with some woefully ignorant people (in regards to technology) running our countries. I don't know that Trump will be any better, but at least he won't make Hillary's mistake. I just can't imagine very many people of my grandparents generation (give or take) make online security decisions. Hopefully their advisors are good, because oh boy if they aren't. Our government has a really shitty time recruiting high-quality software people. The need surpasses the ability of the government to properly fill its ranks. A large part of this is that you can't get some government IT jobs if you've ever pirated anything After 9/11, the intelligence community realized that they had some serious flaws in their ranks because they filtered good, talented people out for the most trivial of reasons.
In the wake of Snowden and the like they have moved back to being petty and ridiculous. And that's the intelligence, not the USDA, EPA, etc., which also need IT people but have less charm.
|
On December 09 2016 12:52 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2016 11:13 biology]major wrote:On December 09 2016 11:10 GoTuNk! wrote:On December 09 2016 10:55 Tachion wrote:On December 09 2016 10:22 Nebuchad wrote: I never understood the appeal of the Trump 7d chess narrative. If he's playing 7d chess, you're the pawns. People like to think there is some hidden, underlying reason for the ridiculous things he says and does. Unfortunately he is simply just a ridiculous man with little foresight for his actions. He won the nomination and became President elect by sheer luck. I know you are being sarcastic but let me correct you anyways. Sheer instincts. It's a combination of both, it doesn't matter; it would be akin to dating a beautiful woman, it's both instinct and deliberate behavior. Being tall and rich also helps in both :p My point is that by now he is one of the most successful men on earth but some people can't see beyond the fog of their leftist narrative and keep calling him an "idiot". Opposing his ideas would be reasonable, calling him an idiot is not; he is a caricature of winning by now, who accomplished pretty much everything he wanted, "idiots" don't do that. How much of an ass would I look like if I critized Obama for his public speaking all the time because I dislike him? I strongly disagree with his policies, but he is obviously a great orator. On the same token, Trump is clearly not an idiot. Are you trying to equate success with intelligence? You can achieve success and still be an idiot. Trump is very ambitious, very driven and tenacious, and he revels in moral ambiguity (as evidenced by his long, long history of lawsuits and shady business practices) for his continued benefit. Does any of this make him smart, or simply opportunistic?
|
Without congressional intervention, about 16,000 retired miners in seven states will lose their health care coverage by the end of the year.
A proposal to temporarily extend the benefits is working its way through Congress. But two Senate Democrats, who are advocates for a more comprehensive plan, say the temporary provision isn't enough.
They are threatening to hold up a spending bill that needs to pass by Friday night to keep the government running.
Coal mining is dangerous work. For many miners, a government-backed promise of lifelong health care for them and their dependents made the risk worth taking.
Roger Merriman, 65, worked in the coal industry for 28 years.
"When we all started in the mines, we were promised health care for life – cradle to grave," he says. Merriman's employer, Patriot Coal, filed for bankruptcy in 2012, then again in 2015. He is now slated to lose his pension and benefits. Merriman says that possibility of losing health benefits for his wife, who is younger than he is (at 65, he qualifies for Medicare), and their pension, is devastating.
"We'll have to make a choice of whether [we're] going to the doctors and buying prescriptions or paying bills and eating. It's a life and death situation realistically is what it is," he says.
In 1946, the United Mine Workers of America and the U.S government agreed that union miners who put in 20 or more years would get lifelong pension and health benefits. Patriot is one of six major coal producers in the U.S. that has sought bankruptcy protection in the last few years, a process that often includes an attempt to drop retiree benefits.
After the Patriot bankruptcy in 2012, the UMWA negotiated a $400 million payment in bankruptcy court for retirees benefits. Existing companies pay into a UMWA fund for retirees, but as those mines close, there is less money going into the pot and the number of retired miners who are drawing from it is increasing. The fund is about to run out of money.
The UMWA's hope was that the $400 million would give federal lawmakers the time they needed to pass legislation that would protect the miners.
Senate Democrats have been working for years to pass the Miners Protection Act — a bill that would move money from the Abandoned Mine Lands Reclamation Fund into a fund to pay for the pension and health care benefits of tens of thousands of coal miners and retirees.
West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, a Democrat, is frustrated by the benefits Band-Aid. "We're asking for a permanent fix, we have a pay for for a permanent fix, it's the excess that we have, the surplus in the AML money," he said Tuesday on the Senate floor.
Manchin and colleague Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, are trying to block a key government spending bill on the Senate floor until miners get their full health care and pension money.
"I haven't ever used this tactic before, but I feel so compelled that I said we are going to do whatever we can to keep this promise," he said Tuesday.
But the Miners Protection Act has met with resistance from Senate Republicans, who are wary of bailing out unionized workers.
Source
|
On December 09 2016 13:16 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2016 13:14 ticklishmusic wrote:On December 09 2016 13:09 LegalLord wrote:On December 09 2016 13:06 Falling wrote: We are actually in a weird world, where technology has rapidly advanced in online communication. However, politics favours old people and old people, unless they are very intentional tend to be quite bad with technology. Not until we have only tech savvy Boomers, Gen Xs and Millenials dominating political and bureaucratic positions will this huge discrepancy go away. And who knows, maybe we also will be left behind. In the meantime, we are stuck with some woefully ignorant people (in regards to technology) running our countries. I don't know that Trump will be any better, but at least he won't make Hillary's mistake. I just can't imagine very many people of my grandparents generation (give or take) make online security decisions. Hopefully their advisors are good, because oh boy if they aren't. Our government has a really shitty time recruiting high-quality software people. The need surpasses the ability of the government to properly fill its ranks. go make 6 figures at a tech company where you can wear whatever and get free snacks work government IT for 50k a year with... job security? HMM I mean, there are plenty of problems with Silicon Valley and friends that would make working for the government better (snacks and wearing whatever are vanity perks that mostly immature people care about). But it's simply not there right now. Just more hassle than payoff.
you're missing the point here. government just isnt able to attract top grade technology talent because they cant make a competitive offer. the government pays worse that private sector for most jobs, but its especially bad for tech positions. its not even google or whatever hot startup, the federal government has trouble attracting people away from companies like weatherchannel and IBM.
idk, free food and not having to do dry cleaning sounds really nice to me. even looking at it purely financially that's a few thousand a year.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Yep, the government has some shittiness in that regard. Even for the good agencies like the NSA which plenty of people are interested in, the smartest people work there for a few years then get 2-3x their salary doing the same job (like literally they go back doing what they were doing for the NSA but more money) by becoming a contractor.
Living in a children's fantasy world appeals to some, but a lot of those perks are really about keeping people in the office in perpetuity. The corporate "40 hours a week of good work, and you can have time off and a stable salary" appeals to a lot of people too. The government just doesn't do a good job of being competitive for various reasons though.
The government isn't necessarily helpless to do anything about this, it's just that they really don't have people in charge who are particularly caught up with the times in that regard.
|
idk how common those 40 hr/wk jobs are anymore outside of government. virtually everyone i know works more than that on salary (though the salary is quite good, though if you do the hourly calculation it's less great).
|
On December 09 2016 14:50 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2016 13:16 LegalLord wrote:On December 09 2016 13:14 ticklishmusic wrote:On December 09 2016 13:09 LegalLord wrote:On December 09 2016 13:06 Falling wrote: We are actually in a weird world, where technology has rapidly advanced in online communication. However, politics favours old people and old people, unless they are very intentional tend to be quite bad with technology. Not until we have only tech savvy Boomers, Gen Xs and Millenials dominating political and bureaucratic positions will this huge discrepancy go away. And who knows, maybe we also will be left behind. In the meantime, we are stuck with some woefully ignorant people (in regards to technology) running our countries. I don't know that Trump will be any better, but at least he won't make Hillary's mistake. I just can't imagine very many people of my grandparents generation (give or take) make online security decisions. Hopefully their advisors are good, because oh boy if they aren't. Our government has a really shitty time recruiting high-quality software people. The need surpasses the ability of the government to properly fill its ranks. go make 6 figures at a tech company where you can wear whatever and get free snacks work government IT for 50k a year with... job security? HMM I mean, there are plenty of problems with Silicon Valley and friends that would make working for the government better (snacks and wearing whatever are vanity perks that mostly immature people care about). But it's simply not there right now. Just more hassle than payoff. you're missing the point here. government just isnt able to attract top grade technology talent because they cant make a competitive offer. the government pays worse that private sector for most jobs, but its especially bad for tech positions. its not even google or whatever hot startup, the federal government has trouble attracting people away from companies like weatherchannel and IBM.
Yeah, government jobs whole pitch is that they typically have better job security and retirement options than their private counter parts. This pretty much falls apart when you get into jobs that pay 6 figures+ outside of government.
You're left with reformed criminals (this is mostly just CIA/NSA/etc...), habitual underachievers, con men/women, and a handful of talented people who put stability/humanity/national pride ahead of personal wealth.
I don't have a statistic (not sure if there are any, I would understand why government wouldn't keep one) but a non-trivial amount of lower government positions are filled through favoritism, cronyism, and nepotism.
The private sector puts on a good show of fair hiring practices, but it would be interesting to see them compared?
|
|
|
|