These companies include the most valuable companies making record profits. They aren't struggling to survive. They are bowing to institutional investor demands to eek out another penny because the alternative is they get replaced by the board.
Fitness is a relative thing, especially when competing for limited resources, like institutional investor money. Everyone has to be prepared before it’s too late.
By the way, standing as workers, I wish they wouldn't resort to layoffs as the usual route when facing challenges, but sadly, excel competence is required to make it happen, and not many have it.
Whatever education system you went through and came out saying shit like that is the real grift.
Think about it for a second. The USIP is a think tank. Think tanks don't accomplish things, that's not their purpose. Their stated mission is "education and training" ffs.
Next time at least read the opening paragraph of the wikipedia article of an org you call a "grift" on the public internet, you'll look a lot smarter that way.
I'm willing to bet Americans are the most propagandized people on Earth. And it's done by our government with the "public/private partnership" aka "unconstitutional workarounds" of all legacy media and social media outlets. Facebook has admitted as much, and the Twitter files proves it.
China controlling the flow of information is the same. The only difference is China is upfront about what information they are feeding everyone.
>I'm willing to bet Americans are the most propagandized people on Earth.
Perhaps. It might feel that way because we have multiple sources of propaganda and interests trying to sway us while places like China only have one. We have political party propaganda, government propaganda, corporate propaganda, special interest group propaganda, religious propaganda, grass roots propaganda, etc. China has government propaganda that encompasses all of that.
I also think the US apparatus' are just better at hiding which information is propaganda and which isn't; this makes it harder to spot. China has full control so it doesn't really matter if its propaganda is believable. Once you bring up a generation on it, the propaganda turns into reality.
>So what is the tiktok ban really about? If it's about the lack of narrative control
Probably part protectionism of our social media sites, part retribution for China banning our social media sites, part an attempt to control the narrative from at least a foreign competitor perspective.
An interesting thing that might happen is the influx of US users switching to RedNote will be difficult for the Chinese government to sensor. This could introduce some western culture and values into everyday people in China.
>we should see the same ban being applied to RedNote.
Good point. I'm not sure the government is equipped to handle this sort of thing without creating an agency with pretty broad powers. I would prefer that didn't happen.
As a Chinese, you know what you can't talk about.
As an American we are "surprised" when our "free speech" results in overt government-sponsored censorship.
You can still say whatever the hell you want, unless you're actively inciting violence against protected minorities. You just have to do it on one of the many social media platforms that aren't owned by China.
It's almost like you've never been to a school or post office in the US.
I mean, I get that the "pledge of allegiance", "the Texas History curriculum", and the "POW/MIA" flags aren't "propaganda", they are just "completely normal things that any country does to maintain a cohesive citizenry".
I think very many people are confusing H1B and straight outsourcing of talent. While there is some overlap, they are not nearly the same.
Ive worked with both, and very few of the H1bs were below average. Otherwise they aren't worth sponsoring.
There was a time in the mid 2000s when the Infosys/TCS/wiPros of the world were gaming the H1B to bring offshore bodies onshore.. but most of that died off as far as I see.
The size of company you work in doesn't matter beyond a certain fairly small size. The only way anybody could work with hundreds of people at all (and have a justified informed opinion about them) is to have a long career in a place or places with very high turnover.
Professors might hit those numbers because having informed opinions about their students is a large part of their job and they see large turnover by definition. Directors could have a chance, but even there I'd say hundreds is actually unusual, unless your standards for quality of opinion are low.
And then that's all people, not just H1-B holders.
Because large tech companies with a large cohort of H1B + tendency to frequently reorg + career level with impact with large reach means I have indeed worked with hundreds.
Sorry bro, you don't get to deny my actual experience.
no one is buying what you are selling so you should not be selling it :)
even if you were the largest outliers on the planet you could not possibly collaborate with hundreds in a way where you get to know much about them. even if you said “tens of h1b’s” it would be a hard sell :)
You didn't name your employer for someone who might be interested. Perhaps visibility is one reason you can't find anyone?
I applied to a similar position locally this year. I far exceed their requirements and experience and I got rejected at the application stage.
And the same goes for nearly all of other places I applied to. Hiring has most definitely changed over the years. They are not just looking for "qualified applicants". There is something else going on.
>I applied to a similar position locally this year. I far exceed their requirements and experience and I got rejected at the application stage.
Could be "This one is overqualified, we can't pay that much" or "He doesn't have experience in the exact thing we need." Or just that they want a qualified applicant but they've got lots of options.
I thought that the original comment was about a company that could not fill with H1-Bs yet they didn't contact him either. There are many reasons that he might not be contacted. I think there are plenty of US programmers for jobs that require only US persons. At least, my experience with those jobs has been that being basically qualified is insufficient to get much interest. They're looking for other things, like very particular experience, salary range, security clearance, demographic characteristics, etc.
His point was to keep the chemicals out of our food supply.
Argue about the details all you want, but nobody wants to consume this toxin and feed it to their children.
So yet again, Alex Jones was right.
This is an excellent point and a real litmus test.
If there really were a labor shortage companies would be providing training programs to build that labor force.
Instead they post job descriptions so niche only a liar could technically qualify.
Your question is why is it wrong to depress wages? Yeah, really tough question.
Now consider OPT visa workers which are being paid even less, plus companies get an extra 8-10% discount because they don't have to pay Social Security and Medicare.
There is no shortage of skilled workers here. Only corporate greed.
