|
Josh Lyman posted:Get ready for a bunch of business owners who are upset that they might not be able to continue having indentured servants in TYOOL 2016: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/31/business/for-harried-assistants-overtime-rule-may-have-its-downside.html Ah, yes, assistants can only truly earn experience for "tougher" jobs by working that 12th hour each day. You only truly can handle being a non-assistant after you've gotten that 4,500th cup of coffee at 8 PM. gently caress all of this bullshit, and gently caress Hollywood especially for making this the standard way to break into the industry.
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 14:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 01:17 |
|
|
Crashrat posted:long wet fart I see.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 14:27
|
|
|
Dexo posted:Really loving good Article on Hillary Clinton from a reporter that was with the campaign. This article is a good example of why the US Presidency is bad for political discourse. It's endless pages dissecting the candidate's personalities, motivation, favorite color and other things that don't matter. Only lip service is paid to discussion regarding constituencies or policy. The article mirrors the reality that the US presidential election is a multi-year kabuki theater where people choose their new pseudo-king. Television as the dominant medium amplifies this, turning the primaries + general into a soap opera with the candidates as protagonists. The word "narrative" is used unironically. When the show finally ends and everyone is sick of politics, only old people still bother to show up to vote which is why the midterms have drastically different outcomes. This media-driven discourse centered around candidates occurs in other countries of course, especially less democratic ones. We're all basically apes choosing the best ape to be our boss ape, and thinking in terms of parties and platforms is hard all around the world. However, most other countries manage to have only 6-8 week long election cycles. Doesn't that sound better?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 14:42
|
|
|
haha any hrc-positive link is like a honeypot
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 14:43
|
|
|
Nocturtle posted:This article is a good example of why the US Presidency is bad for political discourse. It's endless pages dissecting the candidate's personalities, motivation, favorite color and other things that don't matter. Only lip service is paid to discussion regarding constituencies or policy. The article mirrors the reality that the US presidential election is a multi-year kabuki theater where people choose their new pseudo-king. Television as the dominant medium amplifies this, turning the primaries + general into a soap opera with the candidates as protagonists. The word "narrative" is used unironically. When the show finally ends and everyone is sick of politics, only old people still bother to show up to vote which is why the midterms have drastically different outcomes. You must really hate that bio of Ben Rhodes too then.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 14:47
|
|
|
Nocturtle posted:This article is a good example of why the US Presidency is bad for political discourse. It's endless pages dissecting the candidate's personalities, motivation, favorite color and other things that don't matter. Only lip service is paid to discussion regarding constituencies or policy. The article mirrors the reality that the US presidential election is a multi-year kabuki theater where people choose their new pseudo-king. Television as the dominant medium amplifies this, turning the primaries + general into a soap opera with the candidates as protagonists. The word "narrative" is used unironically. When the show finally ends and everyone is sick of politics, only old people still bother to show up to vote which is why the midterms have drastically different outcomes.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
Out of curiosity, how do other countries enforce that campaigns only last for a set time? What stops any particular act, statement, or event being viewed as affecting upcoming (re)elections when out of the window? If that somehow became law in the US, wouldn't it lead to endless winking disclaimers that a particular thing is "not really campaigning" in the same way that superpacs are "not really coordinating"?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 15:01
|
|
|
I wasn't sure where else to post this, since there isn't a history subforum and there doesn't seem to be a D&D thread dedicated to race relations or Black Lives Matter or anything like that (lot of discussions about video games though....). However, since this is relevant to U.S. politics today I suppose I will post it here. Today is the 95th anniversary of the 1921 Tulsa race riot, arguably the worst race riot in U.S. history. Believe it or not, Tulsa once boasted one of the most affluent African-American neighborhoods in the country. Around Memorial Day, a black man named Dick Rowland was accused of raping a white woman, even though the woman in question did not make the accusation herself (she was found "distraught" after an encounter with Rowland, and they may just have had a lover's quarrel). Rowland was detained and a white lynch mob was formed. Black residents, many of them veterans of World War I, mobilized to protect Rowland. What followed was a bloody confrontation between white and black residents of Tulsa. The black veterans could hold their own but the whites called in the National Guard and soon white mobs were roaming the streets, killing any black person they saw. It's unknown how many people died, but estimates range from the dozens to the hundreds. The thoroughfare that boasted many black-owned businesses, called "Black Wall Street," was burned down. This was significant because Tulsa's blacks had done just what whites had told them to do, which was to rely on themselves in their own segregated community, pulled themselves up by their own bootstraps and formed a bustling business community. For this, many of them were killed and their businesses destroyed. For decades institutions in Oklahoma suppressed or spun the history of the event, including the government, schools and the media. Growing up in Oklahoma, I did not learn about the race riot until well into my teenage years after countless state history classes, all of which omitted the race riot. Awhile back Oklahoma set up a commission to "study" the riot and to consider paying reparations to the few remaining survivors of the riot. Of course, Oklahoma -- the state that banned sharia law and aborted fetuses being used in food -- decided against reparations. All they did was offer a handful of scholarships and established a small memorial where the well-off black neighborhood used to be. You can read more about the Tulsa race riot here: http://tulsahistory.org/learn/online-exhibits/the-tulsa-race-riot/ Old 60 Minutes clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivCODTY7fmQ 2002 discussion with James Hirsch who wrote about the riot: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNHfFvemU28 Please spread the word about this and help educate people about this tragic event in our national history which is still ignored and neglected. Most people remain ignorant of the race riot and its many victims. Thanks. EDIT: BTW here is an awesome article making the case for paying African-Americans reparations, not just for the race riots, but for years of discrimination, violence, Jim Crow, etc. by Ta-Nehisi Coates http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/06/the-case-for-reparations/361631/ Panama Red fucked around with this message at 15:05 on May 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 15:03
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:A huge part of being the president actually involves being the face of the country - things like personality and demeanor are actually pretty important for your country's chief diplomat. In fact, this is (one of) the major problems with Trump as a candidate! Eh -- there are plenty of very successful world leaders and former Presidents who aren't or weren't terrible charismatic -- though television/radio made a big difference in how we conceptualize that. I mean, like Angela Merkel -- whatever your views on her politics -- has arguably been one of the most successful leaders in recent memory, and she's about as dour as they come. In some ways. diplomats actually tend to be somewhat low-key, especially successful ones.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 15:03
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Eh -- there are plenty of very successful world leaders and former Presidents who aren't or weren't terrible charismatic -- though television/radio made a big difference in how we conceptualize that. I mean, like Angela Merkel -- whatever your views on her politics -- has arguably been one of the most successful leaders in recent memory, and she's about as dour as they come. In some ways. diplomats actually tend to be somewhat low-key, especially successful ones. People expect and want Germans to be humorless sourpusses.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 15:09
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Eh -- there are plenty of very successful world leaders and former Presidents who aren't or weren't terrible charismatic -- though television/radio made a big difference in how we conceptualize that. I mean, like Angela Merkel -- whatever your views on her politics -- has arguably been one of the most successful leaders in recent memory, and she's about as dour as they come. In some ways. diplomats actually tend to be somewhat low-key, especially successful ones. "Being charismatic" isn't an exact synonym with what I was saying, though. It is at least very nice for the American public to feel like their president is a good face for the country, although I definitely think too much influence is put on it. I also feel that discussions of the president's policy are often treated as "the important thing" when a president's ability to negotiate/compromise is probably even more important. This is my major concern with Sanders, who I do not believe has the political chops to handle the type of thing that presidents do, although I think he's a fine senator.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 15:11
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Ah, yes, assistants can only truly earn experience for "tougher" jobs by working that 12th hour each day. You only truly can handle being a non-assistant after you've gotten that 4,500th cup of coffee at 8 PM. It just means the job will become more draconian and that these former employees will be let go - only to be able to come back and do their work as independent contractors. Those former employees will sign a contract and pay some kind of absurd fee - a few thousand dollars is a decent guess - and then work will be farmed out to them at a piecework rate all while renting the office space that they used to be assigned as an employee. Getting a cup of coffee? 25 cents. Making copies? 2 cents per page. Dealing with that one client's brother who won't stop calling trying to get a meeting? $20 till they stop calling for at least 2 business days. And so on and so on. This of course walks a very thin tightrope with Department of Labor rules, and those rules are ones the Department of Labor has said they're going to start enforcing more strictly, but honestly most of what those interns do isn't even considered "critical" to the company's business. The work being "critical" is a really big factor in the DoL deciding whether they're employees or contractors - and I know shitloads of companies where their entire business is run by contractors with just a handful of actual employees and a couple C-level people raking in the profit sharing. So they'll just reorganize and this will go away. Edit: Max Berry's book, Company, really does a great job of showing how easy it is for major companies to transistion everything to independent contractors. Amazing that he wrote it in 2006 before the craze really took off.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Eh -- there are plenty of very successful world leaders and former Presidents who aren't or weren't terrible charismatic -- though television/radio made a big difference in how we conceptualize that. I mean, like Angela Merkel -- whatever your views on her politics -- has arguably been one of the most successful leaders in recent memory, and she's about as dour as they come. In some ways. diplomats actually tend to be somewhat low-key, especially successful ones. And we didn't pick MOM either, so I have a feeling American elections aren't just hotornot.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 15:22
|
|
|
Panama Red posted:I wasn't sure where else to post this, since there isn't a history subforum and there doesn't seem to be a D&D thread dedicated to race relations or Black Lives Matter or anything like that (lot of discussions about video games though....). However, since this is relevant to U.S. politics today I suppose I will post it here. I was reading your post going "Oh poo poo! Today is that day?" Then realized I mixed it up with the Omaha Race Riot. Which was part of https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Summer_(1919) Red Summer. Thanks for posting the info and links.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 15:25
|
|
|
The Tulsa Riot included aerial assaults, which I know I've posted before but it's just so chilling to me and I fixate on it. Like loving Guernica.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 15:30
|
|
|
GalacticAcid posted:The Tulsa Riot included aerial assaults, which I know I've posted before but it's just so chilling to me and I fixate on it. Like loving Guernica. Giving precedence for the coming Trump administration's drone war on brown people in the US.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
SgtScruffy posted:My wife used to work for a grassroots organizing company in New York, and would work ~60 hours a week for around $25k a year. She's so happy that overtime is going to basically ruin their business model. gently caress You And Diebold posted:Was it USPIRG? Because they're in that article crying crocodile tears about not being able to pay salaried canvassers poo poo pay for crazy work. The PIRGs other than minpirg can go gently caress themselves LowellDND posted:Seconding the PIRG hate. Thirding. My wife worked for a couple of State PIRG orgs around the country and, yeah, gently caress the PIRGs forever.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 15:41
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Out of curiosity, how do other countries enforce that campaigns only last for a set time? What stops any particular act, statement, or event being viewed as affecting upcoming (re)elections when out of the window? disclaimers that a particular thing is "not really campaigning" in the same way that superpacs are "not really coordinating"? Largely because the next election can happen at any time and it could be anywhere between less than a year or a whole 5 or more years between them. So often the procedure for calling the next election is an announcement that the parliament or whatever will be dissolved in Y days with an election to follow in X days and you start the campaign right then. Because of this there's no real advantage in spending all the money on a proper campaign preemptively beyond the minimum necessary to be able to call in the campaign staff, and so particular incentive to wantonly break the rules on campaigning. Regardless they're constantly doing things to look good in the polls in case another election is called soon. The US campaign season has slowly and continually grown because it's been like loving clockwork for 228 years, and this has been "helped" by the switch from the primaries being done entirely in the proverbial smoke-filled rooms to almost entirely by actual popular vote. It'll be interesting to see what happens with the rules on campaigning in the UK as they continue to settle in to a regular cycle of elections every 5 years. The 2015 election was their first under the new laws that make it so its much more difficult to call an election outside of the agreed upon and scheduled every 5 years terms.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 15:44
|
|
|
Mr Hootington posted:I was reading your post going "Oh poo poo! Today is that day?" Then realized I mixed it up with the Omaha Race Riot. Which was part of https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Summer_(1919) Red Summer. If you really want to go all out and reading about the background and way more information than most people will ever want then there's a decent PhD dissertation online with OK State. Sadly it's not too terribly long especially as disserations go - http://digital.library.okstate.edu/etd/umi-okstate-2777.pdf
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:You must really hate that bio of Ben Rhodes too then. Trick question no-one reads anymore, that's what caused this mess! theflyingorc posted:"Being charismatic" isn't an exact synonym with what I was saying, though. It is at least very nice for the American public to feel like their president is a good face for the country, although I definitely think too much influence is put on it. "Too much influence" is a huge understatement regarding the importance placed on presidential personal qualities. Actual diplomacy is done by an army of diplomats and ambassadors ie people who actually know how what they're doing. The President's role is superficial. To make this concrete, do you really think lovable Bill Clinton helped get better terms for the US during negotiations for NAFTA? How is the next President's personality going to change the component of congress incentivized to obstruct any new legislation? fishmech posted:Largely because the next election can happen at any time and it could be anywhere between less than a year or a whole 5 or more years between them. So often the procedure for calling the next election is an announcement that the parliament or whatever will be dissolved in Y days with an election to follow in X days and you start the campaign right then. Because of this there's no real advantage in spending all the money on a proper campaign preemptively beyond the minimum necessary to be able to call in the campaign staff, and so particular incentive to wantonly break the rules on campaigning. Regardless they're constantly doing things to look good in the polls in case another election is called soon. This is exactly it, non-fixed election dates make very long campaigns harder. It's not a perfect system, as the governing party will time the election call for their own maximum advantage. However it's definitely better than the 1.5 year death march that is the US presidential election. edit: I would also say US elections have a lot more spending per candidate/election than many other places, which helps lengthen the process. In some ways I think US election politics is a lot more "advanced" than other nations, you see the same tactics picked up by non-US polticians years after they've become common in America. Nocturtle fucked around with this message at 16:18 on May 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
Nocturtle posted:Trick question no-one reads anymore, that's what caused this mess! While personal persuasion is probably not realistic for international diplomacy, the President still can do a lot on the domestic scene with personal persuasion. Obama's failure to do this is a big critique of his administration. On the flip side, I don't believe a less elegant Obama could have given the Hiroshima speech he did and the nation is better for it.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:19
|
|
|
Crashrat posted:If you really want to go all out and reading about the background and way more information than most people will ever want then there's a decent PhD dissertation online with OK State. Sadly it's not too terribly long especially as disserations go - http://digital.library.okstate.edu/etd/umi-okstate-2777.pdf Im a Texas transplant at OSU and I knew about it before I came here, funny enough there were younger students who had no idea that something like that happened (homeschooled, smaller school districts) or literal apologists such as there wasn't any proof it was an arial assault. Oklahoma is a very strange state and I cannot wait to leave at the end of July.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:31
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:On the flip side, I don't believe a less elegant Obama could have given the Hiroshima speech he did and the nation is better for it. Too bad half the country will never bother to read/listen to it because they read on facebook that he apologized for dropping the bomb. 
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:While personal persuasion is probably not realistic for international diplomacy, the President still can do a lot on the domestic scene with personal persuasion. Obama's failure to do this is a big critique of his administration. It's also a dumb critique made by people like David Brooks. If only Obama had just been a little more persuasive! I am sure those people who didn't disavow people in their own ranks calling him a secret mooselm terrorist sympathizer who wanted to institute death panels, would have surely fallen in line! Like the best sort of rebuttal to that dumb idea is that when he did work with people to try and be persuasive, the Republicans literally turned down an opportunity to drastically harm the Legacy of the Democratic Party in the Grand Bargain. BI NOW GAY LATER fucked around with this message at 16:49 on May 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:46
|
|
|
Nocturtle posted:This article is a good example of why the US Presidency is bad for political discourse. It's endless pages dissecting the candidate's personalities, motivation, favorite color and other things that don't matter. Only lip service is paid to discussion regarding constituencies or policy. The article mirrors the reality that the US presidential election is a multi-year kabuki theater where people choose their new pseudo-king. Television as the dominant medium amplifies this, turning the primaries + general into a soap opera with the candidates as protagonists. The word "narrative" is used unironically. When the show finally ends and everyone is sick of politics, only old people still bother to show up to vote which is why the midterms have drastically different outcomes. I too am upset that the article talks about Hillary as if she is a human being.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:47
|
|
|
Panama Red posted:I wasn't sure where else to post this, since there isn't a history subforum and there doesn't seem to be a D&D thread dedicated to race relations or Black Lives Matter or anything like that (lot of discussions about video games though....). However, since this is relevant to U.S. politics today I suppose I will post it here. There's a long and dense history white riots burning down black towns, just two year laters you had the Rosewood massacre that burned that entire town to the ground and had whites scouring the countryside for any fleeing black people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosewood_massacre It was about lynching a black man for supposedly accosting a white woman, natch. There's a pretty good movie about by John Singleton, which was based on several similar incidents. Rioting whites didn't only target blacks of course. I was just reading about the amusingly named but horrifically catalogued Zoot Suit riot quote:The Zoot Suit Riots were a series of racial attacks in 1943 during World War II that broke out in Los Angeles, California, during a period when many Mexican migrants arrived for the defense effort and newly assigned servicemen flooded the city. United States sailors and Marines attacked Mexican youths, recognizable by the zoot suits they favored, as being unpatriotic. American military personnel and Mexicans were the main parties in the riots; servicemen attacked some African American and Filipino/Filipino American youths as well, who also took up the zoot suits.[1] The Zoot Suit Riots were related to fears and hostilities aroused by the coverage of the Sleepy Lagoon murder trial, following the killing of a young Latino man in a barrio near Los Angeles. The riot appeared to trigger similar attacks that year against Latinos in Chicago, San Diego, Oakland, Evansville, Philadelphia, and New York City.[2][page needed] quote:As the violence escalated over the ensuing days, thousands of white servicemen joined the attacks, marching abreast down streets, entering bars and movie houses, and assaulting any young Latino males they encountered. In one incident, sailors dragged two zoot suiters on-stage as a film was being screened, stripped them in front of the audience, and then urinated on their suits.[17] Although police accompanied the rioting servicemen, they had orders not to arrest any. After several days, more than 150 people had been injured and police had arrested more than 500 Latinos on charges ranging from "rioting" to "vagrancy".[5] Here's a pretty good interview about what replaced large-scale burning to the foundation white rioting: police crackdowns. quote:In response to all those riots in the 1910s and 1920s, civil rights commissions were set up in cities, and there was pressure on both local and federal governments to address white vigilantism and white rioting against blacks. And while it was not particularly effective, it certainly had this censuring quality to it. And then what historians would agree happened is that, in so many cities, the police became the proxy for what the white community wants. http://www.vox.com/michael-brown-shooting-ferguson-mo/2014/8/19/6031759/ferguson-history-riots-police-brutality-civil-rights
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Out of curiosity, how do other countries enforce that campaigns only last for a set time? What stops any particular act, statement, or event being viewed as affecting upcoming (re)elections when out of the window? America's best chance of election and lobbying reform is a hollowing out of its economy and the humiliation of its military, to the point that the global ruling class doesn't give a poo poo anymore. That's the true meaning of "Make America Great Again".
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:52
|
|
|
And Panama Red, this is very much the appropriate place to post racially focused articles and analysis, I've been posting in the earlier iterations of this thread for years stuff exactly like it.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:54
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:And Panama Red, this is very much the appropriate place to post racially focused articles and analysis, I've been posting in the earlier iterations of this thread for years stuff exactly like it. In fact, it's much preferred to our normal round of either forbidden campaign focused chatter or our circular policy debates.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:55
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:It's also a dumb critique made by people like David Brooks. No I think it is a valid criticism. Not all Republicans are Steve King. And more than anything, a lot of politicians are petty people who want to feel cool and powerful. Obama did stupid poo poo, like not inviting congressional delegations to meet sports teams that has been cited as causing butt hurt. Besides, that's how you build relationships that let you win over the few moderate Republicans left. So yes, personal rear end kissing matters because the petty fucks who control congress actual care about it.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:55
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:There's a long and dense history white riots burning down black towns, just two year laters you had the Rosewood massacre that burned that entire town to the ground and had whites scouring the countryside for any fleeing black people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosewood_massacre twenty years before that there was the race riot / coup d'etat in wilmington, nc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilmington_insurrection_of_1898 triggered by the election of a racially mixed (but still majority white in a majority black town) city council and mayor from a third party that promoted racial tolerance. oddly enough the white supremacist democrats were real freaked out by threats of cuc kolding and basically sacked the town
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:No I think it is a valid criticism. Not all Republicans are Steve King. And more than anything, a lot of politicians are petty people who want to feel cool and powerful. Obama did stupid poo poo, like not inviting congressional delegations to meet sports teams that has been cited as causing butt hurt. Besides, that's how you build relationships that let you win over the few moderate Republicans left. I don't really buy the idea that if Obama had just kissed a little more rear end, It's dumb "beltway-centric" thinking.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:59
|
|
|
if obama "kissed more rear end" they would just move the goalposts somewhere else imo
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 17:00
|
|
|
emdash posted:if obama "kissed more rear end" they would just move the goalposts somewhere else imo Basically. It's more or less the kind of dumb thinking peddled by Chris Matthews and David Brooks that assume that structural changes and polarization are forces the President could change by sheer force of will alone. "Look at Tipper and Gipper!" But it ignores a lot of underlying issues going on in the Beltway, and that congress changed fundamentally as party of the 2010 election cycle. You had a bunch of new people who didn't know or care about established 'norms' and who ran on platforms of not cooperating with that evil black man in the WH, stoked on by leadership who found that without the ability to handout pork projects, their only leverage over the assholes in their party was to promise to indulge their stupidity, since they couldn't buy them off anymore. BI NOW GAY LATER fucked around with this message at 17:05 on May 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 17:02
|
|
|
Crashrat posted:It just means the job will become more draconian and that these former employees will be let go - only to be able to come back and do their work as independent contractors. Sure, many companies will try to avoid the new rules by switching to contract workers, but I'm still glad the new rules are being implemented. Hiring people as contract workers doesn't get you a good company man and that's still important to quite a few companies. It'll probably be a weird few years while companies get used to it and figure out that raising wages and/or cutting hours is cheaper in the long run than dealing with constant turnover and contract labor.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:And Panama Red, this is very much the appropriate place to post racially focused articles and analysis, I've been posting in the earlier iterations of this thread for years stuff exactly like it.  As a non-American, I'm a minority voice, but it's really interesting and informative to read these types of posts, and they're most certainly welcome in my eyes.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
I was curious and decided to see if there were any race riots in Iowa. There was one in '67 and will look more later. https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=950&dat=19670710&id=xFYwAAAAIBAJ&sjid=OlcDAAAAIBAJ&pg=5815,1483581&hl=en It happened right where I guessed it would have. Waterloo. Don't worry though. Waterloo/Cedar Falls hasn't gotten any better over the years. Waterloo is one of the worst cities for African Americans to live in the US and it is one of the most segregated to boot. Cedar Falls is white town and Waterloo specifically East Waterloo is black town.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 17:24
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Oh, he'll gladly do it when they bill him overtime. Those people will be fired for unrelated reasons.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 17:25
|
|
|
Crashrat posted:It just means the job will become more draconian and that these former employees will be let go - only to be able to come back and do their work as independent contractors. what is it with this forum and fantasizing about absurd independent contracting scenarios every time <good thing> happens for labor
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 17:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 01:17 |
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:I don't really buy the idea that if Obama had just kissed a little more rear end, Exactly, and this is made especially explicit given that from 2010-present Obama could have been the second coming of Cicero and it wouldn't have changed his ability to get legislation through the house. In this light the disproportionate attention paid to the presidential election is misplaced given how Obama was hamstrung for the majority of his term by forces completely outside his control. The acrimony in the Democratic primary is great given that the (obvious) winner will have to work under these same constraints. I'd argue the democratic primary is also exhibiting something like the "bikeshed" effect. Discussing the structural challenges preventing the Democrats from retaking the house is hard (or even just the details of policy), so that debate gets crowded out by discussions over which candidate is more "effective". It's the kind of lazy debate encouraged by the presidential election and it's focus on singular candidates.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 17:29
|
|