From: Tchiowa on 2 Aug 2006 20:05
> Tchiowa writes:
> > BLS. How many do you want to see?
> Enough to support the assertion. The BLS statistics I looked at
> support the opposite, i.e., it is clear that people change jobs a lot.
From: Tchiowa on 2 Aug 2006 20:07
> Tchiowa writes:
> > Let's look again:
> > http://www.bls.gov/opub/working/page13b.htm
> > The median (and that means half do better than that) of time on the job
> > *WITH THE SAME EMPLOYER* is about 5 years for people in their 30's
> > (which completely contradicts your claim that 70% have been there less
> > than 5 years) and climbs up to 10 as people get older. Steady growth
> > with age.
> Which invalidates the assertion that most people over 28 do not change
> jobs. Clearly, they do, several times.
Better than half stay in job a long time.
From: Tchiowa on 2 Aug 2006 20:29
> Tchiowa writes:
> > That's what the phone company tried to argue. It was broken up and
> > service improved.
> The monopoly on the local loop has never been broken. And the phone
> company is now unbreaking itself, becoming exactly what it was before.
Funny, but I have several options for local phones in California.
> > Etc, Etc,
Steel, Oil, Railroads.
> > Goal? They may talk about goal but the reality is completely different.
> > Tell me the government entity that you think provides good service.
> It's easier to list government entities that do not provide good
> service, but even then, nothing springs to mind offhand, except
> perhaps ephemeral structures that exist for reasons other than the
> ones nominally given for them, such as the DHS.
Actually it's quite easy to list the government entities which provide
good service. Here's my list. Do you have any to add?
> > And didn't I say that monopolies are not normally good?
> Perhaps, but some things have to be monopolies. You cannot have ten
> sets of wires providing electricity to your home, or three sets of
> pipes providing water.
But you can have different electrical providers using the
infrastructure. Which is exactly what we have in California now.
> > That's why monopolies are generally bad. Including government
> > monopolies.
> But some monopolies cannot be avoided, and they should not be private.
Maybe. But to go back to the original topic, health care certainly
From: Tchiowa on 2 Aug 2006 20:32
Keith W wrote:
> "Mxsmanic" <mxsmanic(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
> > mrtravel writes:
> >> How did you calculatae a 3.3 percent chance over 40 years would come out
> >> to 74 percent.
> > If 3.3 percent of the population changes jobs each year, then there's
> > a 96.7% chance that a person will not change jobs each year.
> Only if you assume that each person only changes jobs once per year.
> When younger there were years when I had 3 or 4 jobs
Exactly right. Heck, when I was a teenager it almost seems like there
were "weeks" when I had 3 or 4 jobs. :-)
From: Tchiowa on 2 Aug 2006 20:34
> Mxsmanic wrote:
> > Tchiowa writes:
> > But some monopolies cannot be avoided, and they should not be private.
> There is a myth that government can't perform as well as private industry.
> It's a myth.
No it's not. Cite one example.
> Private industry is no more nor less competent than government entities.
Nonsense. Competition drives competence.
> It depends on who's watching.
In the private world it is the people watching.
In the government world it's the government watching itself.
> In private industry nobody's watching.
Really? Ever heard of the consumer?
> So nobody knows how efficient or inefficient they are.
Their customers certainly do. And if they are particularly inefficient
it is their *former* customers who know.