Draconian vacation policies for US slave workers
in [Europe]
|
From: Tchiowa on 23 Jul 2006 04:29 Jim Ley wrote: > On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 10:40:12 +0200, Mxsmanic <mxsmanic(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > >Tchiowa writes: > > > >> Of course it does. If you pay someone 12 months pay for 11 months work > >> then your productivity suffers. > > > >You mistake mere presence for productivity. In most skilled jobs, > >productivity is largely uncorrelated with presence. What matters is > >how much you get for the money you pay, not the number of hours your > >employees spend sitting in an office. > > Indeed, Tchiowa seems to be living in a world of very low skilled jobs > which essentially any one can do with similar productivity - perhaps > counting boxes as they pass on a conveyor belt. The rich countries in > the world have few of these jobs. Both wrong. Skilled jobs *WITH EXPERIENCE* then presence is not directly related to productivity. That's why it doesn't hurt the economy to give long vacations to experienced people. If you read my post I spoke rather specifically about *NEW* employees. And in that case it makes a definite difference.
From: Tchiowa on 23 Jul 2006 04:32 Dave Frightens Me wrote: > On 20 Jul 2006 17:58:37 -0700, "Tchiowa" <tchiowa2(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > >The Reid wrote: > >> Following up to Dave Frightens Me > >> > >> >>I agree, but I think that's a desirable goal. There isn't any reason > >> >>why human population must perpetually increase. And if it does > >> >>perpetually increase, eventually everyone will starve under the most > >> >>dire conditions, since the resources of the planet are finite. > >> > > >> >I think we'll have a bit of warning. > >> > >> you don't think we are already getting them? Warming, species > >> loss,oil and gas supplies.... > > > >Global warming has been going on for thousands of years. Species loss > >is no greater than any other time in history and is offset by species > >gain. Oil reserves will last at least another century by which time we > >can easily have alternate energy sources (if the environmental nuts > >will allow it, that is). > > Just what on earth makes you believe that? Believe what? That the earth goes through perioidic warming and cooling cycles and that we have been warming since the last ice age 10,000 years or so ago? That there are more known oil reserves now that ever in history? Its documented fact.
From: Tchiowa on 23 Jul 2006 04:34 Dave Frightens Me wrote: > On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 10:13:03 GMT, mrtravel <mrtravel(a)bcglobal.net> > wrote: > > >Dave Frightens Me wrote: > > > >> On 20 Jul 2006 17:58:37 -0700, "Tchiowa" <tchiowa2(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > >>>Global warming has been going on for thousands of years. Species loss > >>>is no greater than any other time in history and is offset by species > >>>gain. Oil reserves will last at least another century by which time we > >>>can easily have alternate energy sources (if the environmental nuts > >>>will allow it, that is). > >> > >> > >> Just what on earth makes you believe that? > > > >When I was in high school, I think I heard we had about 30 years of oil > >left. > > I think you heard wrong then. And you seem to be hearing wrong now. Current proven reserves are estimated to last 50-100 years. Particularly with $75 oil. Reserves that were previously written off as to expensive to exploit are now being reconsidered.
From: Tchiowa on 23 Jul 2006 04:39 Mxsmanic wrote: > The Reid writes: > > > there were a number of new fields discovered in my lifetime, > > there is also the issue of using shale oil at much higher prices. > > Are the worlds resources finite? > > Is the worlds ability to absorb pollution finite? > > I think the real limiting factor on the use of fossil fuels is the > pollution produced by burning them, not the actual amount available in > the ground. But "The Reid" didn't say anything about limited use available. He rather specifically said "supply" and that simply isn't true.
From: Dave Frightens Me on 23 Jul 2006 05:19
On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 00:39:06 +0200, Mxsmanic <mxsmanic(a)gmail.com> wrote: >Dave Frightens Me writes: >> I think you spend that much now indoors anyway. > >It's getting to be hot nine months of the year where I live >now--something I never expected even in my wildest nightmares. Why not move to a cooler city if it's a nightmare where you are? -- --- DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com --- -- |