Related Posts
Benefits at Walmart Global Tech India
Hi Everyone, Please post any nice benefits other than regular stuff like free food/cab, good insurance. Any special Terms and conditions for 30k phone reimbursement, 2k internet reimbursement, 1.5k phone bill, nanny & daycare (whats-the-limit ?) ?? please share any other benefits.
Thanks in Advance
Hello, I have received an offer from Southwest Airlines as a Associate Technology Analyst with their direct college hire program. Will be graduating in May with a degree in MIS and also have internships experience as a Business Systems analyst intern. The salary compensation started off at 66,500 but was looking for the 75k range and they got back to me saying the best they can do is 68,500. They also have a 401k company match up to 9.3%. Do you think this is a solid offer for this job market?
More Posts
What one thing you like about your organization?
Additional Posts in Politics
Photo of the day
We must end the radicalization of our youth.
New to Fishbowl?
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
@OP 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽; thankful to know someone else like me exists. My friends fight me tooth and nail on at least 1 of these points you've made.
Following...
First thing to note that applies to all of this is: have you ever worked in government? The model for all things in government is that you go with the cheapest bid no matter what. Even if in the long run a slightly higher bid would save more money or be more efficient, you go with cheapest. There is little to no wiggle room, there is no efficiency, there is no incentive for employees to be creative or to streamline because structure does not allow it. So the government option is the option of low quality.
1) We have an example of how a fully governmental healthcare system in the US would work and it’s the VA....which is a nightmare and treats veterans inhumanely due to the lack of resources. There aren’t many that would claim the VA is a success.
2) do you mean income or wealth tax? Because wealth tax is obviously problematic for stock purposes. For income I honestly believe that the money that billionaires pump into their charities (like the Gates foundation) is used far more efficiently and effectively in the hands of a private charity than in the hands of the government. And when that money is used to invest in start ups that create jobs that’s also more efficient.
3) I agree. Can you agree that unions also shouldn’t be sponsoring elections? Why should the teachers unions and public unions be paying to put the governors and school board members in office that vote on their contracts? It creates a system where larger unions pay off politicians for the best benefits and smaller public unions that can’t afford to get nothing. I also personally don’t think anyone should be able to donate to a local election if they don’t live or work anywhere near the election. If you don’t face any of the consequences then it’s none of your business who is elected. Stop putting people who don’t care about their district in charge of districts you don’t live in just because you like their political party, that’s not democracy. Make all campaign contributions local and from individuals.
4) How do we do that with private universities though? I went to undergrad at a California State school because it was all I could afford during the economic crisis and it was a nightmare. The constant budget cuts (tuition increases that tripled tuition) led to classes constantly being impacted which meant many couldn’t graduate on time because not getting into physics meant you couldn’t take statics next quarter, etc. Resources were constantly cut like therapy and tutoring for those who needed it, all while it turned out the CSU system hid billions or dollars. After that I went to a private law school (because CA law schools only are $2k cheaper than privates for us in staters) because I was so frustrated and I never had problems with resources being cut or not being able to take classes. How do you ensure that a system of only free public schools isn’t constantly cutting corners? And then privates are only an alternative for the rich? So the rich get a good education while the rest are stuck with no resources and impacted classes.
More government isn’t the solution unless we want a slow and crappy system with bad medical care and bad education.
Going to rebute your 1) point -
Why is it that every other first world country (and I mean EVERY - Google it) has universal health coverage, but the USA does not? We're a lot bigger population wise than most, but we also have one of the highest GDP (PPP) per capita in the world. Systems like the VA are inefficient because they're at the mercy of whatever the current adminstration/Congress wants to fund. A universal system removes the BS of politics from health care and lets everyone have access to the basic human right they deserve. There's also the benefit of eliminating the exorbitant middle man costs of health insurance companies and increasing access to preventative vs. responsive care, among others.
1) the pure cost to provide, my opinion is it would not provide incentive for individuals to become doctors (countless years of schooling and pay will have to decrease) and/or companies to produce research. A successful product costs Billions to produce, and that on the 5-10% chance it's successful.
This is mostly conjecture / anecdotal based on the limited research. However, no one has provided a clear cost of how much this will be to provide. Even Bernie Sanders can't get an accurate estimate.
2) what is the purpose of taxing them at 70%? The govt doesn't spend it's money well. Let's balance the budget before we try this. As well, the ultra wealthy donate to their various causes. You take that income away there goes disposable income for a) consumable goods and b) donations to charities c) starting foundations d) etc.
3) if you're against electoral college are you against giving minorities the right to a voice? The electoral college ensures that rural cities are not drowned out by major metropolitan areas like NYC and LA. They each face unique situations, policies pushed by one group may hurt another. We are currently fighting for equity among PoC and other minorites, it's the same concept. I get mad at fellow conservatives who dont see bias in this as well b/c that's a core principal that goes both ways.
4) Someone has to pay for tuition. Who pays for the professors? The materials? The buildings? The football fields? The libraries? The list goes on. The rising cost of tuition, imo, is based on a few factors a) the high demand b) the availability of student loans c) the need to be the best to attract the best and (i.e. re football fields) d) lower federal funding than provided 20,30,40 years ago.
VP that's a valid point. Do they make the same margins back in those other countries to offset the billions in losses from failed products? (Sounds sarcastic, but it's a serious question).
Fundamentally disagree on taxes. f you increase taxes, they don't have the same disposable income to make those donations. Not all wealthy people donate just because of the tax shield. There are plenty people who try to donate x% of net pay every year. You reduce the net by raising taxes, you reduce disposable income (yes I get tax shield but it's not an even 1:1). Also don't think the govt is very efficient with the budget, so giving more money just adds to the problem. Have been very disappointed in fiscal policy by recent republican presidents. Claim to be about reducing spend, but only cut cash inflow and don't focus on cash outflow.
As someone else on the left, your questions are antithetical to the rugged individualists on the right.
Nice closed and assuming mindset you have.
4) I don't say "get an education." My little brother, an electrician, makes twice as much as I do. I say stop stigmatizing learning a trade, especially when we have such a need for skilled tradespeople. Community college is affordable. Transferring to a good school from community college is incentivized in most states. And learning a trade is cheaper than a gender studies degree. Don't go into debt just to hold a useless sheet of paper in philosophy; a diploma is not the same thing as an "education". Learn a skill, which does not mean the same thing as go to college. For engineers and accountants, sure, college. For a lot of other well paying jobs? Stop looking down on the people who keep this country running.
1) Nothing is free and everything has a cost. Put another way, if doctors strike en-masse, and only ones remaining charge $1M/hr. Should we compel doctors to serve you?
2) Same as I'd be against taxing the poor at 70%. The higher the tax rate the less I want to work. The more money the government gets, the more it messes things up.
3) Yah, and it is the natural order of things that capital talks. Whether it's in the form of money, commodities, social capital, looks, etc. Etc. People have influence over others and all forms not only should be equally allowed, it will happen regardless. Power is like Water, it'll find the cracks and fill them.
4) This is the easiest, college is so expensive because of government subsidized loans.
Seems like some slippery slope fallacies here.
Well let’s look to analogous society to see how that works: 🇨🇦. Zero doctor strikes. I feel like your treating doctors like a maligned labor class, not a educated part of society that made a very deliberate career choice.
Can you compel them to give care? No. You can use incentives, if a doctor decides they want to be out of the system, that’s fine. We don’t live in a dictatorship they can look after their own family. Just means maybe that doctor doesn’t get money anymore. Which is their liberty to choose.
Doctors in the USA already demand impossibly high fees, and nobody wants to pay, but it’s better then dying. How do we stop soldiers from demanding their own price and all quitting?
I choose how my tax dollars go, and I would rather they go to making sure the system is fair and not rent seeking. No value is created in charging 10 dollars for an aspirin. So many inefficiencies that privatization and capitalism hasn’t fixed for Americans.
1) universal health care isn't so universal. For instance, the nearest doctor to me is an hour and a half away, and I have to schedule at least two weeks in advance. Instead of actually having access to medical care through universal health care, I would simply be paying for city folk to receive it, while I continued in a worse situation due to decreased access to the one doctor I can currently reach. Fix rural hospitals and encourage people to move out of cities, and then we can talk about it.
Conversation Starter
A1, I call myself an progressive. You'd probably say I'm left.
I don't hear that sentiment, or at least the sentiment I hear regarding "eating the rich" is in regards to people who use the system to screw everyone else over (Amazon not paying taxes kind of thing). Never doctors or attorneys. The only time I have heard doctors and attorneys lumped into the afore mentioned category is when a certain news channel is using it to drum up outrage.
As for your point of the reality of the hell that those professions have to trudge through, I'm all for no debt education paths for public good professions (doctors, police, teachers, paramedics, firefighters, social workers, public defenders, etc). I think we can agree on that. It allows them not to be handcuffed to options that having immense student loans have. An attorney, like yourself, may have their heart set on helping out the unfortunate or fighting to create a better system but are stuck trying for the most money they can because they are being chased by this enormous debt elephant, which means they service only those that can pay for those services at those price points. It also means you are incentivized to not say no when sometimes you really should.
Many really smart people's efforts are wasted on trivial billables. No debt education for public good is a small cost for a huge upside and a shot at a truly better society.
Of course there will be those that figure out how to manipulate that system, but that's part of the cost, and it's a hell of alot better option than what we currently have.
1. Nothing
2. The economically optimal income tax for the top bracket is definitely higher than what we have now but probably also lower than 70%
3. Not really corporations more the super wealthy. We’re kind of stuck of the current system after Citizens United
4. The truth is we don’t need a workforce full of 4 year degree holders. I’d be more in favor of a system that provides support for vocational schools / associates degree
VP1, #4 is a valid point, those vocational programs and associate degrees should be free of charge as well
If we ban private insurance, imagine President Mike Pence in charge of our health care. Bye bye abortion access
Enthusiast
Op, why it did not work out in Venezuela and Cuba etc.?
Conversation Starter
1) Cuba has almost no economic footprint to speak of and an American type system, which is what they had before Castro, was incredibly bloated. The universal model is much more cost effective. Cuba has better health outcomes than the US and they do it with far less resources. Castro, even though he was a dreaded communist, was an effective leader.
2) Healthcare in Venezuela has a different story, and it's demise has nothing to do with the system itself. Unlike Cuba, Venezuela has had abysmal leadership under Maduro since Chavez's death in 2013. He was only given political credit due to his relationship to Hugo Chavez before him, who was Castro-esque, but Maduro has quickly shown that he doesn't know what to do with power once he has it. The story of the healthcare system there has everything to do with terrible dictatorial leadership of the last 7 years. If Chavez was still alive, Venezuela would probably be a different story. Venezuela is used by cherry pickers to show throw shade on it, harkening the old throws of Cold War US public sentiment, a deliberate misinformation tactic.
If universal healthcare was solely the product of the dreaded Soviet "socialist", then the concept would have been shown to be meritless, but it actually thrives in democracies with strong economies. The US not has the opportunity to implement something like this, but to absolutely crush the level of care, quality, costs, and effectiveness to become the gold standard of care, something we are far from currently.
2) how are you defining "super rich"?
3) Not particularly; for instance, Bernie outraised Biden without the use of corporations. Biden also won, without the use of actual money or campaign staff. Bloomberg had all the money in the world, and it got him American Samoa?
I think it's dumb that individuals have a donation limit but corporations do not, though. I don't think there should be any donation limits. Go hog wild.
Enthusiast
On your point #1, you gotta fix the hospital bill. If you breakdown the medical costs - bulk of the money is in the provider segment. Fix provider segment and many healthcare related issues will be addreased.
On your point #2.
Apparently, taxing the super rich is marketed as taxing everyone (especially MAGA voters who make less than 75K). It is marketed as socialism. Who likes socialism? C'mon.
The belief is that MAGAs will be super rich one day and they don't want their future non-existent wealth they dream about to be impacted.
Yes, you should tax the rich. BTW, rich people build assets (stock) and minimize income. This will motivate them to invest into assets and draw a lesser income.
On your point #3
Citizens v. FEC changed American politics. It made Koch brothers vote lot more important than an average Tom's vote. Need to revisit that ruling.
On your point #4, it is a timing issue. It is unfair to those parents who just paid 100K per child in tuition each year and then you have the next batch come in for free. It should be set up as a long term payback loan. Let us say your education costs $400K over 4 years. Government will subsidize it 80% and you pay 20%. You will be taxed at a high percentage on your income after graduation to recover that cost untill you pay it. Your income will determine how quickly it is paid. The more you earn, the faster you pay it. If there is an adverse event say death then you are not on hook for it. This might be a win win for all.
What about HENRY's?
As a 🇨🇦 who now lives in the 🇺🇸 can honestly say the medical system here is so, so, so infuriating. In Canada I was told the system here was better because you didn’t have to wait and you could choose your doctor*. I didn’t realize how big that asterisk was! Not worth it. I Definitely make more money here, but it’s a giant shell game. One bad illness and I loose all that money. It’s my choice to stay or go, but no one has been able to change my mind since I’ve been here for 6 years, that this system is corrupt.
Also, why the fuck are Epi pens so fucking expensive here!