Hail To The Chief (Read Mod Warning In OP)

Christy42

listermint wrote: »

Salaries?

Salaries in the tech sector are high.what more nonsense is this.

He just wants to attack his biggest critics. Trump doesn't invest in tech because he doesn't understand it. He prefers bricks and oil. No attacks on those sectors.


This is idiocy

This is revenge. The tech companies are big into good will and did a lot of good in the wake of the Muslim ban as well as being complaining given they tend to hire plenty of Iranians.

Someone speaks out you punish them. That is the Trump way. Making it harder for tech giants to combine talent from around the world will be painful for them and it isn't like his base will be (directly) affected by Google suffering or outsourcing more jobs abroad.

wonderfullife

RobertKK wrote: »

If you saw the Sean Hannity interview,

I saw it (I think) I couldn't see the interviewers face though as it was wedged up Donalds arse. Probably looking for Piers Morgan up there.

As for tonight, Sally Yates decision was a combination of opportunistic & political and partly legal. There's no doubt that the constitutionality of the EO is dubious but to say it was indefensible is partly posturing.

And it worked. She's come out of this as a hero on the left. She's also advanced the narrative of women being the people to stand up to the misogynist bully Trump.

The last few days have also scuppered the impending EO to hammer the LGBTQ community, but make no mistake Trump is stubborn and stupid enough to push that through Friday night while people about to chill and trigger more protests.

This is going to unravel into a General Strike very soon and that's extraordinary really. It's also the most effective way of combating this incompetent sociopath. One general strike is likely to cost the US economy billions in a single day.

Donald Trump is a spoiled child. He's not used to being told no - by anyone. This will escalate quickly over the next week and I predict it'll unfold into the loss of life in police v protester stand-offs.

VinLieger

listermint wrote: »

Salaries?

Salaries in the tech sector are high.what more nonsense is this.

He just wants to attack his biggest critics. Trump doesn't invest in tech because he doesn't understand it. He prefers bricks and oil. No attacks on those sectors.


This is idiocy

Its not just that he doesn't understand it he simply cannot move as fast as is required to to get money out of it.

Like you said he invests in bricks and oil cus they don't move and tech moves like lightning

HellSquirrel

It strikes me whenever I read one of Trump's pronouncements just how..undignified they are. He writes like he's still on the campaign trail, still using easy soundbite phrases "weak on immigration" to try catch the news.

Also, nail on the head or not, and I think not, the role of the Attorney General is to work with the White House, but the primary responsibility is to the law, not to the President. They are not supposed to be legal enforcers for illegal or potentially illegal (and going by the 1965 Immigration and Nationalisation act, it is illegal) proclamations.

Igotadose

listermint wrote: »

Salaries?

Salaries in the tech sector are high.what more nonsense is this.

He just wants to attack his biggest critics. Trump doesn't invest in tech because he doesn't understand it. He prefers bricks and oil. No attacks on those sectors.


This is idiocy

The way the corporations use H1B's to suppress salaries (yes, they're higher than construction salaries, so what?) is well known and has been litigated against in Silicon Valley repeatedly. The biggest employers are usually the guilty parties; and what it means, is that the jobs aren't being handed out based on merit, but on 'who will work for the lowest salary.'

There's no shortage of college grads from the US to fill available positions in high tech. Why does the US need to import workers for those jobs from overseas? The whole 'not enough STEM grads' is nonsense, there are more than enough.

Sorry, respectfully disagree I've been a spectator to this for 30+ years of employment as worker and manager in high tech and salaries are continually under assault there. Plus the new technique is to get rid of the older employees simply because they're older and "cost more."

Whether Trump's doing this for economic reasons (doubtful as I said previously) or to beat his perceived enemies (more likely, and he obviously has plenty given the outbursts we hear daily), it still sounds like a "good thing." I am reserving final judgement till the new regulation, err, executive order comes out and see what effect it has. These things take time to play out but I'll be keeping an eye on this one.

RayM

Not even two weeks into his presidency, and those trying to claim that Trump isn't a fascist are looking sillier and sillier.

listermint

Igotadose wrote: »

The way the corporations use H1B's to suppress salaries (yes, they're higher than construction salaries, so what?) is well known and has been litigated against in Silicon Valley repeatedly. The biggest employers are usually the guilty parties; and what it means, is that the jobs aren't being handed out based on merit, but on 'who will work for the lowest salary.'

There's no shortage of college grads from the US to fill available positions in high tech. Why does the US need to import workers for those jobs from overseas? The whole 'not enough STEM grads' is nonsense, there are more than enough.

Sorry, respectfully disagree I've been a spectator to this for 30+ years of employment as worker and manager in high tech and salaries are continually under assault there. Plus the new technique is to get rid of the older employees simply because they're older and "cost more."

Whether Trump's doing this for economic reasons (doubtful as I said previously) or to beat his perceived enemies (more likely, and he obviously has plenty given the outbursts we hear daily), it still sounds like a "good thing." I am reserving final judgement till the new regulation, err, executive order comes out and see what effect it has. These things take time to play out but I'll be keeping an eye on this one.

I work in high tech have done so since the last dot com crash.

You are making stuff up there is no downward trend in wages there just isnt.

It's hard to keep hold of good people thats the biggest problem


Unless you are talking about tech sector call centres......

BlinkingLights

He's going to run the country like an authoritarian CEO who takes no advice until he's either reaches the end of this tenure or is impeached, whichever comes first.

It's as simple as that really.

At this stage, I don't think we can expect any diplomacy or compromise from him. It's just going to be clash after clash.

26000 Elephants

Rjd2 wrote: »

She probably knew she was going to be fired. The statement tonight was a shambles and the bill is a disgrace, but not sure Trump has done much wrong in firing her. She serves at the pleasure of the president.

This will come back to bite him. The duty of the AG is to the constitution, not the President. The role is one of the bulwarks against tyranny that the US prides itself on.

Billy86

RobertKK wrote: »

Let me see, you are the guy who asks me that question when you supported Hillary, whose foundation received many millions from the Saudi government.
What doesn't add up is why it matters to you now, when it didn't when it looked like Hillary was going to win.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timdaiss/2016/11/16/no-saudi-oil-says-trump-saudi-arabia-fires-back/#188f5110708b
Waiting to see if Trump keeps this election promise on Saudi Arabia.

No, I wasn't fond of one side receiving money from Saudi but I wasn't fond of the other side receiving it also. You on the other hand, are remarkably more quiet on Trump receiving millions from Saudi Arabia (including the -eight- business he set up there along the campaign trail), as well as basically being bailed out directly from the House of Saud itself previously despite dozens of posts giving out wildly about his opponent doing it. You have higher standards for one than is the case the other, which there is a word for.

Christy42

BlinkingLights wrote: »

He's going to run the country like an authoritarian CEO who takes no advice until he's either reaches the end of this tenure or is impeached, whichever comes first.

It's as simple as that really.

At this stage, I don't think we can expect any diplomacy or compromise from him. It's just going to be clash after clash.

The Senate and the house need to stop working with him entirely. Stonewall completely and work to stop anything he does until he shows he is willing to work with them. After that point they can work with and get the few good things through. He needs to be shown he is not a dictator and should not be allowed operate like one.

Of course this requires the Senate and House to work together and trust their colleagues which may be a tall ask. The Republicans must also be worried of the damage fighting him could do to their party so I don't see it happening.

learn_more

26000 Elephants wrote: »

This will come back to bite him. The duty of the AG is to the constitution, not the President. The role is one of the bulwarks against tyranny that the US prides itself on.

I don't pretend to know anything about the remit of the AG but surely there are democratic channels to go through if an order is considered to be illegal instead of flat out blocking it, which she knew she wouldn't get away with.

What has happened is she did something she knew she would get sacked for which was easy to do because she was going soon anyway and now ends up looking like a hero to her supporters.

BlinkingLights

26000 Elephants wrote: »

This will come back to bite him. The duty of the AG is to the constitution, not the President. The role is one of the bulwarks against tyranny that the US prides itself on.

The Attorney General position in the US is slightly different from here in the sense that the Irish Attorney General is primarily just a quasi-member of cabinet whose main role is to advise the Government on legal issues.

In the US the AG has that role, but they are also the head of the Department of Justice and technically the top law enforcement officer for the Federal Government.

It's a weird hybrid of Attorney General, aspects of the DPP and the Minister for Justice. In some ways, quite old fashioned and lacking in divisions of power and placing way too much authority in one person and also because it's a direct presidential appointment, in the president themselves.

The checks and balances in the USA are often not criticised enough because there's a lot of weird patriotic, almost worship of the Founding Fathers and how their system of government is somehow the pinnacle of democracy. Compared to many European system, which have evolved more and also since WWII have had the addition of the ECHR and EU ideals around checks and balances and democratic oversight. In contrast, the Federal US system can sometimes be rather frozen in time and very executive heavy.

In a lot of cases the checks and balances have really functioned because the office holders, particularly the president, has followed a doctrine of precedent about a lot of issues e.g. divesting from their own involvement in businesses etc. Trump seems to be only doing what is absolutely legally required of him and sticking to the letter of the law, which is really removing a hell of a lot of protections from the system.

My concern with Trump is that when you strip the US presidency back and start operating it to the maximum of what's permitted in the constitution and throw away a lot of the niceties of what has been done to date by presidents of both parties, you end up with an extremely powerful executive that can throw a hell of a lot of weight around without consulting anyone at all.

Unless something changes very radically in the house and senate, you're not going to see much moderation at all.

Politics aside, it doesn't really matter if the guy's a Republican or a Democrat (and in reality he is neither), having someone who is going to run a democratic country based on a totally dictatorial approach is going to lead to absolutely chaos as he is not even achieving slight consensus on issues. You can't really operate like that without causing huge problems as people will not move along with you.

Government can only function by consent and if that consent disappears, what's he going to do? You either slip into a situation where the country turns into an ungovernable mess, or you end up with an authoritarian using force of law to impose their will.

Either way it's not a good thing for the US or the rest of the world for that mater either.

VinLieger

learn_more wrote: »

I don't pretend to know anything about the remit of the AG but surely there are democratic channels to go through if an order is considered to be illegal instead of flat out blocking it, which she knew she wouldn't get away with.

The channels are before signing or even drafting an executive order you first consult with the departments who will need to enact it and numerous lawyers who can test its constitutionality and legality. Trump has done neither for any of his executive orders thus far

AlanG

listermint wrote: »

I work in high tech have done so since the last dot com crash.

You are making stuff up there is no downward trend in wages there just isnt.

It's hard to keep hold of good people thats the biggest problem


Unless you are talking about tech sector call centres......

Have to disagree - Igotadose has a clear view on the tech sector at a management level. Entry level wages and opportunities in Tech are very low and are being suppressed by outsourcing. There are reducing opportunities for people in the western world to make a living while they get experience in IT. As for older workers - the tech companies and consultancies want to get rid of them and proactively work to do it. They leave older staff nursing legacy systems and fail to provide them with training on new tech. Then once the legacy tech is retired they force the person onto a lower grade as the latest hire from a low wage economy is doing the same job on a lower grade. It is a very common practice to manage out older employees in Tech.

listermint

AlanG wrote: »

Have to disagree - Igotadose has a clear view on the tech sector at a management level. Entry level wages and opportunities in Tech are very low and are being suppressed by outsourcing. There are reducing opportunities for people in the western world to make a living while they get experience in IT. As for older workers - the tech companies and consultancies want to get rid of them and proactively work to do it. They leave older staff nursing legacy systems and fail to provide them with training on new tech. Then once the legacy tech is retired they force the person onto a lower grade as the latest hire from a low wage economy is doing the same job on a lower grade. It is a very common practice to manage out older employees in Tech.

I also have a clear view at this level.

The company's you are working for I assume or old stallmarks or department's within another larger organisation.

The above description is not accurate for pure technology companies including large players in the saas areas.


It's hyperbole . We are chasing good people and paying good money to retain.

If someone isn't upskilling that is a different story altogether.but the assertions that wages are being driven down is farcical I'd go as far as saying the experience touted in the post is more IT rather than software.

BabyCheeses

There are only something like 64k H1Bs given out each year across the entire workforce. I'm sceptical of how much is can affect wages in one sector.

Manic Moran wrote: »

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-regulations-idUSKBN15E1QU
Interesting new executive order today, and I think one we can generally get behind. From now on, whenever a department makes a new regulation, two regulations must be removed from the books. This is particularly aimed at helping small businesses, which usually can't afford to hire lawyers, but, frankly, the US Code of Federal Regulations is stupidly large, currently standing at well over 175,000 pages, plus an 1,100 page index, and usually going up between 2-5,000 regulations a year.

https://cei.org/blog/new-data-code-federal-regulations-expanding-faster-pace-under-obama

Sounds like something an 18 year old who just discovered libertarianism would come up with and would drop the idea after spending 5 minutes to think about it.

BoJack Horseman

RobertKK wrote: »

Trump says they have saved $600 million on the purchase of 90 F-35s, and that 3000 are being ordered, and he had started talks with them a month ago.
He says the US will save billions on contracts.

No.... Trump is claiming credit for scheduled price reductions that were already happening.

He hasn't saved a cent there.

Leroy42

The optics of firing the AG is not good. And the wording of the statement is at best childish and petty.

You have a stand in AG that has brought up an issue and Trump has fired her for not agreeing with him. Now this man has no legal background and already has rowed back on the Dual citizens for UK and Australia and may or may not roll back on the green card holders yet has now fired the woman for having the audacity to stand up for the rule of law.

Anybody claiming that her 1st responsibility is to the POTUS should look back at her congressional hearing where Sessions (the man due to replace her full time) questions her over here ability to stand up to the president for what is right.

Whatever way you paint this it is a disaster for Trump. He has been shown up as having little idea of the law, has nobody around him that does, has little appreciation of the standing of the US in the world or the implications of his actions.

It comes across as the typical approach of going ahead and seeing if anybody calls you up on it, rather than dealing with potential issues first.

Jelle1880

Any of his fans want to donate ?

Billy86

It's hardly surprising to watch Trump try to speed up the process of going full dictator with all the records he's setting.

https://twitter.com/williamjordann/status/825781634330980352/

Trent Houseboat

I haven't seen this posted yet. Former Acting AG Yates, being questioned in 2015 confirmation hearing by Jeff Sessions, current nominee for AG, as to whether or not she would have the balls to do what she just did.

I believe the attorney general or the deputy attorney general has an obligation to follow the law and the constitution and to give their independent legal advice to the president.

Easy win for Yates. She was out of the job anyway, why not go down in a blaze of glory and expose the ineptitude of the administration?

They'd want to up their war on the media if they're going to deflect this mess. I think Trump's Supreme Court nomination is due tonight (like a reality game show results episode) so there may be silence until that drops and the news cycle is reset.

Joey Jo-Jo Junior

Attorney General states that an order in unconstitutional as is her job to do so.

Fires Attorney General and accuses her of "betraying".

Replaces Attorney General with one who is "honoured to serve President Trump".

It's like something out of a dystopian book.

B0jangles

The guy in this clip is on the cards to be the US ambassador to the UK:

https://twitter.com/jonwalker121/status/824921025066500096?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

All but declares intention to undermine the EU as far as possible - spread the US's chaos globally is apparently the plan.

A Little Pony

The EU undermines itself. David Cameron tried to get concessions on immigration, they wouldn't budge an inch on it. They destroy themselves.

darkpagandeath

Billy86 wrote: »

It's hardly surprising to watch Trump try to speed up the process of going full dictator with all the records he's setting.

https://twitter.com/williamjordann/status/825781634330980352/

I'm sure one will show the rest of the class where the U.S constitution will allow Trump to take over power and become a dictator.

Billy86

Joey Jo-Jo Junior wrote: »

Attorney General states that an order in unconstitutional as is her job to do so.

Fires Attorney General and accuses her of "betraying".

Replaces Attorney General with one who is "honoured to serve President Trump".

It's like something out of a dystopian book.

We'll have Trump fans supporting this, no doubt about it. And if you had told those same Trump fans a month ago that this exact thing would happen, they'd be shouting about conspiracy theories and fobbing it off as completely unrealistic. We're really getting deeper and deeper into cult-like behaviour at this point, and this is exactly why Trump fans were so desperate to not lay out any expectations of what they wanted to see from his presidency - so they could say they supported it either way.

Grayson

darkpagandeath wrote: »

I'm sure one will show the rest of the class where the U.S constitution will allow Trump to take over power and become a dictator.

http://morgenstern.jeffreykegler.com/

Godel was probably one of the greatest logicians ever. He apparently found a loophole in the constitution which would allow a dictator to take power.


However he never said what it was although there has been speculation. I doubt Trump or any of his cabinet are smart enough to figure this out.

darkpagandeath

Billy86 wrote: »

It's hardly surprising to watch Trump try to speed up the process of going full dictator with all the records he's setting.

https://twitter.com/williamjordann/status/825781634330980352/

I'm sure one will show the rest of the class where the U.S constitution will allow Trump to take over power and become a dictator.

Billy86

darkpagandeath wrote: »

I'm sure one will show the rest of the class where the U.S constitution will allow Trump to take over power and become a dictator.

Nah, he'd just fire them as he has zero interest in the constitution.