We’ve already let our 13-year-old daughter know that we will do our best to support her if she wants to live on her own when she turns 18, but that she almost certainly is not going to be able to once she gets out of college dorms on a starter income, so she will always have a place to live with us if she wants/needs it. I hate to be the bearer of harsh reality on her, but she needs to know that, unless things drastically change, she may not have the independence she wants when she becomes an adult. And a lot of parents are in our position.
What makes it harder is that we’re basically told as parents to never respect our child’s privacy because they might be hurting themselves or having suicidal thoughts or communicating with pedophiles or doing drugs (I trust my child and respect her privacy, but this is what parents get bombarded with). And then they become adults and expect you to treat them like adults but they still live with you because they have nowhere to go. A lot of parents are going to have trouble with that.
Your work (and mine) could be done in almost the exact same manner by anyone with the same education and training. The work of artists is very specific to the individual. Not that no one else could do it, but if someone else did it, it would be a different product.
I think it has something to do with the nature of creative work. If we didn’t have some system in place to compensate creatives over time then people in creative jobs couldn’t afford to live between employment opportunities.
You are treating a written product the same as a commodity. The success of a creative work isn’t assured and fixed like a commodity is, basically working like fiat. So a piece of writing can either make very little money or a bunch. The initial cost of creating a show would be so much higher if writers were paid based on what the script is “worth”, since there is no real metric for show success and writers would probably just charge up the wazoo to be able to survive long enough till their next gig. This would probably also decrease creative quality, and you’d probably have shittier shows because of this.
Also why would anyone deliberately magnetize the population what’s the benefits supposed to be?
… Maybe that when you turn on the supermagnets on the, uhm, poles, or in China or something, everyone lines up pretty well adjusted rows automatically? And everyone would face the same way. There’s gotta be some benefit in that.
Nah, it’s been around for a while. Someone pulled it in front of a public forum and the speaker made him put talc on it and try again. The look of sheer confusion and mild sadness when it fell of was golden.
Counterpoint, it won’t “hang over” Joe’s reelection bid because he’s not the one on trial. The article even quotes someone pointing out that voters don’t care about guilt by association in a situation like this.
Honestly, if he was running and I had the right to vote, I would probably vote for him over the two other guys. And I don't have a problem with his father.
Why is Softbank involved in so many business investments that go sour? I’ve lost track of the number of articles I’ve read that go something like, “Softbank invests in X. X’s value is tumbling.”
I think a lot of the issue is that softbank had the idea of if they can invest a bit and get a good amount of growth, how about they invest a ton more from the outset and "guarentee" insane growth. They did that with a few startups and it worked, then they did it with WeWork and it spectacularly backfired. The basic premise of WeWork was pretty sound until the real estate market started going up in price, which kind of blew up the margins that WeWork lived in. That and a frankly financially crazy CEO kind of ruined it.
I think the special part was having smaller rental spaces and that feeling of having coworkers in an office that weren’t actually your coworkers. I used to deliver to a lot of we work and we work type places and I sort of got the appeal for startups. Some definitely didn’t have privacy like another commenter mentioned.
In the beginning, WeWork definitely was about renting to smaller companies (or individuals) at reasonable prices, providing decent (if not upscale) accomodations. That’s probably a decent little business.
But their CEO had (or at least, promoted) delusions about WeWork providing a fundamentally different experience. Some of those delusions were IIRC software projects he claimed would allow renters to automate and improve their network and electricity use. He sold this bullshit on talk shows, and gave this as a reason that WeWork wasn’t just another renter of office space. In reality, they didn’t have the expertise to do anything like he claimed, and it all came to nought.
Maybe if he hadn’t been spending money like a fleet of drunken sailors, much of it on himself or vanity projects, they might’ve not cratered as badly, or at least as quickly.
And that’s a perfectly reasonable business, but nothing revolutionary.
If their business would have been co-working franchises, in the sense that you can have an office everywhere and with some set standards, it could even have been a good business. But it’s low-margin, nothing like Google or Facebook.
At one point, a security guard who tried to intervene was attacked with a chemical spray
Damn, how much is the person getting paid? Aren’t they supposed to just report it and not intervene? I mean like what do you expect one person to do against a large group of people like that. Do they even get some sort of work injury compensation if they get injured like that?
The buses were hours late picking students up to go to school, and late picking them up from school after it was out.
All this shit isn’t a “worker shortage” either. Our economy is fucked from unrelegated capitalism, they’re offering $22 to drive buses, but I’d be surprised if drivers qualify for full time and benefits. Even if they do, not many want to split their day in half to drive pickup and drop off
they’re offering $22 to drive buses, but I’d be surprised if drivers qualify for full time and benefits
Ya, this is what I’d be curious to know about. $22/hr is pretty good. But, if that only comes with 4 hours a day, no healthcare, and a split schedule, it’s a lot less attractive. $22/hr at 4 hours per day would be $22,880 per year. And it’s less than that once you figure in holidays and not working much of the summer. So, anyone working as a bus driver is probably also working a second job. Trying to deal with the split schedule is going to make that second job harder, to the point that it makes more sense to try and pickup a full time job at a lower wage. Even making $10/hr at 40 hours per week, you’d make $20,800. That’s probably on par with what a bus driver makes for a year at $22/hr. A full time job also would likely bring with it health insurance.
Unfortunately, the solution is largely going to mean more money. Hiring the drives as full time, with pay equivalent to 8 hour shifts (even if split) and benefits won’t be cheap. And with the training and licensing requirements for bus drivers, the pay needs to be enough above other options available for people. I’d also look for a solution which involves training people and getting them licensed, rather than expecting them to walk in with those on day 1. From a coldly economical point of view, the people you expect to fill this role are not rich and may not have the resources to get trained/licensed as a bus driver on their own. Even if the training is fully paid for, people may not be able to take the time for the training. So, you’d likely need to pay them something, probably a lower wage, while they are a trainee with the expectation that they get the full wage/benefits package once they finish training and take a job with the county. This would come with amortized repayment requirements if they leave before some fixed period (e.g. two years).
There is also the issue of working conditions. I love my kids, I don’t universally love all kids. Some of them are absolute shitheads. And bus drivers have to deal with 20-30 kids while trying to operate a multi-ton machine. And let’s not forget the “fun” of dealing with parents when little Todd gets in trouble for smearing shit on the seat. There needs to be an administrative system supporting the drivers. And many school boards are so gunshy about being sued, that the driver is likely to find themself under the bus they used to drive at the hands of the school board.
Needing fewer urban and suburban bus drivers frees up drivers to service rural areas. In any case the vast majority of students live in urban and suburban areas.
They also need to get more creative with who they are hiring and what “benefits” they are offfering. A split schedule like that sucks for someone looking for anything more than part time work. If they can come up with benefits that attract say, stay at home parents looking to make some extra money, that particular split in the schedule may not be so bad for them. But they would also likely need other non-traditional side benefits that full time workers in other jobs might not, like the ability to bring younger children (not yet in school) to work with them on their route. A benefit like that might bring in more drivers and not even cost the company anything but too many places are stuck in a traditional workplace mindset.
From the area. The issue is state funding for transportation is down 84%. As a result what was 950+ bus routes for 96k students has been shortened to 550ish routes this year. It is a combination of drivers leaving for other jobs to no money to incentivise people who can work at the major ups here for double/triple the pay.
The smaller amount of routes for the same population means they had to do something different. This year they used an AI routing program to “optimize” the transportation which has led to longer routes (thus more variables), the crazy amount of start times, and busses having to hit multiple schools in a single run (3-4 on avg). The district is telling us they didn’t configure the AI properly while the drivers are saying during practice runs the last couple days, with zero kids on board, they haven’t been able to be within an hour to 90 minutes of their final mark.
There’s a lot more fine details leading to this but it’s all become one big cluster. School is already cancelled Monday and Tuesday also and there was a distinct lack of staying Wednesday+ wasn’t off the table.
Oh … Because of money and federal regulations they don’t have gps. The drivers literally have something printed out like the days of MapQuest.
Anyways just wanted to clear up some stuff.
Source: local, went through JCPS, coached in it, have a kid in it
Is there a point? Are they protesting clothes? Is it not considered public indecentcy? I got a ticket when I was younger for mooning a cop. Can I get my 150 back? I hear if you piss in the bushes you can get a sexual predator charge. Idk how true that is.
Public nudity is illegal in Portland, although court rulings have allowed it in instances of protest.
If you happen to stray from the group’s route in Saturday’s event, don’t fret: The public indecency ordinance does not apply to the Naked Bike Ride, the Portland Police Bureau confirmed to Axios.
So guess it’s a protest for cyclist safety, against oil dependency and in support of body positivity. I feel like it would be more unsafe naked, road rash will sure hurt. I’m not sure naked bike riders are going to stop climate change or get people to make more bike lanes. Especially if they already said, “go for it.” Id do it for fun though lol.
You can do it just for the fun of it. I did it a few times (not portland) & it’s one of the most fun liberating things I’ve been a part of. It’s very positive event and a good time. It does confuse some people i suppose
news
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.