Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Will Trump Serve a Full Term? Will Trump Serve a Full Term?
View Poll Results: Well?
yes
116 48.13%
no
125 51.87%

01-30-2017 , 10:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjshabado
Profit margins have nothing to do with the H1-B program. Nor does their fiduciary responsibility.
Labor costs have nothing to do with profit margins? That is way wrong.

Quote:
The salaries they pay their H1-B workers are completely public. Go look them up. Do you believe they are underpaying their workers? Do you believe they're skipping over comparable American talent just so they can pay foreigners high salaries?
I think that if companies have a choice between people of comparable skills they will hire people that cost less. If you believe otherwise well okay.

Quote:
Like, there's just so much nonsense in your views here.
If you believe that companies wouldn't take the opportunity to lower their costs and at same produce high quality products well I guess we'll just have to disagree.

Quote:
I'm a Canadian citizen.
Thanks.

You seem to be implying that I resent companies somehow trying to maximize profits. I don't at all. I think it is perfectly rational. I have worked with Devs on H1-Bs that do excellent work. Hiring highly productive people that cost less is like perfectly understandable. So if you are claiming that is nonsense well okay.

Last edited by adios; 01-30-2017 at 11:03 PM.
01-30-2017 , 11:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jbrochu
Seems like most of the jr developer roles get outsourced which makes it hard to gain requisite experience for more senior roles.
No that isn't it. Tbh big companies like MSFT and INTC have a lot of projects that go round the clock with people working on them in multiple continents. So I don't think outsourcing is that big of a deal.

INTC laid off 12,000+ direct workers in 2016, many in Oregon where they have a huge facility and in Silicon Valley. It is absolutely astounding how many contracting reqs they have now. I have no doubt that INTC sees contingent workers as being better for the bottom line. Many of the agencies that are doing the recruiting are Indian companies. I actually see nothing wrong with doing that. I think INTC is a great company too btw FWIW. I just think the meme that they are starving for talent is baloney.
01-31-2017 , 12:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lozen
I voted Yes but I am curious if the Democrats can field a better candidate in 2020
Michelle. Other than that, I don't know. There are only so many Obama's out there.
01-31-2017 , 01:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ineedaride2
Michelle. Other than that, I don't know. There are only so many Obama's out there.
Corey Booker maybe.
01-31-2017 , 01:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by revots33
Corey Booker maybe.
Zombie Sanders? Is Warren still in her heyday? No idea.

All I know is the republicans best chance was their joke candidate and they won. They have nothing in the hole. Assuming Trump screws the pooch the next 4 years the republicans have everything to lose.


Whoever pulls a random decent person out of the crowd and coronates them has a decent chance to win it.
01-31-2017 , 01:34 AM
Kirsten Gillibrand? I don't really know anything about her other than she's the one voting no for most nominees so far.
01-31-2017 , 06:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxtower
Because you don't want to be the one who profits from an event like this should an investigation occur.

I think the books exclude this possibility because they don't want to be scrutinized if some loony decides to make some money while making an attempt.
Ironically, if there's going to be scrutiny at all, there should also be scrutiny on the ones who bet AGAINST assassination. The way bookies work is that a bet will offer better odds when more bets are accumulated against it. Then a potential "bounty hunter" can just make his bet before carrying out the act. This means that betting against the assassination is akin to paying a hitman for a job. And if he fails to accomplish it, the bettor gets paid for his trouble.

It's not entirely clear what the law has to say about all this, or what it should have to say about it. When you take out a life insurance policy, you're essentially making a bet that you (or someone you know) is gonna die, and that's perfectly legal. When an insurance company offers life insurance, they're making a bet against that person dying, and again it's perfectly legal.

Last edited by alwayscall; 01-31-2017 at 06:43 AM.
01-31-2017 , 09:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
Labor costs have nothing to do with profit margins? That is way wrong.
Of course that's way wrong. It's also not what I said.

Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
I think that if companies have a choice between people of comparable skills they will hire people that cost less. If you believe otherwise well okay.
Obviously true. And not what I asked.


Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
If you believe that companies wouldn't take the opportunity to lower their costs and at same produce high quality products well I guess we'll just have to disagree.
Again, this isn't what we're talking about.


Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
You seem to be implying that I resent companies somehow trying to maximize profits. I don't at all. I think it is perfectly rational. I have worked with Devs on H1-Bs that do excellent work. Hiring highly productive people that cost less is like perfectly understandable. So if you are claiming that is nonsense well okay.
I'm not implying that at all. I don't think you do that.

But its pretty clear you either didn't read what I wrote or didn't understand it. So... cool.
01-31-2017 , 09:44 AM
no, his sentence will be commuted by mike pence
01-31-2017 , 03:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by econophile
no, his sentence will be commuted by mike pence
Sublime.
01-31-2017 , 04:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jbrochu
Seems like most of the jr developer roles get outsourced which makes it hard to gain requisite experience for more senior roles.
lol no. you realize that boot camps all over the country (like even in cleveland ohio theres at least 3 of these places) or just pumping out jr devs like a freakin assembly line. most are 3 months, a few are 6, and the job rate is like 96%.
01-31-2017 , 08:30 PM
i hope trump eliminates presidential debates before i have to watch him stammer through 3 more of them
02-12-2017 , 08:06 PM
www.politico.com/story/2017/02/trump-impeachment-bets-234931

"Ladbrokes, the British oddsmaking giant, has Trump’s chances of leaving office via resignation or impeachment and removal at just 11-to-10, or just a little worse than even money. The odds of Trump being impeached this year in the House of Representatives are only 4-to-1, according to the Irish bookmaker Paddy Power, despite GOP control of the chamber. You can win $180 on a $100 bet with Bovada, the online gaming site, that Trump won’t make it through a full term — though the bet is off if Trump passes away during the next four years."

...

"Perhaps the most unusual — and certainly most lurid — wager is the 4-to-1 odds offered by Paddy Power that the alleged Russian video of Trump outlined in the dossier compiled by a former British intelligence agent will appear on a pornographic website."
03-04-2017 , 06:06 PM
Wondering if anyone would like to change their answer. Since Trump is going to be proved an agent of the Russian government and sentenced to live out his days in Ft Leavenworth(?)
03-04-2017 , 06:13 PM
https://www.inverse.com/article/2629...peachment-odds
Quote:
Donald Trump is the President of the United States. But if oddsmakers are right, there’s a good chance that he won’t hold office for that long. There are many reasons Donald Trump could be impeached or resign before his first term ends.

As of March 3, Trump’s odds of leaving office before his first term are 10/11.

The odds are part of a group of “Donald Trump Specials” offered by Ladbrokes, a UK betting house (Vegas doesn’t let you bet on anything but sports). It includes bets that he won’t be re-elected in 2020 and that he’ll visit Russia by the end of the year. Now, gambling odds aren’t exactly reliable predictive science — they’re pretty far from it in a lot of cases — but after a tumultuous first few weeks of his presidency when odds went from being even to likely, the odds of Trump’s impeachment have since dropped. Ladbrokes has gotten serious action on Trump’s odds, and in a Ladbrokes post on the change, Jessica Bridge, a spokesperson for Ladbrokes, said:

“The money is showing no signs of slowing down and we’ve been forced to cut Trump’s impeachment odds accordingly. We’ve taken five times the amount of bets on him failing to see out his full term than on him doing so.”
03-25-2017 , 12:20 AM
Bumpity

My original brash prediction was going to be o/u on 3 months. I didn't say it out loud though, it seemed too crazy. Was it?

Let's see: Health Care dead, Travel Ban down, Wiretapping face slap, excessive wkends costing $3m/per, Major FBI Investigation in yo house, 37% approval. I can only imagine it slips to low 30's after this health care disaster?

Even if he's smart enough to change and adapt to the climate of 'governance' over his natural dictatorial/business tendencies, do the sins of the campaign which will be unearthed swallow him up regardless of what moves he makes. In other words is he FATED to impeachment or resignation now.
05-14-2017 , 05:21 PM
Current odds:

No -150
Yes +110
05-14-2017 , 05:56 PM
Either he quits gets impeached or just dies because he's an old imo. Hard to see him going for re elect in 2020
05-14-2017 , 10:37 PM
He's already filed for re-election.
05-14-2017 , 10:59 PM
Yeah man, obviously Donald Trump has never gone back on a promise, so if he's filed for reelection, that's it.
05-14-2017 , 11:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by einbert
One reason the the odds for impeachment should drop is because an overwhelming majority of the republican party has made it very clear they have no backbone whatsoever and are more than willing to turn a morally blind eye towards setting the constitution on fire if necessary as long as it cuts taxes for the rich, gets rid of Obamacare, and wipes out whatever gains women, gays, and minorities have made the last 8 years.

Does anyone still doubt that it's party before country in their view?
05-14-2017 , 11:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by OFC_OMG
Let's see: Health Care dead, Travel Ban down, Wiretapping face slap, excessive wkends costing $3m/per, Major FBI Investigation in yo house, 37% approval. I can only imagine it slips to low 30's after this health care disaster?
Be careful getting all giddy about Trump's low approval rating. Last I read, the democrat's favorability ratings aren't looking too good. I know that makes me a Trump voting racist for bringing that up, but just a warning to be careful.
05-15-2017 , 11:12 AM
Yes is free money

      
m