_dczq

Is the average tenure truly due to "employee choice" or simply a result of the system we created?

==makes everyone spend money they don't actually have.==

So much for all that personal responsibility we used to hear so much about. Far easier to blame the government for everything.

Companies use credit to buy back stock because we deregulated that activity. It used to be that the government didn’t allow it. This point is actually a counter-point to your theory.

You had to go back 12 years for your example. I think that speaks pretty loudly to the differences between countries.

Not what I said at all. I thought there was an opportunity to make a larger connection between what has happened in the Appalachian towns he focuses on and larger Rust Belt cities who face much of the same issues.

I am trying to bootstrap a niche B2B service myself and having much less success getting off the ground. I would love to hear more about how you identify, qualify and communicate with new leads/referrals.

I am delayed for a flight and only have mobile access right now. Not the best place to respond to such a detailed question, but I’ll try.

The bulk of the evidence we have comes from news reports. This includes the Dutch viewing Cozy Bear hackers [1]. It is also, this guy [2] saying we caught the Russians hacking the DNC. The FBI Director told us that Russians hacked the RNC [3]. It seems like you don’t consider that evidence because you can’t see the hard proof. That is your prerogative, but know that an FBI officer swearing in and providing details on a case is treated as actual evidence in any Federal court or grand jury room.

That leads us the the other evidence we have, which is the indictment of 25 different Russians by the Special Council [4] [5]. This means a grand jury saw all the evidence available and believed overwhelmingly that there was probably cause to believe these people committed crimes to further their motives. To me, this is evidence that Russia intended to influence the US election. That they released DNC emails, started pro-Trump social media accounts and kept the RNC emails secret is evidence that they were working in favor of Donald Trump.

If we can agree on that premise, we can discuss the next piece. Is there hard evidence that the Trump campaign was involved/aware of those crimes in favor of their campaign. Here, the facts are murkier and a case could be made either way. I personally believe the combination of the campaign continually lying about Russian contacts, the campaign manager sharing poll data with a Russian oligarch, the candidate literally asking Russia to hack his opponent, the timing of document releases, the server communication between Trump Tower and Alpha Bank, the campaign lying about Trump Tower Moscow plans/details, changing the RNC platform, Papadopoulos bragging about having dirt on Clinton, Kushner trying to set up a secret back-channel, telling Lester Holt why he fired Comey, telling Stepanopoulis that he would take help in 2020, that The Trump Tower email explicitly mentioned Moscow’s ongoing support for Trumps campaign and Don Jr didn’t seem surprised and Roger Stone’s ties to WikiLeaks all speak to some level of collusion between the two parties (Trump and Russia).

Some of that is backed up by hard evidence (Trump Tower emails, court filings, etc.). I think if you apply Occam’s Razor, the most logical conclusion is that Trump and his team welcomed Russian help and worked to amplify it. An example is Trump touting WikiLeaks on the campaign trail while Stone and Trump Jr we’re communicating with them behind the scenes. Obviously, if someone obstructs justice, that often hurts the ability to get the exact type of evidence you are requiring.

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2018/01/26...

[2] https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2016/12/12/dmitri-alpero...

[3] https://www.wired.com/2017/01/russia-hacked-older-republican...

[4] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/16/us/politics/russians-indi...

[5] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/rod-r...

==Seems like a failed attempt to avoid adding gas to the burgeoning Russian collusion hoax.==

And this sounds like someone searching for an answer that doesn't challenge their preconceived beliefs.

==Why did the Russian attendees at that meeting meet with the firm hired by the Clinton campaign to find dirt on Trump both immediately before and after that Trump Tower meeting?==

Not sure what meeting you are referencing, but this is textbook whatabout-ism. The discussion is on Donald Trump and his campaign.

==Because the campaign manager owed $20M to a mutually associated oligarch and wanted to show he was in a position to make good on his debts.==

And how does this show he was in a position to make good on his debts? Why does someone $20 million in debt take a campaign manager job without pay? How was he going to magically get $20 million by virtue of Donald Trump winning?

You stopped your logical thought because it took you exactly where you wanted to go, go one step further and you may start to get uncomfortable.

==It's not uncommon for people's preconceived beliefs to outstrip their willingness to think critically about rationale for whatever specific, concrete evidence is available. ==

Maybe this is a chance to take your own advice.

This is the same thought process used to discredit the moon landing, the effectiveness of vaccines and the roundness of the earth. Sometimes life doesn't provide you a smoking gun and you have to put the pieces together yourself. One thing I have found useful is to understand that if a group of people keeps lying about the same thing over-and-over again (like meeting with Russian representatives), they are likely hiding something nefarious (ask any parent). If not, why were they lying?

Why did they lie about the reasoning for the Trump Tower meeting if it was so innocuous? Why would the campaign manager share internal polling with a Russian oligarch? I haven't seen an answer to these questions that passes the smell test.

==I often reach out to people who seem to believe they have witnessed specific, concrete evidence, to share the specific information they have seen.==

Have you ever been on a Federal Grand Jury? They show you all types of evidence and ask you to indict people based on that evidence. One thing they don't do is share that evidence with the media or the public. The only concrete evidence the media/public has to go on (until a trial) is the indictment itself.

==Take the Russia hacking the election meme for example==

Isn't it possible that you are the one falling victim to the exact type of thinking you describe? You admit yourself that propaganda is easy and effective. Have you explored that possibility?

==most humans will always continue to believe what their brain tells them, without hesitation==

The embedded assumption in this post is that you have risen above the misinformation, bad mental models and propaganda to assess the "real" truth. How have you managed to overcome the weaknesses that others fall victim to?

I think it is a stretch to claim that an article from Time magazine about how four American political consultants helped Boris Yeltson win an election is the same as state-sponsored election hacking and interference. I also don't see how this article is equivalent to the entire US "bragging" about anything.

One involves multiple crimes being committed at state-scale (DNC hack [1], RNC hack [2], identity fraud [3]) the other was a consulting contract.

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/how-t... [2] https://www.thedailybeast.com/report-russian-hackers-had-rnc... [3] https://www.wired.com/story/russian-trolls-identity-theft-mu...

Do colleges exist solely for the purpose of training future workers?

==The guys going into plumbing right out of high school are a lot smarter than the history majors working at Starbucks.==

Based on what criteria? How much money they make today? How much money they make over their career? How happy they are? How much they contribute back to society? Who gets to choose which measure we use?

==If there were less 4-year graduates, the demand would diminish at all the smallish businesses wanting bachelors and associates in business where they provide little to no value beyond just working for those few years anyway.==

Or companies may shift their workforce into higher-educated countries.

==Community college is junk, go to trade school or into a real profession and stop inflating entry-level job requirements at tax-payer expense.==

The idea that 2 years of post high-school education is "junk" is alarming. What is a "real profession" and who gets to define it? Wouldn't all the new trade school graduates just inflate entry-level job requirements in those fields and decrease wages?

Then maybe that is the real discussion we should be having. Do publicly funded colleges really need brand new student unions, exercise facilities and dorms every 10 years?

Meanwhile, other rich countries offer college that is significantly more subsidized, sometimes even free. How do Norway, Sweden, Germany, France and Slovenia offer almost free university tuition without the same problems [1]? Certainly those countries have politicians.

EDIT TO ADD: Argentina, Brazil, Poland, Spain, Turkey, Panama, Kenya, Egypt and more [2]

[1] https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/08061...

[2] https://www.edvisors.com/plan-for-college/money-saving-tips/...

==What we are saying is that Facebook is no longer a platform for free and open exchange of idea and is engaging in censorship==

When was this ever not the case? Violent imagery and sexual nudity are already not allowed.

==I would also argue for caution when messing with an institution that has been established on every successful civilization.

Would you say the same about prostitution?