Bay 12 Games Forum

I kinda lost any hope that either party would be serious about punishing white-collar crime after the banking meltdown and the fact that pretty much NOBODY went to jail. In China, those fuckers would have been lined up against the wall in front of a firing squad. It's sad when China does better on financial justice than the US.

From what I can tell of how China handles these things the ones without the right political connections would end up in front of the firing squad & the ones with the right political connections would end up with a greater share of the profits in their pockets, but this might just be me being jaded & cynical.

That's not really true. It's pretty standard to bring the knights out early unless your blocking the c-pawn in the queens pawn opening or the french defence. So after 1. d4 d5 you don't tend to play 2. Nc3 because it becomes hard to break open the centre with c4 or e4 & the position becomes locked up. You can play 2. c4 immediately as black can't really keep the pawn if he takes it. After 1. e4 e5 however you would normally play 2. Nf3, the difference being the queen is supporting your central break (pawn to d4).

For most of the opening you want to be doing 3 things. Controlling the centre (e4,d4,e5,d5), developing the pieces & looking after your king safety (usually be castling). So 1. e4 hits a centre square (d5), opens the diagonal for the bishop (development) & after the bishop & knight come out you can castle (king safety). 1. d4 is good for similar reasons. 1. Nf3 is also good. 1. f4 for instance does not develop a piece & exposes the king needlessly. You can play it but it's easy to get in trouble in those lines.

Pretty sure this kind of thing is S.O.P. & the only thing unusual is he may actually pay the price. I've seen politician get caught out doing worse & continue to hold there seat then get re-elected when the scandal dies down. It'll be a welcome change if he does lose his seat.

If you tie baseline pay (across all disciplines) to total education level and prior job experience, and do so with weight of law, coupled with nondiscrimination law against ageism, you can hit this problem below the belt.

The formula needs to be based on current inflation values, costs of education, years of experience doing a job, and the wages they pay entry level employees, in terms of percentages.  This needs to be enforced regardless if the employee is an american citizen or not (include payments to SS and the like, healthcare, etc.).  American corporation? American wage laws.

Wouldn't this cause issues with overqualified workers not being able to get a job because there pay rate is too high? I mean, that sometimes happens anyway but I could see this causing as many problems as it solves.

.

The main problem we need to address is that pointed out to HugoLuman: with increased minimum wage, there is a risk of lay-offs. Not only in small companies that won't be able to afford to increase wages, although that will surely happen too; there are some things that are barely profitable with minimum wage of 7.25$, and they will just stop working after an increase. But think also of big companies. If there are only minimum wage workers, and the wage is increased by 10%, the management might try to get away with letting 10% of the crew go and just working the rest harder, since they are already getting 10% more. They will cut hours in fast food joints and the hamburgers that fallen on the floor will lay there until rush hour ends and somebody is free to pick them up.
In general: those with jobs will earn more, but there will be less people with jobs.

Work is a resource, like everything else. Let's say cheap milk costs 1$ a gallon, and expensive brand costs 1.5$ per gallon, and there are people buying a gallon a week of cheap one. And suddenly there is a minimum price of milk: 1.25$ a gallon. Some people will start paying 1.25$, but others won't, they will go back to drinking water barbarians. And some will think 'well, since the cheap one is almost as expensive as the expensive one, I will just buy the expensive one'. But generally, there will be less milk sold, because nobody will start to think 'since the milk is more expensive, I will now buy more milk!'...

Seems to me this kind of logic makes a lot of sense to people but doesn't stack up if you look at the real world. I live in a country where minimum wage is much higher than in the US and yet the unemployment rates are roughly the same. In my experience businesses will employ the minimum number of staff they can to get the job done. The minimum no. of workers doesn't actually change whether you're paying them $5, $10 or $50/hr. As long as it's not so high that the business can't actually turn a profit the number of workers employed tends to stay the same.

I can't tell if that's game or real life

halp

Look at the background. Should be pretty obvious

Also, the universe has an objective means of determining Good and Evil, that is, the detection spells. If we had an objective way of, say, determining who's going to be a dick and who isn't from birth, the world would be totally different.

Does is? I've always taken detect evil to detect "supernatural" evil, demons etc. rather then human villains.