They've been confined for weeks under a COVID quarantine. With how long the lockdowns have been going on in China, I'm not surprised people are hitting their breaking point. Once you get to that point, it doesn't take much to break the proverbial camel's back, and messing with people's income is a surefire way to do it.
Regarding the financial status of Foxconn, I'm just firing out guesses here, but with how much Apple has cut back on iPhone production and lowered sales projections, etc., I wouldn't be surprised if they're feeling the pressure.
> (except the "life, or worse," I'm firmly against the death penalty but totally fine with letting him sit in a cell in Terre Haute for the rest of his life).
Can I ask why you think this is better? I just did some quick math, and based on the average yearly cost of incarceration for an Adult Male in Indiana at $19,202[1], assuming SBF lives for another 50 years, that's $960,250 of tax payer dollars being used to store someonne that contributes nothing to society. So after he's stolen billions of dollars, we'll spend another million keeping him alive for absolutely no reason whatsoever. It doesn't make sense to me economically or socially. It doesn't even make sense to me as an individual, as I'd much rather just bite the bullet than spend the next few decades looking at concrete walls.
It takes millions of dollars to go through the legal process necessary to execute somebody with any confidence in the judgment. It is vastly more expensive than life imprisonment.
It also costs a lot to go through that process and determine that execution is not justified, at which point we're still on the hook for imprisonment.
Putting somebody in jail for life is a bargain in comparison.
Whelp, that answered my question! Seems like there's a lot of cost cutting to do across the entire board. I saw an article the other day on here talking about Riker's and it said that 1 inmate costs something like $550,000 annually.
Somewhat surprisingly, it is actually cheaper to just throw them in prison for the rest of their life then use the death penalty. Like 50% more to a whopping 1000% for California [0].
Of all the reasons to be in favor of the state calmly killing people, to argue for it because saves money over the alternatives is truly chillingly terrifying to me.
execution should be only for the "lost losers" of society, like school shooters & similia; rich and powerful people who value their own life, time & status would suffer immensily from being demeaned as "simple prisoners"
Except that he later goes on to describe how this is also affecting women more and that we should be paying attention to that as well? I don't think anything the author said is actually disparaging of women, in fact there was quite a bit of the opposite, talking about how vital their role in society has been. He's not blaming working moms, he's using them as the perfect example that a person can leave the workforce for years at a time and rejoin without much loss.
Where is he blaming mothers for this situation in the statement you quoted?
implication that there is supposedly some bias towards giving jobs to moms re-entering the workforce and not to men. which is absurd. the US does not even have any system of state-supported childcare set up. The lives of working moms could not be more difficult.
well, chalk it up to a site that as soon as I go there pops up a giant, screen-covering banner for me to learn about how trans people are horrible (only a few days after a massacre of trans people in Colorado, very tasteless) and deceptively calls itself "Independent Women's Forum" while being an obviously conservative / libertarian site that per https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33709488 was founded as a group to defend Clarence Thomas of all people, who not only was indeed a sexual harasser but also just voted to strip the right to abortion for women across the US.
Anything Trump did was an unpopular decision. If this starts to move forward under the current administration people would be more receptive to it purely based on the fact that it's the other side now.
I'm about as libby a lib as ever lib'd and Trump's action on China was maybe the single thing I agreed with him on. Neoliberal free-trade-over-all-other-concerns policies are actually pretty unpopular among voters in both parties, but are very popular with the donor and policy-wonk class, with the result that both parties typically favor it and have since the 80s, despite their voters mostly disliking it. One of the notable things about Trump's candidacy and presidency was his breaking from this (unpopular) long-standing norm, which fit with the rest of his messaging in that he mostly ignored whatever was ordinary or standard and instead picked the kinds of positions you'd hear talking to a Republican trucker in a diner ("They ought to just build a wall" is straight out of those kinds of conversations, for instance).
Oh, wait, one other thing I agreed with him on: leaving Afghanistan ASAP. The whiney push-back he got on that and the way the military managed to sand-bag the effort until well into Biden's term and still fuck it up, was straight-up embarrassing. Heads should have rolled.
I hope so as well. The language in his response from last week is has some strong language that really makes it feel as if it was written alongside legal counsel. With how long he's sat on this issue, I would imagine there has been quite a lot happening behind the scenes in that regard. Issuing that statement publicly feels like the first step towards litigation to me.
Once again, California inflating the national average to insane proportions.
I understand that the issue you're speaking to is farther reaching than just California, but I think we can all agree that it's one of, if not the absolute worst offender.
>her main duties now consisted of simply being available between 0900 and 1800, sending the occasional email and completing the odd routine task from home.
This sounds like a perfect opportunity to be paid while searching for a new job. I honestly don't see how employers still see this as a good idea. Please, by all means, stick me at home with nothing to do but collect a paycheck. I'll gladly clock in while filling out applications for a better role.
I'd 100% find a new remote position, not quit the now-joke-of-a-job, and collect two salaries for as long as possible. This sounds like a perfect setup tbh. They're trying to freeze someone out by giving them the Milton-in-the-basement treatment, except Milton doesn't have to physically sit in the basement anymore.
> I'll gladly clock in while filling out applications for a better role.
I would assume that's the point. You can turn over employees without the political headaches of firing. If you fire enough employees nobody will want to work for you (in the case of specific managers) and risk triggering an exodus as people lose faith in the company (and the best most employable employees leave first).
Not that I'd enjoy the process, but it also sounds like a pretty good retirement plan. I'd keep my resume up to date for when they'd give up on me quitting, but I'd also not be adverse to doing things I want to do in exchange for being available for the occasional email.
I would love to semi-retire with a role like that. It's not like I'm going to instantly turn off my Internet and forget how to do software when I'm 60. But, I'm also not going to be interested in running at full throttle grinding and chasing promotions, either. I would love to wind down my career with a role like "Grow a beard, answer E-mail questions, be available to help with emergencies, and mentor junior employees." I'd probably only ask for 25% pay for a job like that.
It seems like she invested herself and her ego too much into the job, almost caring more about the "position" than the money, which is very weird. I would just take the paycheck and the easy work.
Regarding the financial status of Foxconn, I'm just firing out guesses here, but with how much Apple has cut back on iPhone production and lowered sales projections, etc., I wouldn't be surprised if they're feeling the pressure.