awilliams87

sog35 said:

awilliams87 said:

So in your example, the drivers quitting their jobs demanding more money aren't greedy? If the drivers quit, everyone, including them, are in a worse position. The drivers have less money than Uber as a corporation.

By the way, Taxi companies rely heavily on the government for monopoly privileges. That's why they're able to be so profitably.

Taxi companies charge about the same as Uber. There is no reason Uber can't make profit with human drivers. Especially since they pay them minimum wage, and bear no risk of owning billions in car inventory.

If the drivers quit then Uber will be forced to come to the negotiating table. No way Uber can survive if they even lose half of their drivers. Sure the drivers will hurt for a few weeks, but it will be worth it if they can form a solid union and have bargaining power, and a multi year deal. That's what strikes are all about.

Taxi companies, such as those in NYC for example, uses a medallion system to limit the supply of cars, which is distributed by the city government. Each medallion use to cost millions of dollars to buy before Uber brought that price down. Also, Most medallion are owned by politically connected Jewish millionaires. It's illegal for any non-yellow taxi to pick up any person up off the streets of Manhattan, giving people no other choice but to use it. By no means can we ever compare how Uber operates to the taxis.

Uber's purpose is not to provide jobs to people. It's to provide a service (a taxi service in this case) to customers. Getting mad about how much the drivers make is senseless when they wouldn't even have this job had it not been for Uber.

watto_cobra said:

Typical. Samsung gets to steal whatever IP they want.

Remember Steve Jobs saying "and boy have we patented it !!!" on the original iPhone. I guess he had more faith in the patent system he should have.

Latest news is S8 ditching 3.5mm headphone socket. And trying to beat Apple to the punch on a virtual home button. As usual Apple bears the brunt of "moving forward" with innovation and technology and Sammy just rides their coattails. I actually know people who've said, "you cannot play music on the new iPhone" until I patiently explained the situation.

Thank Facebook, and other outlets of misinformation and sensationalism, for that (literally, so many people I know got in an uproar because of whatever ill-informed rubbish they read on StalkBook)

IP is conceptually bullshit anyway.

lkrupp said:

awilliams87 said:

Okay, so he was turned down because he is too old. And? Why this totalitarian anti-age discrimination law exist to begin with is nonsensical. The  stores give off a certain youthful ambiance. Obviously hiring a 60+ year old would be contradictory to that. I don't want to walk into the stores and be greeted by grandparents. The youth are forward looking (generally), while older individuals tend to be stuck in their ways. If  wants to be seen as innovative, then their store employees should reflect that.

I’d say F**K YOU but that might get me banned.

Tell me, what specifically in my post do you have a problem with? I'm sure you can articulate a proper counter argument.

vvswarup said:

Trump is barking up the wrong tree. It's not in Tim Cook's hands where iPhones are made. People like to think Apple closed down its American factories and moved them to China to save money. That's not what happened. Apple closed down every single one of its factories in the entire world. Apple doesn't want to be in manufacturing. Apple designs all the components for its devices. It then pays component manufacturers to make them according to Apple's specifications. Those component manufacturers are located all over the world. Some of them are even in the USA.

Bottom line is that Apple cannot "move manufacturing back to the USA" because it doesn't own any manufacturing plants to begin with. 

But Apple does want to manufacture it's own products if it reaches cost parity with outsourcing it to others.

Okay, so he was turned down because he is too old. And? Why this totalitarian anti-age discrimination law exist to begin with is nonsensical. The  stores give off a certain youthful ambiance. Obviously hiring a 60+ year old would be contradictory to that. I don't want to walk into the stores and be greeted by grandparents. The youth are forward looking (generally), while older individuals tend to be stuck in their ways. If  wants to be seen as innovative, then their store employees should reflect that.

Rayz2016 said:

techprod1gy said:

I have high hopes for Trump. I voted for him because I truly believe he can bring changes that are need here stateside. I also think good advisers will temper his extreme talk. He is just candid like I am. Doesn't mean he is bad. Just has to choose his words differently depending on who he is addressing. 

Right.

So during a conversation about women during whicy he said, "You can do anything. Grab them by the p###y," which words should he have chosen?

When he went past that 14-year-old girl and said to an adviser that he would be dating her in ten years, would it have been better if he said he'd be dating her in twelve years?

Stop being a pussy. I don't see anything wrong with those comments.