The Glade 4.0

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine

Thanks, I appreciate a good laugh...

But seriously - you claimed "extension of the hierarchy of evidence to labor studies" is "the generally-accepted hierarchy". You brought it into the discussion and now you think it's better as a separate argument?

Not gunna happen. I mean, it's not going to happen without being challenged, but ...


I still have a bigger problem with your whole "hierarchy of evidence" tack....

How do you propose we use "hierarchy of evidence"? A hierarchy is used to rank related items... How does one go about ranking data about "employer" versus data about "age and experience"? There's no conflict between them to apply a hierarchy to select one over the other. If statistical analysis showed government employees didn't have greater age and experience and the spokesperson said they did, well, then you might have a point, but that's not the case.

I'd sure like your explanation on why I shouldn't think you just want to arbitrarily throw out evidence that weakens your argument.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

I guess I'll just report your repeated insults, and be done with the thread.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine

Instead of backing up your claims?



You know, if you don't want people observing that you ignore data that disagrees with your argument you might consider not ignoring it. The truth may hurt, but that doesn't make it an insult.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

I'm not ignoring it, but thank you for continuing to make this debate about me instead of the facts.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine

I'm just trying to figure out why referencing ALL the facts presented in the article represents "MY" logic. I'd say that it's "generally accepted" to do so and to refuse is the exception. I'd LOVE to make it just about the facts... but you refuse!

You made it personal with your first reply to my post to Ladas and now you want to hide behind the "I'm a victim" shield?

Once you break the fourth wall, complaining about quid pro quo is pretty silly.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

From a biological sciences perspective:

I think people in the private sector are more apt to do the following than their government counterparts:

1. 'Graduate' out of their current job descriptions - going from bench scientist to manager, director, etc.

2. Switch career paths entirely

3. Switch to a government job for the long term security when it becomes apparent that #1 isn't going to happen and they don't have a desire to do #2.

<edit> 4. Have their private sector company make a ridiculous amount of money, cash out their stock, and retire/go into private consulting/work on the next great american novel.</edit>

I believe this causes a proportionately greater influx of new, younger workers entering the private workforce and a proportionately greater influx of experienced, older workers entering the government workforce.

Obviously this is not an absolute rule, but is rather an observation of a trend that I have anecdotally witnessed and is one possible hypothesis that is supported by the facts as stated in the OP.

If true, then the better question would be whether or not the cost-benefit equation balances favorably for the federal government for taking on more expensive, experienced individuals rather than taking inexperienced and a cheaper rate and training them up to do the work themselves?

Given the amount of red tape that a government employee has to cope with as compared to the same position in the private sector, it may well be worth the premium cost an experienced professional has in managing complex projects rather than hoping the wet-behind the ears college grad won't create a massive boondoggle that instigates an ethics and/or competency probe on the 11 o'clock news.

My opinions are worth exactly what you paid for them.

<edit #2> After that half tongue-in-cheek previous edit, it occurs to me that the OP is only talking salary. Does the comparison hold true when you include other compensations? I got stock grants and participated in employee stock plans in my private sector company. It was a really nice chunk of change for my salary grade when I cashed all that out. I do not have the same opportunity in a government position.</edit #2>

I just saw this:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/03/12/pi.d ... tml?hpt=C2

I admit, the number fascinates me.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

So 3 reports on this thread. I dont even care what it's about. Cease and desist. move on. If you're offended, move on. If you're offending, move on. Next.

_________________
“Strong people are harder to kill than weak people, and more useful in general”. - Mark Rippetoe

In spite of my better judgment I went back and re-read this. The only issue I see here is you both want to re-argue the same points ad nauseam. The tone seemed fine to me and I didnt see anything really egregious. I thought everyone was being civil. Maybe not elite debate club or ultra bland milquetoast, but civil.

There is certainly no content worthy of 4+ reports. That's not how this works. I dont want to set a bad precedence that says "report whoever I'm arguing with and Dash will make a blanket statement indicating both are wrong, possibly closing a thread".

I've issued a warning to stop with repeated and frivolous reports. If you cant handle this level of conversation then I suggest you keep out of these types of conversations. I'm certainly not going to insert myself into every internet spat and disagreement on political subjects. If you want some sort of iron hand running the place, that more than a couple seem to have suggested, I'll set up a forum for you here similar to the gaming ones or you can go to hostmonster or whichever provider you like and get yourself a forum of your own.

_________________
“Strong people are harder to kill than weak people, and more useful in general”. - Mark Rippetoe

It should have been 3+

Then we could have had pi

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

So does that mean this thread can die now mebbe?

_________________