Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
edna_mode
Participant@flu: this is happening in “green tech” projects as well, but before anyone gets any nationalistic dander up, it’s because there’s only a few places in the world with certain areas of technical expertise for certain highly bottlenecked steps. I have to wonder if that’s one reason why the Chinese were permitted to bid. Perhaps a devil’s advocate example might illustrate my point:
If a company in Japan is the only one that has extensive experience machining the containment vessel for a nuclear reactor core (and remember that there are many countries in the world way ahead in this technology), I would have serious concerns if that company were banned from bidding over a hastily-put together corporation that is US based that claims it can do the job because it’s done it twice…
Perhaps the way to alleiviate some of these technical expertise bottlenecks would be to figure out a policy framework that would 1) encourage more people towards science/math education; 2) encourage development of this kind of long-term expertise to stay in the US.
I know far to many scientists in San Diego who are fed up with the economic climate and are decamping for more hospitable climes. If the nerds who know how to make things work leave, what will the rest of the country do?
Participant@flu: this is happening in “green tech” projects as well, but before anyone gets any nationalistic dander up, it’s because there’s only a few places in the world with certain areas of technical expertise for certain highly bottlenecked steps. I have to wonder if that’s one reason why the Chinese were permitted to bid. Perhaps a devil’s advocate example might illustrate my point:
If a company in Japan is the only one that has extensive experience machining the containment vessel for a nuclear reactor core (and remember that there are many countries in the world way ahead in this technology), I would have serious concerns if that company were banned from bidding over a hastily-put together corporation that is US based that claims it can do the job because it’s done it twice…
Perhaps the way to alleiviate some of these technical expertise bottlenecks would be to figure out a policy framework that would 1) encourage more people towards science/math education; 2) encourage development of this kind of long-term expertise to stay in the US.
I know far to many scientists in San Diego who are fed up with the economic climate and are decamping for more hospitable climes. If the nerds who know how to make things work leave, what will the rest of the country do?
Participant@flu: this is happening in “green tech” projects as well, but before anyone gets any nationalistic dander up, it’s because there’s only a few places in the world with certain areas of technical expertise for certain highly bottlenecked steps. I have to wonder if that’s one reason why the Chinese were permitted to bid. Perhaps a devil’s advocate example might illustrate my point:
If a company in Japan is the only one that has extensive experience machining the containment vessel for a nuclear reactor core (and remember that there are many countries in the world way ahead in this technology), I would have serious concerns if that company were banned from bidding over a hastily-put together corporation that is US based that claims it can do the job because it’s done it twice…
Perhaps the way to alleiviate some of these technical expertise bottlenecks would be to figure out a policy framework that would 1) encourage more people towards science/math education; 2) encourage development of this kind of long-term expertise to stay in the US.
I know far to many scientists in San Diego who are fed up with the economic climate and are decamping for more hospitable climes. If the nerds who know how to make things work leave, what will the rest of the country do?
Participant@flu: this is happening in “green tech” projects as well, but before anyone gets any nationalistic dander up, it’s because there’s only a few places in the world with certain areas of technical expertise for certain highly bottlenecked steps. I have to wonder if that’s one reason why the Chinese were permitted to bid. Perhaps a devil’s advocate example might illustrate my point:
If a company in Japan is the only one that has extensive experience machining the containment vessel for a nuclear reactor core (and remember that there are many countries in the world way ahead in this technology), I would have serious concerns if that company were banned from bidding over a hastily-put together corporation that is US based that claims it can do the job because it’s done it twice…
Perhaps the way to alleiviate some of these technical expertise bottlenecks would be to figure out a policy framework that would 1) encourage more people towards science/math education; 2) encourage development of this kind of long-term expertise to stay in the US.
I know far to many scientists in San Diego who are fed up with the economic climate and are decamping for more hospitable climes. If the nerds who know how to make things work leave, what will the rest of the country do?
ParticipantAnother interesting twist is the mention that the profiled person has been “socking away money for retirement”. If she was doing it in an ERISA-qualified plan (most pensions and 401(k) are), then that money is largely JUDGEMENT-PROOF. A quick google suggests the only way for another party to take away retirement accounts is for family support (http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/faqs/faq_compliance_pension.html). The Supreme Court upheld that IRAs are similarly shielded in 2005.(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24753-2005Apr4.html)
So another reason to top up those retirement accounts every year — not only do you diversify your taxation liability, you protect some of your assets against bankruptcy, lawsuits, etc.
ParticipantAnother interesting twist is the mention that the profiled person has been “socking away money for retirement”. If she was doing it in an ERISA-qualified plan (most pensions and 401(k) are), then that money is largely JUDGEMENT-PROOF. A quick google suggests the only way for another party to take away retirement accounts is for family support (http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/faqs/faq_compliance_pension.html). The Supreme Court upheld that IRAs are similarly shielded in 2005.(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24753-2005Apr4.html)
So another reason to top up those retirement accounts every year — not only do you diversify your taxation liability, you protect some of your assets against bankruptcy, lawsuits, etc.
ParticipantAnother interesting twist is the mention that the profiled person has been “socking away money for retirement”. If she was doing it in an ERISA-qualified plan (most pensions and 401(k) are), then that money is largely JUDGEMENT-PROOF. A quick google suggests the only way for another party to take away retirement accounts is for family support (http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/faqs/faq_compliance_pension.html). The Supreme Court upheld that IRAs are similarly shielded in 2005.(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24753-2005Apr4.html)
So another reason to top up those retirement accounts every year — not only do you diversify your taxation liability, you protect some of your assets against bankruptcy, lawsuits, etc.
ParticipantAnother interesting twist is the mention that the profiled person has been “socking away money for retirement”. If she was doing it in an ERISA-qualified plan (most pensions and 401(k) are), then that money is largely JUDGEMENT-PROOF. A quick google suggests the only way for another party to take away retirement accounts is for family support (http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/faqs/faq_compliance_pension.html). The Supreme Court upheld that IRAs are similarly shielded in 2005.(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24753-2005Apr4.html)
So another reason to top up those retirement accounts every year — not only do you diversify your taxation liability, you protect some of your assets against bankruptcy, lawsuits, etc.
ParticipantAnother interesting twist is the mention that the profiled person has been “socking away money for retirement”. If she was doing it in an ERISA-qualified plan (most pensions and 401(k) are), then that money is largely JUDGEMENT-PROOF. A quick google suggests the only way for another party to take away retirement accounts is for family support (http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/faqs/faq_compliance_pension.html). The Supreme Court upheld that IRAs are similarly shielded in 2005.(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24753-2005Apr4.html)
So another reason to top up those retirement accounts every year — not only do you diversify your taxation liability, you protect some of your assets against bankruptcy, lawsuits, etc.
ParticipantHmmm…snopes and the American Red Cross give a different perspective:
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/household/triangle.asp
***
It would seem you need to account whether or not you live in a country with strongly enforced earthquake codes (i.e. buildings that don’t pancake) in your assessment of what to do in an earthquake.
ParticipantHmmm…snopes and the American Red Cross give a different perspective:
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/household/triangle.asp
***
It would seem you need to account whether or not you live in a country with strongly enforced earthquake codes (i.e. buildings that don’t pancake) in your assessment of what to do in an earthquake.
ParticipantHmmm…snopes and the American Red Cross give a different perspective:
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/household/triangle.asp
***
It would seem you need to account whether or not you live in a country with strongly enforced earthquake codes (i.e. buildings that don’t pancake) in your assessment of what to do in an earthquake.
ParticipantHmmm…snopes and the American Red Cross give a different perspective:
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/household/triangle.asp
***
It would seem you need to account whether or not you live in a country with strongly enforced earthquake codes (i.e. buildings that don’t pancake) in your assessment of what to do in an earthquake.
ParticipantHmmm…snopes and the American Red Cross give a different perspective:
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/household/triangle.asp
***
It would seem you need to account whether or not you live in a country with strongly enforced earthquake codes (i.e. buildings that don’t pancake) in your assessment of what to do in an earthquake.
-
AuthorPosts
