Essentially, what are some of the metrics by which economists would decide whether a market has too much concentration or oligopsony power, particularly labour markets where it is harder to determine the exact number of sellers?
... will blow it the fuck open with runners on the corners and no outs with the top of the order at the plate.
When the offense goes off, the bullpen shits the bed.
When the pitching goes off, offense shits the bed.
A lot of libs, socdems and baby leftists have a problem with billionaires specifically without actually broadening their criticism to class relations under the capitalist system.
You will see a lot of remarks from such people about how it "isn't possible to become a billionaire without exploitation". The implication being that it is possible to have a net worth of 500 million or 999 million without exploitation.
It is an incorrect and incomplete analysis.
A billion dollars isn't some magical cutoff point where class exploitation becomes uniquely severe and evil.
After all, there are people with significantly less wealth who arguably exploit their employees in a more oppressive manner than billionaires. There are smaller companies that are actually much more profitable than really big multinational corporations with thinner profit margins.
You will often see smaller businesses underpay and abuse their employees far more than massive corporations with HR departments. After all, having worked for both "mom and pop" businesses and giant multinational corporations, I would pick the multinational corporation in a heartbeat if given the choice.
A billionaire is just a capitalist whose unrealized gains (speculative value of all their ownership shares) are equal to or greater than a billion dollars.
They extract surplus value the same way a medium sized business owner does, just at a larger scale and for more profit. But the basic class relations are exactly the same.
Their net worth can fluctuate as well. Mark Zuckerberg once lost tens of billions of dollars in net worth, but that didn't somehow make his class position less exploitative.
It would be like saying that slavery is only bad once a slave plantation reaches a certain size. In terms of class relations, a billion dollars is more or less an arbitrary point at which libs and socdems start criticizing capitalism.
This is probably falling on deaf ears as most people in this sub already understand this, but it should be pointed out nonetheless.
The writing is on the wall.
Already an entire 9 games back of first, will likely be 10 games back after tonight and then 6 below .500 with a truly shambolic offense that is showing zero signs of life.
Even with injuries, the healthy guys who are expected to produce aren't producing and Okamoto is the only player doing much of anything at the plate.
About to head into a road trip featuring a 4 game set against New York in which we could very easily get swept.
In addition to a bad performance on the field, the vibes are bad too.
With a bunch of guys' contracts expiring, the entire thing will need to be blown up so the front office can rebuild for the next era starting in 2027.
Hoping for Bieber to return ASAP.
Could be an interesting experiment. I personally want to see what happens when Ernie is given more at-bats.
I was talking with a family member about the work they do in the pharmaceutical sector, and from what I gathered, the federal government does not fuck around in the slightest with safety, particularly on the manufacturing side.
Obviously companies try to lobby the government, but generally, Health Canada has a reputation for being incredibly strict and not, to put it in their words, "industry-friendly".
My question is, why does the ruling (capitalist) class allow regulatory agencies to exist?
A lot of these regulatory agencies increase businesses' operating costs and prevent them from cutting corners too much (though this sometimes fails), but it seems like it would be in the interests of the DoTB to abolish these bodies entirely or weaken them to the point of being completely useless.
In colonial times, Africa was basically a giant plantation for Europe. Resources, cash crops and embodied labour flowed to Europe, which industrialized and got wealthy.
Today, what has actually changed since these countries gained formal independence?
Raw materials such as cocoa, minerals, and palm oil are extracted from Africa while the West profits from the finished products, as well as the labour of cheap and exploitative primary industry, while Africans are still impoverished. Resource extraction and its associated low-income hard labour are basically designated for Afica, while the West gets to have the profits and all the high-income cushy jobs.
So the arrangement of Africa being a raw material repository seems like it hasn't changed as the extractive relationship and global division of labour has remained in place. Plus, were this arrangement to change (Africa now refines those resources for its own industries), the West would be screwed.
I have considered buying it for a year as I want to model a personal project, however, I was looking through some threads from a few years ago in which users were commenting about all kinds of issues with the maker version of SW and the 3DExperience interface. Connectivity issues, having to log in constantly, etc.
Is this still the case or has it been fixed?
I always found it hard to believe that the mission to rescue humanity wasn't the result of a multinational coalition and decades of collaborative research by international space agencies, just the small remnants of NASA operating in complete secrecy.
Like how are there no Chinese, Russians or Europeans involved?
Since there aren't in the film, it seems like these countries are canonically failed states that have collapsed completely.
Power Hypertrophy Upper Lower (P.H.U.L.) Workout | Muscle & Strength
It has three front-delt heavy pressing movements in one workout.
I'm cooked, but this isn't a sympathy post. It is an advice post.
I've been looking for work for, well, some time now. I graduated with a degree in mechanical engineering, but I just feel like a guy with a piece of paper rather than a knowledgeable and skilled person who can add value to a company.
School was very theoretical, and though I did do some basic mechanical design and machining for extracurriculars as well as a capstone project, I don't really have any engineering job experience nor am I super confident in the "bread and butter" of the profession.
I mean things like detailed design drawings, tolerances, complicated modelling in CAD, GD&T, elements of a thread callout, all of the in-depth mechanical knowledge.
I understand how to interpret notation for fits and stuff and how to interpret stuff like control frames in GD&T, but I wouldn't know how to really use these things in a real world design context.
I'm dead serious. You can ask me a basic mechanical engineering question in the comments, and I don't think I'd be able to answer it.
I've read that a lot of entry level engineers learn a lot of this stuff in the job, but I'm getting the impression that to the extent entry level engineers are actually being hired, employers expect a high degree of competence and engineering knowledge already.
I have often seen the argument that vegetarianism is a privileged lifestyle which is unaffordable and inaccessible to the working class and marginalized castes in India, which is why the culinary traditions of the 'lower' castes are non-vegetarian.
However, I have also read that lentils are significantly less expensive than meat per kilogram in India. For instance, 100g of raw lentils contains 24 grams of protein while 100g of chicken contains 27 grams, with chicken being the more expensive option.
With this in mind, isn't a vegetarian diet less expensive and thus more accessible to the poor?
To clarify, I am not a vegetarian, but I also live in North America where inexpensive cuts of meat, particularly beef and pork, are relatively abundant.