Child support is a percentage of your pay, so it has nothing to do with poverty. So that just leaves people who are bad with money management. Yes, threaten to take away their driving privilege instead of jail time. Put them in a position that forces them to meet their legal obligations. Child support is not some tax or fee or fine. It pays for food and shelter for children. The poorer spouse is usually the one that gets it. So if you don't enforce it, then you are directly punishing the poorer spouse (with the children) because the other one is "too bad with money management".
That ratio doesn't mean shit when you are homeless and starving to death due to poverty caused by having your means of transportation taken away from you, or by the combined effects of having that taken away from you along with the added fines and penalties of breaking the law by driving when it's illegal for you in order to try to break out of the loop.
All it means is your kid gets less and thinks less of you for it. Poorly thought out plan that punishes the poor and the children dependent on them.
> Child support is a percentage of your pay, so it has nothing to do with poverty. So that just leaves people who are bad with money management.
Ohio's minimum wage is $10.45/hr, $21,600/year. With one minor child, the state will require ~$2,000/year in child support (processed for an additional 2% charge).
ADP's net pay calculator says that that will mean you take home $365 a week. $1,400 a month after your child support comes out.
Saying "it has nothing to do with poverty" isn't exactly accurate, either.
> Child support is not some tax or fee or fine. It pays for food and shelter for children.
Wait til you hear about states where the man can be on the hook for child support for a child that isn't his because he "acted as a parent" (because he didn't know this). Sure would seem like a tax or fee or fine to me if that was the case.
Have fun collecting that 20% of their minimum wage paycheck for the rest of their life to pay off your injuries, car damage, and lawyer fees. Assuming they don't just get paid under the table or work as a contractor.
And if they move to another state, have fun transferring your judgement over there and trying to find their bank accounts and employer(s). It's like getting blood from a stone. It's easier and cheaper to just pay a tiny bit more in insurance premiums.
Don't they have caps and levels for federal employee salaries? I agree that raising the salary would decrease the issues. I think that they'd need exceptions to account for these increases though.
Yes, but not for contractors. Most software sustainment ultimately ends up in the hands of contractors with government supervision in the form of program offices. Not all, though, many programs are also "organic", primarily or fully staffed by government employees and managed by government employees.
That's not really how it works. They are more than happy to have "market forces" drive up the hourly rates, so long as they get to keep their overhead % fixed, and that's probably how the contract is structured. Win-win (and perhaps -lose for taxpayers).
> That's not really how it works. They are more than happy to have "market forces" drive up the hourly rates
That’s exactly how it works, look at contract government salaries compared to anything in the private sector. They charge the government more as rates “go up”, but that certainly isn’t passed along. If large contracting companies really offered value to the government _and_ kept up with market rates for their employees, the state of federal software wouldn’t be what it is today.
I didn't say that your rate at a govt focussed consultancy would be identical to your rate elsewhere. I probably should have been more explicit.
I rejected the idea that the consultancy would get a rate increase based on "market rates being higher" and then just capture it all - in my (admittedly somewhat limited and path dependent) experience that just isn't how it works. It's more like we pay randmeerkat $X, we bill them out at $X * factor + overhead. "Market forces" mean we have to go Y > X in renewal or we will lose randmeerkat & friends, so now they get $Y and we bill $Y * factor + overhead. It's of course usually more complicated in general, and overhead especially likely isn't that simple.
Nowhere in there is the assertion that X or Y is what randmeerkat would get on the open market. Importantly, their market isn't really "programmers", but "programmers that work in govt + contracting halo". Which is part of why the idea: I could get $N more in SF tech may be compelling for you, but isn't compelling for them (unless too many people actually make that change, instead of just talk about it).
Also there are many other ways they can raise there rates, but if the claim is that it is due to market on the developer salaries that are going to be a line item, there is going to be at least first pass look at a) is that true (find some market data and wave hands) b) did it actually get spent that way (may come up in an audit).
So the real answer seems to be not "They get more and I get nothing" but "I get a bit more, and they get more scaled by what I get", i.e. "win-win".
There is lots wrong with the system of contracting, but I don't think criticizing a cartoony straw-man of it gets anywhere useful.
For their cheapest model, they want to sell it at $10k which includes profit, but they can't build a single working one before that? Several thousand to build a single functional prototype is a drop in the bucket comparatively. This instills absolutely zero confidence that they could build anything... because well they've apparently built nothing except a preorder website full of mockups.
You're forcing Apple to carry/send/receive messages for their direct competitors. Apple obviously subsidizes the cost of iMessage currently from their iPhone sales. A workaround could be charging users a monthly rate to connect to their servers I suppose. But that seems like it would maybe defeat the point a little?
Surprised no one else mentioned this. The official documentation includes a tutorial that is quite good. I would read it before jumping into Fluent Python. https://docs.python.org/3/tutorial/index.html
In addition, you can download the docs as a PDF. Several years ago, I printed the tutorial so I could sit on the couch and read through it, which was a much better situation than having to do it on a screen of any type. https://docs.python.org/3/download.html
I really wish all docs would have a PDF option.
Zigbee Alliance renamed themselves to the CSA. Can companies still keep making Zigbee devices after Matter? Sure, it's not impossible, but it's not really going to happen much more than somebody producing anything else obsolete.
The fact of the matter is that Zigbee isn't competing with Matter, it's being replaced with Matter. Rebranding may not be the best choice of words, but I think you're missing the point.
People who want to drive and don't have licenses (whether by their choice or not) are currently driving on the roads right now. Also some of the worst drivers I've ever seen all do have their driver's license.
While what you're saying does seem to make sense, sometimes the situation isn't always that simple.
