vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
""If you have to assume the worst of people to bolster your argument, then you have a terrible argument."" &gt;You suggest that people who are poor didn't get there because of their own right. Are people who are self-made millionaires (on average) good with finances? Why would that be? If yes, why do you assume those that are successful are so because of their own merit but cannot be blamed for failure? Your words not mine. Nice straw man though. Honestly I recognize all of the things that lead people to success and failure: work ethic, background (race, gender, social class, connections, etc.), good/bad decisions, receiving help or not, luck, etc. There are definitely people that are stuck in bad positions because they were born into it or they have fallen on hard times outside of their control. There are definitely ""successful"" people because they had a lot of help to get there. There are people that deserve being at the bottom because of their lack of work ethic and poor decisions. There are people at the top because they worked their ass off and made the right decisions. &gt; My exterior painter is doing a job there right now. It's a 3 month job. He is painting 1,000 apartments. He took 7 guys with him that he pays around $1,750 a week plus room and board. He had to take 7 guys with him because he can't find workers up in Washington. Can you imagine that? People in Seattle have not developed the skill of exterior painting. That's the reality of your job market. I'm not sure what this has to do with anything. Actually, it's more likely because Seattle is growing and building more buildings than anywhere else because of the recent tech boom. It's most likely that all of the painters are booked up and their is a job shortage for painters, like there a shortage for engineers here. &gt;should society fill the gap? Lastly, congrats on owning your own company, but it makes me sad how you look down on minimum wage workers just because they are at the bottom, seemingly finding whatever justification you can for this position.
"&gt; There aren't only two factors at play here.  Absolutely. There are many factors that go into success.  &gt; His genius has been rivaled very few times over the past 250+ years.  The thing about art is that older is better. For example, who has rivaled shakespeare? Or even better homer? It's unfair to blame modern people for not being columbus because you can't ""rediscover"" america.  The point is that there are just as equally talented people at every generation, but a lot of external factors must come into play for one to become bach, shakespeare, etc.  &gt;  Both Bach and such nameless composers put conscious effort into the placements of their notes, so luck is not a factor.   That's nonsense. Luck is always a factor. However, it's not the sole factor."
"I'm genuinely curious... what colleges are ""lying to youth"". I went to a public university in Nebraska, all of the mean/median salaries and employment rate of recent graduates for each major were clearly posted online. They were not lying, just reporting the statistics for students to see and make informed decisions themselves. I think people generally love to have someone to blame, but I don't think universities should take that blame."
&gt; How long will that transition take? I guess it'll be as long as it takes me to become proficient enough to have value to a company. &gt; And why did you get into construction? I like working with my hands and at the time it seemed like a good job with opportunity to gain skills that would help me in the future. It is and was, but at this point in my life, I feel the need to make a change. &gt; You mentioned CC debt as building the trade deficit and that isn't entirely true I don't think that's what I said. I'm just tying up loose ends by replying to unread comments right now. About to get back to learning. If you can find the quote, I can address it. &gt; The deficit is a symptom/outcome of some of which you know, but the decisions businesses make to outsource doesn't just add to that, but builds a skill deficit. Manufacturing is a good example of businesses outsourced and that skill seeing less and less entry level work due to it, which inhibits choice of income. That's correct. &gt; As for wages, a lot of countries have minimum wage laws, but to suggest one or another is disastrous for an entire country ignores a variety of economic factors that lead to a crap economy. I was referring to a $15/hr minimum wage thrust upon our current economy. A dark part of me would actually love to see a parallel universe where it gets implemented and watch the turmoil that happens as a result. But yea, I agree, there are other factors also fucking up our economy. My belief that a minimum wage is bad is something that I've come to believe recently, and it doesn't come lightly. The reason that businesses have gone over seas is because our workers couldn't compete on wages. Those people aren't being forced at gunpoint to work (with the exception of things like diamond mining). They chose to get those jobs because it was preferable to the alternative. So, let's say we never allowed jobs to go overseas and forced them all to stay here with high wages.
"&gt;it certainly wasn't a priority for the government to oversee account-opening operations at the branch level  &gt;**Consumer Finance** protection bureau  What the hell are they supposed to be doing then? There are already multiple organizations for the institutional level this group was created specifically for consumer level products and they missed one of the most blatant and widespread abuses in recent history.  Dodd Frank is like if my kid crashed my car, so I broke his arm to make sure it never happened again. Making sure he can never crash cause he can't even get behind the wheel, but failing to consider the greater consequences. &gt;particularly among those of us who chose to leave big banks for smaller banks, who now have carte blanche to gamble in order to ""compete"" with the big guys. Looks to me like a strategy to discredit smaller banks in the end.  Please explain this one to me because I don't understand what you mean at all. You know most of the bulge bracket banks are *against* this rule while many community banks have expressed support? And what are you talking about freedom to ""compete"" against the big guys? What are you even talking about and how is that freedom threatened?  Since you brought up Republicans it seems to me like you are a liberal who hears 'Republican repeals regulation' and immediately think you have to be against it. There are a number of reasons this bill should receive bipartisan support:  * The guy who sponsored this bill was staunchly against the bail outs of '08 and wanted the banks to just fail.  * The compliance costs under Dodd are massive and smaller banks can't afford to pay them, and they shouldn't have to because if they fail to meet compliance they will just go bankrupt and won't bring the economy down with them.   * More overhead for compliance = lower deposit rates for clients = can't compete with bulge brackets. On a side note this is a general rule anyways and why I think its stupid to be using a community bank. Ever.   * It removes the orderly liquidation authority and leaves big banks to die instead of getting bailed out.  Other than the stigma of voting for GOP backed repealing of regulation the only real counter argument seems to be Elizabeth Warren, trickle down, Wall Street, 1%."
Regardless of what you think of lawyers... If for some reason you consider them all Satan incarnate soley due to the fact you think they all fall into the ambulance chaser, sleezy trial lawyer, or opportunistic publicity whore groupings...   (This of course ignores the scores who entered the field for the same reasons teachers and social workers do, to make the world a better place and shit. The ACLU, public defenders, those who run private practices who routinely give price breaks or simply pro bono help to those who need it- remember how many showed up at airports around the country when the Muslim ban was signed???)  Anyway, take the most negitive view of lawyers possible, that's fine for this question...   How are they *possibly* worse that monolitic multinational financial institutions that have used their power and size to lobby for and pass anti consumer legislation for years. Who, well Wells Fargo last year, BOA laundering billions for the Sinola Cartel, LIBOR manipulation, the 2008 collapse... the list is endless, just depends how deep you want to go...  I'll take all the sleezebag lawyers in the world over a cabal of institutions who are actively making life more difficult for untold millions in the unerring, devoid of morality, quest to generate fucking shareholder value.
yeah no worries, it's tough right, because uber provides an incredibly valuable service, but i'm amazed at how they're able to get away with not vetting their drivers, but at the same time that sort of lack of regulation is what allowed them to expand so rapidly and provide a (usually good) service. Austin TX banned uber and drunk driving rates went up - (https://fee.org/articles/without-uber-or-lyft-austin-experiences-skyrocketing-dui-rates/)  Clearly this needs to be worked out, and it's been pretty clear that the management at uber has been incapable of making mature decisions in a lot of areas, but it's also a positive disrupter because it allows a lot of people who are between jobs or out of work to be able to continue to bring in an income without being beholden to the cab companies that hold the medallions and charge the drivers for use of the cars and licensing.  I don't know the answer, I think that by providing the matchmaking service there is a level of accountability that is required for uber's vetting of drivers that hasn't yet been reached, but at the same time I think that the primary burden of liability should fall on the drivers themselves unless there's a reorganization and the drivers become employees instead of contractors.
"Based on the conversations in the comments, I believe a pragmatic solution would be the best immediate course of action, while still working on the long term addiction issues. The first step is to get your husband to agree to give you all of his credit cards and let you manage the money for a set period of time, say 3 months, to see how it goes. (In my experience people are more likely to agree to being uncomfortable for a finite period of time, rather than indefinitely.) Step 2 is to provide him a means for making purchases on his own, but with a limited budget. Here are some examples: Perhaps a combination of the above options would work best. Another thing to consider is to set up alerts with your bank so that you are notified of certain purchases (or all) that are made by your husband. This varies by bank, but nowadays most will allow you to receive text/email immediately when the purchase happens, and can be set to certain amounts or categories. There is a definite psychological difference between, ""If I buy this, my spouse will find out at the end of the month and berate me."" and ""If I buy this, my spouse is going to run in here in 30 seconds and berate me."" The latter might actually be a deterrent on its own, and you may likely have the opportunity to undo the purchase if you wish to. As a side note, it's important to realize that the above suggestions are still allowing for some limited amount of enabling and temptation to occur. If the addiction is such that it is hazardous to one's health (for example drugs or alcohol addiction), then I don't believe this would be the best course of action. These suggestions are based on my impression that the biggest concern at the moment is financial, and I believe these ideas help to mitigate that. Good luck."
&gt;I want a president who is going to look out for the little guys.  Obama certainly wouldn't be your man then. Consider his insurance, and wall street ties; he's not for the little guy; he may say he is, but his actions and policy are obviously not for them.    Also, consider that you can be a CEO of a one man shop, and in fact, alot of start-ups begin this way.   What about them? Are they not 'little guys' - the ones willing to take the risk, spend their own money, and create jobs in local economies, or must we be dependent on the government for everything from regulating how much soda we drink to what healthcare plans we can or cannot use?
Yea right! This is some communist propaganda if I have ever seen it!  No rational person would ever want someone else to be making decisions as personal as health care for them. Get out of here with these ignorant socialist lies.  No questions asked; people want health care decisions to be made between them (the patient) and the doctor, it is a fact. In all practical honesty, no one wants those types of decisions made by some pampered disconnected bureaucrat miles away. Anyone who argues otherwise is not being honest with themselves.  The plain reality of health care in America is that it is a protected and dark market where no one actually gets to see the cost of services. All we need legislatures to do is make insurers and health service providers publish price sheets and cost lists to the general public and we all will get to watch costs for everyone across the socioeconomic landscape plummet to unprecedented lows.   Fuck the Republicans for letting the insurance companies continue to write these disasters of legislation that they call a repeal bill. Equally, fuck the Democrats for letting the insurance companies give us the complete, failure by design, that is the ACA. Both of these shit-wings embedded with wilful bureaucratic incompetence need to just give us a fucking price listing for services and medications and get the fuck out of our way!
According to your scenario then, if Gen Xers are making less money then they'll also be working longer, thereby keeping millenials out of those jobs for even longer, thereby reducing millenials' earning expectations even further. The Gen Xers are already in a better position because they are more likely to have experience in a given industry; the millenials often lack even that, and in addition they are likely to have large student debts (because they paid more for college in the first place) and no way of paying it back.   I really don't see how the generation attempting to enter the workforce now has any advantages over their predecessors. Everything is stacked against them. I'm not saying it's good for other generations, but it is worst for millenials. It will probably be even worse for future generations.
"Three things....  First, it sounds like you have gotten incredibly lucky.  Maybe you were born into a stable family, and to date haven't had any major medical issues.  I know you say likely retire, but what if god forbid you have something medically that comes up which wipes out your savings.  What if your investments go south?  There are many, many people who made similar choices such as you and it didn't work out for them. Why should they have to work until they are 70 when you get to retire at 40?  Second, none of the things you mentioned happened in a vacuum.  Society, and yes the government, has support systems in place that made all of this possible for you.  Why should then you get to hoard all the wealth from making this possible for others while you get to pat yourself on the back for making ""good choices"".  Third, maybe along the way your investments actually hurt society?  Maybe that growing company was able to grow because they invested in a dirty technology, or outsourced a lot of jobs, or compromised peoples privacy in the name of profits.  Why should you, just by the amount of your ""capital"" get to choose how to impact society while the workers at those companies and the people in the surrounding community don't.  We are suppose to live in a democracy....."
The answer is actually very simple: the cost of data. Seriously. Call the CBOE tomorrow and ask yourself. They have two big programs:  1) the penny pilot program, where options trade at penny increments instead of 5 cent increments. This is only extended to a select few symbols because of the amount of data this can generate is too much for the data vendors. Data vendors store and sell historical data. The exchanges themselves often have a big data vending business too. 2) the weekly options program, where only select symbols get these chains because of the amount of data they will generate. Liquidity and demand are factors in determining if the CBOE will consider enabling those series on new issues. (although they have to give the list of which symbols are on these programs to the SEC)
Shinmaywa submersible pumps Submersible pumps play an important role in making sure water doesn’t pool in a home’s basement or is transported to the proper location throughout a building. Sta-Rite pumps are used in both residential and commercial construction and they have some very important features that make them popular among contractors today.
Corporate trainer is an instructor, who works in a business environment and imparts the skills, ideas and ethics to groups of employees. Now-a-days corporate trainer plays an important role in corporate sector. Better corporate training can transform your life. For good corporate training, you need best corporate trainer, who can guide you in a perfect way, then take help of Mitesh Khatri – Corporate Trainer, Motivational Speaker &amp; Leadership Trainer. https://trainermiteshkhatri.wordpress.com/2017/06/30/corporate-trainer-3-super-easy-ways-to-select-the-best/
Instagram is one of the most popular social sites among many others such as Facebook, Twitter Snap Chat and Google+. All these websites play a very important role in the conduct of business organizations. In particular, Instagram has several ways in which it has advantages to promote their services and possessions. They consist of likes, comments and followers.
The SWIFT network is federated. The connection routing is via country server to regional servers. All these are maintained by SWIFT. The Banks have corresponded relationship with other banks. They play a role in actual settlement and take some risk. L/C is very risky business. It is expensive.
its sad that I am getting down voted because people disagree with me. I'd like the people that disagree with this notion first read this:   http://pragcap.com/understand-the-modern-monetary-system/understanding-modern-monetary-system  Most people in this country just have no idea how this economy works and what role the federal reserve plays and what role the government is supposed to play. Please read this and then respond to me yea?
In my graduate thesis I explored the liquidity changes in the bond markets. Part of my research led me to also identifying an opportunity for blockchain to play a role in measuring it, something mathematically impossible but increasingly necessary in fixed Income.  Definitely interested
&gt;This buildup of excessive debt started so long ago -- Levy dates it to the 1980s in the U.S. -- that people no longer know what's prudent.  This is echoed elsewhere.  At this time, people that use capital don't truly know how much it's worth because it's so abundant.  Consequently, creates difficult in making business decisions.
This is really important for business in general.  Silicon Valley goes through more venture capital in a year than most countries spend in their budgets or make with their GDP.  Almost none of that goes to women founders and there is every reason to believe that is largely because of the poisoned culture.  So this is really big no matter how you measure it, whether you focus strictly on following the money or zoom out to consider the cultural implications of small business support structures being not merely male dominated but thoroughly exclusionary toward women.  Women play an increasingly important role in commerce because of the need for social skills.
They price based on their extortion power.  The 17 year calculation may occur in terms of whether they bother to R&amp;D a symptom management procedure for a condition, but if they have the rights to an approved compound, the 17 year window plays no role in their pricing decisions.
There are millions of websites available on the Internet but only a few stand-out and build their reputation in the online world. The overall design, look and feel of the website has a major role to play in this. Intelligent designs involve many other aspects than just creativity.
I don't really see it that way. Both kinds of companies are trying to maximize return on investment. Both play a vital role in the economy. And private equity companies like Bain that do a little of both blur the line even further.
Well anyone who spends 95% of their money isn't very wise. There's really no quantifiable way to determine exactly what percentage they spend, but I seriously doubt it's a tiny fraction   Edit: I'm not saying wealthy individuals spend more than half their money or even a quarter of it, but they definitely play a crucial role in the economy. Particularly, in the credit and lending markets which drives investment
All these news articles are starting to make me think that the president is the only one who exists and the rest of us don't play a role in the economy. Don't get me wrong, I can't wait to give this guy the boot in November. But these posts detract us from the fact that other groups created problems too that they need to take responsibility for.
If you are thinking IT infrastructure management is not an important role for handle any business then you might not aware with this.You should have a look at this piece of content which is describing the robust network infrastructure role in achieving your business goals.
"Yes, there are fringe cases is every system...  &gt; This isn't a call to reward people for their decisioms  Ahh, but that's life, isn't it?    Make good decisions, have better life.  Make bad decisions, have crappier life.  No getting around cause and effect.   Want to help people?  Start a charity. Or better yet, start a business and pay your employees a ""living wage""."
Yeah, I can understand when someone is directly infringing on a company's works and they go after them, but sometimes in the business world you just have to scratch their head at their decisions.  They're so focused on controlling *everything* sometimes that they'll even damage their own business.  Good to see Lego understands that sometimes letting people in on the action is a good thing.
Quite possible, although I doubt those will play a significant role in the near future. Aside from robbing students of the whole 'college experience', 'virtual' classrooms can't really re-create one of the most important factors of college/university education: networking.   The reason rich people send their kids to expensive schools is not that the education there is necessarily better, but because they are sure to meet other rich people's kids there, which creates business opportunities.   A similar thing, albeit at another level, happens at every college in every town in every country. If there is no campus, there is no (or, at best, very little) networking.