vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
Here is a list of threads in other subreddits about the same content: * [Outsourcing airplane repair jobs imperils national security](https://www.reddit.com/r/AnythingGoesNews/comments/78ea22/outsourcing_airplane_repair_jobs_imperils/) on /r/AnythingGoesNews with 1 karma (created at 2017-10-24 15:51:00 by /u/thinkB4WeSpeak) * [Outsourcing airplane repair jobs imperils national security](https://www.reddit.com/r/union/comments/78e1up/outsourcing_airplane_repair_jobs_imperils/) on /r/union with 1 karma (created at 2017-10-24 14:49:13 by /u/RedditGreenit) * [Outsourcing airplane repair jobs imperils national security](https://www.reddit.com/r/labor/comments/78e1u5/outsourcing_airplane_repair_jobs_imperils/) on /r/labor with 2 karma (created at 2017-10-24 14:49:04 by /u/RedditGreenit) * [Outsourcing airplane repair jobs imperils national security | The airline industry likes to claim that the U.S.suffers from a shortage of qualified aircraft mechanics and airline pilots. What is happening is that young people looking for solid career paths see that the pay is continually falling.]
I'm from Canada, so your going to have to take that into account when reading this, as things are done a little differently here.    I wouldn't go the accounting route, as it's going to require more education on top of this. Id there is a program that focuses more on the management of finances that would be ideal. There are many mid to entry level positions that deal with the flow of cash throughout the company. From there you work your ass off and see where it can get you. Sometimes they go as far as hiring someone with no experience, but a certificate and a some educational knowledge will go a long ways in helping you.   You probably could, if you went to the right sources, gain similar knowledge by learning things yourself. But it won't look nearly as appealing to potential employers. Hope this helps.   Also, it blows my mind, the difference in cost of tuition. I spent 12k over 3 years(just finished). Those kids in Montreal have no idea how good they have it.
&gt;You seem to have very little respect for your coworkers in general. So why the fuck are you still there?!? A true high performers rarely can stomach working with people they despise as long as you've been with this company.  It's a job and I need the money. I'm used to being the top percentile of the class, working at the top firms. The economy has made that difficult. So I'm settling for less and looking for better opportunities in the meantime.  Thanks for the advice, I understand what you mean now.
I'd recommend LinkedIn instead for this purpose. I'm an admin for a business page on both platforms and in the US, Facebook is highly competitive paying little attention to group affiliates, more focused on consumers or prospects. You are lucky to even get a like from a vendor. LinkedIn however has groups directly associating B2B.
"break new ground  ""band aid""  ""on the back burner""  ""a lot on your plate""  ""knowledge transfer""  ""fire drill""  Man, I do NOT miss working there.   The annoying part was being ""called to serve"" at any given moment. I was good about that, I tend to half-remember what's going on, but I've had co-workers caught with their pants down (so to speak, though who knows...)  ""Rob, you've been working on ______ ,what do you think about _____?""  ...  ""...Rob?""  ""Well, it looks like we lost Rob.""  **5 minutes later**  ""SORRY GUYS I HAVE CHILDREN AND USE THEM AS AN EXCUSE FOR EVERYTHING.""  The man got promoted and became my boss. I immediately quit."
Thank you very much for your reply.   I'll look more into the CFA but I have a question - does it require an undergrad degree in finance/accounting to become licensed if you pass? Obviously that's an area that I need to do more research but a great place to start based on your suggestions.   If I take it in December I'll be 5 months from my masters. In that case it makes more sense to complete the masters because quitting that close to the end really throws a lot away. I know counseling isn't specific to the field, but people skills seem to be the cornerstone of every career.   Thank you again for taking the time to respond. I feel like a small fish in a big pond. The earning potential is shiny, but I'm more interested in a career that is not as emotionally taxing and that tailors to my skill set, critical thinking, and love for evaluating/speculating/problem-solving.
&gt; I'm strongly considering the military as an option to pay for it. They have a program where you commission as an officer, with that salary, and they cover school.  Aren't they going to make you work for them and send you overseas whenever they want?  In high school I took the asvab and they wouldn't stop bugging me and told me they would cover all expenses, but from what I remember I had to be their property for a while which I wasn't okay with.
[I appreciate the attitude that you wrote back in, seriously!]  Look I'm not against some form of help if they are working 60-85+ hours a week (we can discuss exactly what should be done).   However my whole issue is that this women has been working at a minimum wage job for a long time (I forgot the exact number). Why isn't she trying to advance away from that? (Maybe she is, but the article didn't talk about that).  Look I know it's tough, living in the Greater Seattle Area is very expensive and it's hard. But I'd not only do what I have to to support my family (which she is trying wry hard to do, props for her), but I'd also try to educate myself (not talking university) and try to develop/enhance my abilities so they are attractive to employers. She has tons of years of experience, why not try to move up in management?
The article states these are not good jobs. My area everywhere is hiring like crazy. But it's all minimum wage fast food, retail, and commission based jobs who only guarantee minimum wage. Nobody is complaining about jobs, they're complaining about the lack of quality jobs that can sustain a family.
You are right sir. We both make good points and it just goes to show you how the MBA is NOT as prestigious anymore. I still think it should be. I'm getting paid worse than some BA's I know for Christ sake.
"I agree with this argument. Finance, legal, and tax compliance industries are bogus and add dubious value at best. The creation of more wealth helps those that created the wealth the most, but it oftentimes also does help everyone else as well (think: Steve Jobs &amp; his company's many creations).  But I also believe that if you had a ""full equalizer day"" and redistributed all the wealth in the US so that each of us had the same amount of money (we'd each roughly have $255,000 if my math is correct), then within 1 generation you'd already see a similar wealth distribution to what we have now. Most would consume more- rather than invest- and it would only be a temporary fix.  It's a rarity to find people advocating for changing the system that creates inequality (the Fed currently being the biggest perp) instead of simply trying to redistribute the results of that system."
"Slightly higher wages (as paid by Costco, Starbucks, Ben&amp;Jerry's, etc) only work for certain business models. This is like first year business school stuff, man. Walmart is what's called a ""low cost leader"", and their success is absolutely dependent on their ability to keep their costs low, so that their prices will be lower than all of their competition. Low prices are pretty much the only reason they are competitive. If they paid a higher wage, they would lose this advantage, and could eventually fail."
"&gt; One man interviewed by Salon is making $8.90 after three years at Walmart. Other complaints include dirty working conditions and inadequate access to healthcare.   IANAL but I wouldn't think any of those would be sufficient cause to be ""protected""."
I'd suggest you check into a fairly recent book entitled [""The Careless Society: Community And Its Counterfeits""](http://www.amazon.com/Careless-Society-Community-Its-Counterfeits/dp/0465091261) by John McKnight (a ""lefty"" disciple of people like Saul Alinsky) who is director of the Community Studies Program at the Center for Urban Affairs and Policy Research at Northwestern University (i.e. hardly a hotbed of ""conservatives""). &gt;where we gave them an increasingly smaller share and wondered why they weren't getting ahead. Your correlation is misdirected. The chief reason for the ""flattening"" of wages has a lot MORE to do with economic fundamentals of monetary manipulation. (Look at any graph of wage growth... you will see an almost DIRECT change right around the time the dollar went OFF the Gold standard.) The reasons this impacts the lower classes (lower AND middle class) significantly more than the upper class are (oversimplified, but still) essentially: 1) the lower and middle classes have to conduct business in the form of dollar-based contracts, and chiefly derive income via selling their labor (something that is not easily multiplied) -- IOW their potential revenue streams are limited, and their wages are set in terms of dollars (which are being steadily and regularly, often very significantly, debased via inflation); even when they DO achieve ""cost of living"" increases in pay (to purportedly ""make up"" for inflation), said increases *always LAG* the inflation (by definition). 2) While the lower classes *may* have some debt (basically mortgages) that *might* ""benefit"" from the inflation (via being able to pay off the debt in later ""debased"" dollars) -- because of the lag factor mentioned above, the benefit is essentially negated -- in addition, the lower classes are not ""leveraging"" debt for productive investment; they are instead carrying ""consumption"" debt.
Jesus, talk about obstinate.  I did not say Equifax was Wall Street.  I called him a Wall Streeter.  He made a bunch of dough in a public company, on stock he overinflated, and insider trading.  I am not criticizing the wrong industry.  The whole financial sector plays by the same rules.
The research was comparing grocery chains in Manhattan, who all would have similar costs, and WF was the second cheapest.  It's not apples to apples if you're comparing prices at stores in locations that would have different costs of doing business. Of course things will be cheaper way out in the Bronx than in midtown Manhattan.
&gt;I want a guy who has spent 20 years in such a blue-collar job to be able to earn as much as a computer programmer who only graduated a couple of years ago.  So you want low skill jobs to pay more than high skill jobs based solely on seniority. Do some research into the Italian or Spanish economy. That's pretty much what you advocate. It's a terrible idea that would probably destroy the US economy.
The one financial reform we should have passed is to stop the conflict of interest rating agencies have:   They get paid by the very companies they are supposed to rate!  All it takes is a company to slip a little more in to get that higher rating. I've heard this is also how the BBB operates too.
Given that the Apple janitor is a contract worker, shouldn't the focus be on the company that actually pays her and not Apple?  My first job back in the late 80s was as a contractor, making just above the minimum wage as a data entry/office clerk.  I spent two years with them and they had training classes for their employees and vacations.  I would have liked for the New York Times to focus on their story as well; also, I think the comparison shouldn't be between Apple and Kodak but the difference economic environment they faced.  Kodak and they do everything model (even janitorial work) and Apple's decision to outsource everything else.
"I just read this article, and I have to say I am utterly baffled. One of the quotes:  &gt;""This week, senior executives at the investment bank convened a group of employees to try to stem any exodus, according to several people briefed on the meeting. Among the employees’ questions: why remain at a bank that treated its top executive so harshly?""  Here's what confuses me: if you are working at that level, probably making high 6 figures or more, why in the world would you even allow yourself to be quoted about how your little fee fees got hurt because someone got fired? For fuck's sake, these guys control billions of dollars, they earn millions, they got bailed out by the fucking government and walked away free as birds after almost completely destroying the economy, they live a cushy life at the top, yet they talk like a bunch of fucking 5-year olds who got their feelings hurt on the playground."
/r/personalfinance might be better.  Not really sure where this falls... this sub is more for just specific financial industry news and topics.   Here's the DOL page.  In all honesty, I'd imagine it'd be considered fair if the law only required him to pay you hourly for the work periods during the day so long as they expensed all your travel expenses.  Seems absurd to give you 24 hours of pay if you're going to go stay overnight somewhere that's already paid for by the employer and work a normal day.  http://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/whdfs53.htm
See if any of the funds they offer are index funds, which will generally have MUCH lower fees and which seem to perform as well as any of the actively managed funds in the same categories.
&gt; … Sycamore lined up financing from **UBS Group AG, Bank of America Corp.’s Merrill Lynch, Deutsche Bank AG, Credit Suisse Group AG, Royal Bank of Canada, Jefferies Group LLC, Wells Fargo &amp; Co. and Fifth Third Bank. Merrill Lynch and Deutsche Bank** …  &gt; Staples, meanwhile, got financial advice on the deal from **Barclays Plc and Morgan Stanley** …   Any banks in the world missing?
Personally, I'd like an comparison about the difference between the different 'houses' of Economic theory. Rothbardian Liberterianism, as argued by the Mises Inst, has some fantastic video-lectures, so I've been getting acquainted with them, but I'd like a good overview of the other side of that fence.
As an employee of an (apparently) different one, us consultants earn more revenue than the auditors.  Also, there is nothing flavour of the week about consulting... 3 of the Big4 are desperately trying to regain the consulting arms they sold off in the 2000s because of the perceived conflicts of interest after the Enron collapse.
If your gripe is with government fund allocation, that's a completely different conversation we can have. But don't come in here defending corporations for shitty business practices and poor treatment of employees. I'm much less concerned with what the government does with the money, than I am with the fact that a system of checks and balances exists to try and prevent corporations from acting like a bunch of cunts.
"When he wrote this I think there may have been greater interchangeability between workers, workers were perfectly competitive if you will.   I find that there is huge wage growth, in certain industries and with certain skills. This only impacts a limited number of people, with the majority of workers in fields that are not heavily valued.   Another avenue would be to look at the ""real"" wage. If wages are going up only 1-2%, but inflation was at negative 3-4%, then those workers wages were increasing at 4-6%.   I am not sure the gig economy is to blame. The gig economy would suggest that we are nowhere near full employment. How can people have time to have these gigs if they were gainfully employed already?   Another scenario is that we are not near full employment at all, that you have a large number of people who are reluctantly part time, supplementing their income with other jobs to make ends meet.   And I am sure that were Milton Friedman alive today, he would change his assumption to match reality. I wonder what wisdom he would have for us today."
&gt;Not everything is about marginal utility and trying to define people by their marginal utility is almost sociopathic.  This needs to be said more often.  Walmart earned $4B this quarter yet they pay their employees slave wages.  They could afford to pay every one of their employees an extra $3 per hour and still make huge profits.  That's a 25% raise.  Apple, to extend the comparison,  earned $8B yet pay their contractors slave wages.  Perhaps they should revise the ethics classes for business degrees and start teaching social responsibility as well.
I don't have a source for this, but intuitively more finance options could increase people's willingness to pay, which is akin to shifting the demand curve outwards, leading to an increase in price, all other things equal. Consider asking a variation of this question in /r/askeconomics for a better answer.
You ever go in a Verizon store?  Man, they're seedy, so it doesn't surprise me that they get commissions.  But really, do the salespeople at Staples or Best Buy get commissions?  That's a better comparison.  If someone knows tech they would work for HP or Dell selling to corporate customers, not some mall store.
"There's a point where splitting low activity subreddits becomes counterproductive, and I think to split ""finance problems"" from /r/finance would cross that line.  Career questions come up as least as frequently, if not more so than more legitimate finance questions, so I don't see the issue there."
I think a lot of research is about to get cited very soon.  I'll dump it here.  I have a full time job so I don't have a lot of time to dig it up; I'll let the researchers do the researching for now.  I'll get back at you when a compilation of research comes out.  My goal will be to provide the most up-to-date, global studies on gender interest levels for different career fields under the hypothesis that we will see that far fewer women are interested in tech, despite the development level or cultural background.    But, c'mon, let's be honest: All over the world men are the majority of those in tech.  That didn't happen in every single society in the history of humanity because there was not a gender bias for career fields.  If I need to cite a paper to admit there is validity to this guy's claim, then no amount of research will convince you that the bias is there.  It's like convincing Trump that climate change exists, he doesn't want to believe it, so he will ignore all of the evidence to the contrary and focus on the tiny exceptions.  Here is a little bit of research for thought, though:  http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0153857  &gt;Most importantly and contra predictions, we showed that economically developed and more gender equal countries have a lower overall level of mathematics anxiety, and yet a larger national sex difference in mathematics anxiety relative to less developed countries. Further, although relatively more mothers work in STEM fields in more developed countries, these parents valued, on average, mathematical competence more in their sons than their daughters.   As people get more economic choice, they tend to **separate** their profession based on their gender.  It's a bit paradoxical, but only if you assume that males and females have equal interest in all fields.  If you open your mind to the possibility that women and men have separate interests that are biological ingrained, then it makes a lot of sense.  If men and women are biologically predisposed to a certain career fields, giving them more choice will separate them into those fields.   More food for thought:  https://www.economist.com/news/business/21632512-worlds-most-female-friendly-workplaces-executive-suites-are-still-male-dominated
That's a very generic response that doesn't pertain to the article at all. How does adding entry level jobs undervalue someone's potential? It should give more people an opportunity to show their potential. If someone doesn't like the way corporate america is set up then deal with it, save up and go start your own company.
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://m.sfgate.com/business/networth/article/New-law-bans-California-employers-from-asking-12274431.php) reduced by 81%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; California employers can no longer ask job applicants about their prior salary and - if applicants ask - must give them a pay range for the job they are seeking, under a new state law that takes effect Jan. 1.  &gt; If a woman is paid less than a man doing the same job and a new employer bases her pay on her prior salary, gender discrimination can be perpetuated, the bill&amp;#039;s backers say.  &gt; The San Jose Unified School District said it needs to attract and retain educators and &amp;quot;In order to so, it needs the ability to ask applicants about their salary history.&amp;quot; The Western States Trucking Association said it &amp;quot;Effectively eliminates an employer&amp;#039;s ability to negotiate wage, as well as creates a new reason to sue.""   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/76dhxw/california_introduces_new_law_banning_employers/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~228343 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **employer**^#1 **bill**^#2 **salary**^#3 **state**^#4 **applicant**^#5"
"There is no ""shortage"", what there is is a lot of untalented unskilled fakers who think they can skate their way through an I.T. career after 4 years at college.  Because HR people can't tell the difference they have hired too many of the fakers and because management can't deal with the social differences that people who spend all day working with machines are going to have they have fired all of the true experts.  The business world brought this situation upon itself because of arrogance and ignorance and it deserves all of the suffering that has resulted.  Wages for high tech work have actually dropped by 50% over the last 10 years. If you folks want skilled computer workers to support your organizations again you need to increase average salaries by 200% and treat the experts with the respect we deserve."
&gt; Management consulting as a major?  Job.  &gt; Would minoring in CS be good enough? or for maximum aptitude should I major in it?  IDK.  I would dual major TBH.  Minor better than nothing.  Everyone (including bankers) value engineers over straight finance degree people, because engineering is harder and those graduates typically have higher IQs.  A 3.5 gpa electrical engineer major &gt; 3.8 gpa finance major.
Finally women in a male dominated industry are calling out what is fact. I have worked in finance all of my life and I have seen appalling acts of sexual discrimination/harrassment against women. I am happy to see the culture in Silicon Vally expose the truth.
"Okay I am not apart of Silicon Valley and do not know the culture but I don't want to jump to conclusions right away. How many female entrepreneurs are actually trying in Silicon Valley? There's a lot of talk about the amount of money but that means shit if 95% of entrepreneurs seeking funding are men.   If you told me, no, women are seeking funding just as much as men but receive nowhere near as much money as them then I'd instantly argue there's a problem. But these numbers sound a lot like the ""women make 70% of what men make!!!!"" number when we all can agree that that data is misleading as fuck and have filled a bunch of young girls heads with the idea that they will make less then what their male counterparts make.   I just want to make sure we have our facts straight. Regardless the anecdotes in the article are pretty bad."
"Except that they underreported the initial amount of people affected by this incentive program as evidence by this article we're all commenting on, which doesn't seem like an ""overcorrection"" to me.  Edit: Credit unions are generally a better option than for-profit banks.  Edit: I feel like saying ""some employees"" is a bit disingenuous considering an estimated 3.5 mil customers were impacted."