It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
So, what you're saying is she refuses to work in any field aside from the one she was trained for, and then only if they meet her salary requirements. Did I understand you correctly?
Originally posted by mutatismutandis
Id like to know what country this person is living in. My wife has been seeking a job in her field for over a year now. She has extremely extensive experience, and had atleast 100 interviews. You want to know the real reason she hasn't gained employment? Its not because she's unqualified...
Its because in her field they've extensively cleaned house for the long term employees so they can hire young blood in at cheaper pay! They would rather train someone with no experience, then pay for someone that knows the field.
It's a good thing you had plenty of resources to fall back on unlike many others, otherwise you're wife wouldn't have the luxury of being quite so selective about her employment options.
This isn't just happening to her, its happening all across the country! If I hadn't had a substantial enough income, it would have been our home taken as well.
If their situation is similar to your wife's, and they're actually choosing not to work, I'm sure he'd be glad to.
Id like to see this person come here to nevada where we have the highest unemployment and highest forclosure rates and tell theses poor people that lost their homes a have gone years now without jobs that its their fault because they're all lazy!
You make me sick...
Just what constitutes the “bad” kind of insider trading? This is generally understood to be trading on information originating within a company that could have a material effect on the share price had it been publicly known. The law applies not only to insiders—employees and directors—but also to any outsiders to whom inside information is disclosed.
As precise as this definition may sound, it rests on some very shaky concepts. First, the source of a particular piece of information isn’t always clear. Second, how is materiality established? Suppose a firm is expected to win a particular contract and an insider learns that it has been lost. If the contract amounts to 1 percent of a firm’s annual revenue, is that material? Ten percent? And how is a defendant supposed to establish that a particular fact was “widely known” at some particular time?
We see that insider-trading regulations are subjective and arbitrary, rivaling antitrust laws in this respect. It is no wonder that Congress never defined insider trading and that the SEC resisted defining it for many years; the courts have had to make up the rules as cases arose. Every so often someone like Martha Stewart is thrown to the lions, drawing cheers from the jealous and spreading fear to successful and therefore high-profile managers.
Vagueness and subjectivity make insider trading well-nigh impossible to police. Difficult as it is to decide whether a particular transaction violated the rules, it is impossible to police nontrading. What if an insider had planned to sell but, having heard inside good news, decides to hold instead? Insider gains from such inaction could be very real but impossible to detect or punish.
Originally posted by Redwing48
So, what you're saying is she refuses to work in any field aside from the one she was trained for, and then only if they meet her salary requirements. Did I understand you correctly?
Originally posted by mutatismutandis
Id like to know what country this person is living in. My wife has been seeking a job in her field for over a year now. She has extremely extensive experience, and had atleast 100 interviews. You want to know the real reason she hasn't gained employment? Its not because she's unqualified...
Its because in her field they've extensively cleaned house for the long term employees so they can hire young blood in at cheaper pay! They would rather train someone with no experience, then pay for someone that knows the field.
This doesn't show a lack of jobs, just a lack of the type of jobs she's looking for. If you both were hungry enough, and had a lot of bills to pay, she'd do whatever type of work that was available like millions of others in this country do everyday.
It's a good thing you had plenty of resources to fall back on unlike many others, otherwise you're wife wouldn't have the luxury of being quite so selective about her employment options.
This isn't just happening to her, its happening all across the country! If I hadn't had a substantial enough income, it would have been our home taken as well.
If their situation is similar to your wife's, and they're actually choosing not to work, I'm sure he'd be glad to.
Id like to see this person come here to nevada where we have the highest unemployment and highest forclosure rates and tell theses poor people that lost their homes a have gone years now without jobs that its their fault because they're all lazy!
You make me sick...edit on 7-10-2011 by Redwing48 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by DragonTattooz
Well, the good news is that this tool will never be elected president. I hope I run across him someday, I have a few choice words for him.
Originally posted by babybunnies
Originally posted by DragonTattooz
Well, the good news is that this tool will never be elected president. I hope I run across him someday, I have a few choice words for him.
Actually, I'd say he has a pretty good chance. FOX News are starting to tout him as the nominee. Once the FOX News Republican faithful start to listen, he will increase past Perry and Romney in the polls.
Even Bill O'Reilly is predicting that this guy will be the nominee.