cabiness42

The problem is that fast food work requires no advanced skill. The woman who has worked their 10 years is no more skilled than someone who has worked there 10 weeks. If you mandate higher wages for experience, the employers will simply respond by replacing everybody that has been there 2+ years and hasn't advanced into management. It's not like most other industries, where there is value in having employees with long tenures.

Such a bizarre day at work. I spend a lot of time working with data from the previous day, except that for today, the "previous day" is September 30.

Well, they ARE trying to win elections--they're just doing a very poor job of it. I would have thought the Lugar/Murdouck fiasco would have taught them a lesson but it doesn't seem that way.

Atrocious against lefties isn't a big deal for the Sox. They seem to be cornering the market on lefty starters so their hitters won't be facing very many.

I had already been trying to find a new job in the Indy or South Bend areas for family reasons. This just gives me more incentive to find something.

Kentucky accusing others of being dirty. Now I've seen everything.

Yes, there definitely is irony in that.

Just passed the House 285-143. Only 87 Republican votes.

I don't know for sure. I don't know the chain of official notification between the President signing the bill and the agency heads getting the instruction to open. We have a call-in line that is generally used to provide operating status during inclement weather. We've been told that it will be updated by 5am each morning as to whether or not we are open for business. I guess I have to set my alarm tomorrow morning and call in to find out. Funny thing is that, during this entire shutdown, tomorrow is the first weekday that my wife, son, and daughter were all off from school on the same day and we were going to do a fall color tour of Southern Indiana. I was almost hoping the deal wouldn't happen until after midnight.

Funding bill passed by Senate. 81 Senators voted in favor 18 Senators Assholes voted against

I've heard Boehner say a lot of things. I'll believe it when it actually comes up for a vote. I'm sure the Tea Party wing is working overtime to try to find a way to avoid it.

The Senate has reached a deal. I've yet to see any sign that this will pass in the House.

No, I meant that it will remain the same because the people measuring the change in the unemployment rate aren't working!

No it won't. Unemployment will remain exactly the same as long as the government is shut down.

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article/mlb/major-...p;vkey=news_mlb

Fitch has put the US on notice regarding its credit rating.

Isn't a quorum 50%? If so, the 20 most moderate Republicans could say they'll go along with that, then sneak back and join the Democrats to pass something while they're gone.

The dream of a Bradley v Bradley World Cup matchup just got smashed to pieces.

2003 NLCS Game 6 on ESPN Classic right now. DLee just tied it in the 8th.

No I don't think a 13% growth in employment for a 68% increase in population is unreasonable. That said, regardless of what level you think is reasonable, I'm telling you that we could easily trim 5% off the rolls without any loss of service. Or, if you prefer, we could reallocate those 5% to improve the level of service.

That table didn't mention that. I know the US population increased about 72% from 1960-2010, but I don't think that necessarily justifies a 72% increase in government employment.

http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/d...ent-since-1962/ Lowest number of civilian employees since 1962 was 2.501 million in 1964. Current level is 2.820 million, which is 12.8% higher than in 1962. Lowest level during Reagan's presidency was 2.825 million in 1982, so we are still a touch below the biggest year under Reagan. Now, I can certainly tell you from personal experience that my agency could shed 5% of its staff without any noticeable loss in performance, and I'm guessing just about every agency, save maybe a few health, security, and defense related agencies, could do the same. You could also reclassify a lot of positions to lower grade levels and save another 5%. I don't buy the argument that government can't be leaner, but neither party is interested in doing it the right way. I can also tell you from personal experience that a family of four with a gross income in the $75-100K range pays between 5-6% of gross income in Federal income tax, so I don't buy the argument that taxes on the middle class are too high.

Something I would love to see Fangraphs do: Calculate the win probability for the Cubs if Alou makes that catch, compared to the win probability when he doesn't. I wouldn't think it moved the meter more than one percent or so, given everything else that still had to happen for the Cubs to lose that series.

Try to not compare the most corrupt government in the world to the rest of the government entities. That would be a good start.