Interviewed with another state agency which here are the highlight:
- The main issue with this interview purely has to do with transportation. Two main failures of my part: (i) not getting the bus spot five minutes before the bus arrives and (ii) not anticipating that the taxi would not wait for me when I got off the bus. The taxi cab could have instructed the driver to call me and then I could have instructed him to wait as long I was being charged for it. Instead, the taxi cab driver did not call me and taxi cab left. It resulted in another taxi coming about 15 minutes late and for me not arriving to interview
- The big issue is always anticipate that the bus could arrive up to five minute early and do not expect it to show exactly at the scheduled time.
- Another issue during the interview was that I was required to give theoretical explanations to the interview problems. I had to theoretically set up and theoretically define customer service question. My answers were very orderly and sequential but I do not know what the panel specific critieria was met
- The written exercise was a piece of cake except my biggest concern is that I edited the letter to my expectations and even reworded specific sentences because I just do not feel that it convey the point of the letter. No real big changes letter but the scope of the edits that I made could have been outside the scope of the edits that the panel expected the applicant made.
- Overall, the big foul-up with this interview was the bus arriving three minutes early and having that screw up your entire interview schedule
NBC Reports reports
Nina Pham, the Dallas nurse who was infected with Ebola while caring for a Liberian man who died this month, has been upgraded to good condition, the National Institutes of Health said Tuesday.
Pham, 26, had been listed in fair condition since she was flown Thursday to a special NIH clinical studies unit in Maryland from Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital, where she and a second nurse tested positive for the virus after Thomas Eric Duncan died Oct. 8. The NIH said it would release no further information, but it said Pham was grateful “for everyone’s concerns and well wishes.”
The other nurse, Amber Vinson, 29, was being treated at Emory University Hospital near the headquarters of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta. Worldwide, the worst outbreak of the virus on record is believed to have killed more than 4,500 people and to have infected more than 9,000 others.”
So, the real fear that all of the Ebola might just be fear.. Fear, drummed up by crazy conservatives who want to cash on a vote.
But, we should very, very careful about this disease. It is better to be overly cautious than declare outright victory and let the disease come back the vengeance. Vigilance and precaution will prevent the disease from bring outright panic that the GOP would love to cash in at the polls.
Today. I had an interview with a law firm in Irvine. A few points to note:
* I need to properly prioritize that I need the documents that I bring to the interview. It was not my fault because I did try to call the print job into Staples, but nobody answered the phone. Also, the clerk was really busy and could not print the documents in a rapid period of time
* During the question and answer portion, I made some remarks trying to upsell my computer skills to the employer, but the employer did not seem to be impressed with the technical skills.
* I did a good job of understanding the nature of the job, but I seem put overemphasis on my skills
* It seemed the employer really wanted someone who would be very aggressive with collections and prefer an candidate with collection experience. I tried to give them an example of where I had to aggressive to request supporting data for contractor, but it is not the same
* Overall, I did a good job except for (i) not have the printed documents on time, (ii) not having the proper workplace illustration for dealing with collections, and (iii) overemphasizing my technical skills when the employer wanted somebody who was strong collections. On point three, I do note that I do not really have an aggressive personality for collections because if I did, I would already have a job by now.,
The Acton Institute made a good point on excessive minimum wage
“here’s something almost charming about people in American who champion socialism. Yes, their economic views are naive and destructive. And yes most people (though especially the poor) would be much worse off if their vision for “progress” was actually implemented. But it’s hard to be too concerned when they are, at heart, really just capitalists who like to play political dress up.
Consider one of their favorite causes, a $20 minimum wage. In their most recent party platform, the Freedom Socialist Party advocated for raising the minimum wage to $20 an hour. Naturally, you might assume that the Freedom Socialist Party would be a great place to work for since the minimum pay you’d received is $20 an hour, an annual salary of $40,000 per year. But that assumption would be based on their applying their socialist principles to themselves. In reality, of course, their wages are based on the tenets of free enterprise.”
However, the Acton Institute is probably going to tell you that there is no minimum wage. The minimum wage is just that a minimum wage. $20.00 is insane amount for a minimum. In my opinion, the minimum wage of $9.00 in California is a decent minimum wage and it should go up to $10.55 by 2017.
But, $20.00 is nuts. How do you expect companies to make a profit with that type of income without causing massive wage inflation. There is such a thing of suppression of workers wage which a lot of companies engage in. But there is a point where the wage suppression is just a myth of far leftists (far to the left of myself) and does interfere with a business to make a profit and have liquidity to pays its workers.
This New York Times editorial makes an excellent point that our country on the road to plutocracy
“Beyond its durable imprint on American civic life, the Watergate scandal of four decades ago left its mark on political language. For one thing, that suffix will not go away. Commit a major folly, and you can count on some headline writer describing it as Whatever-gate. Forty years later, investigations into wrongdoing by public officials still routinely yield the Watergate-era chestnut: What did so-and-so know, and when did he know it? Americans are well aware, too, that they would be wise to “follow the money,” abiding words bequeathed by the shadowy figure Deep Throat in “All the President’s Men,” the 1976 Watergate-themed film.
“Follow the money” was sound advice in the 1970s. It is even more sensible these days, when cash courses through American politics like a flash flood.
“Watergate” was a catchword for a multitude of government and political sins. At its core were secret, and illicit, contributions to the 1972 re-election campaign of President Richard M. Nixon. Some Nixon retainers went to prison. Also, more than a dozen American corporations were found guilty of criminal behavior, typically for having showered barrels of dollars on the campaign in the hope — no, expectation — that their largess would translate into favors from the administration. As can be seen in the latest video documentary from Retro Report, tracing the money side of life from Watergate to today, much has changed. Oh, the cash still flows, and a fair amount of it continues to be secret. But what was deemed ill-gotten loot 40 years ago is now legally accessible, countenanced by no less than the United States Supreme Court. And the money no longer rains down on presidential and congressional campaigns by the barrelful. By the truckload is more like it.
Big political scandals have often inspired laws to address whatever went wrong. Watergate was no exception. The same went for lesser situations that were eyebrow-raising all the same; the trading of campaign contributions for sleepovers in the Clinton White House was one example. With almost every cycle of wrongdoing and attempted reform, Americans have had to absorb a sometimes-bewildering array of political terms, like “soft money” versus “hard money,” or PAC — it stands for political action committee, in case you forgot — versus “super PAC.” They have also had to come to grips with Supreme Court rulings that do not always seem consistent, one with another, on what sort of behavior is kosher.
The prevailing spirit now is embodied in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. That 5-to-4 decision by the Supreme Court in 2010 tossed aside decades of legislative restrictions, freeing corporations and unions to spend as much as they wished. Bans on direct contributions to candidates’ campaigns remained in force, and, of course, anything that smacked of a blatant bribe was taboo. But companies and unions wishing to make their political druthers known, and to encourage others to share their views, were suddenly empowered to open their wallets as wide as they could. That allowed new independent-expenditure-only committees, better known as super PACs, to spend vast sums. Their influence is immense. Though super PACs are supposed to keep at arm’s length from candidates’ campaigns, the relationship in many instances seems more fingernail length.
Six months ago, the Supreme Court took its Citizens United decision further by opening the gates to yet more campaign cash. In McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, it struck down longstanding caps on what an individual may contribute to all federal candidates, collectively, in any two-year election cycle. Under the guidance of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., the court has tended to move incrementally on divisive social and political issues. This was evidenced in the Citizens United and McCutcheon rulings, and it raises questions of whether campaign restrictions that still survive, including limits on how much may be donated directly to a given candidate, may someday be swept aside as well”
We are really on the road to plutocracy and we already there.
So this week, I interviewed with three employers. Here are the highlights that I noted
* Staffing Company (Anaheim) – I interviewed for this company on Wednesday. The problem with the staffing company is that I lost my birth certificate and had to reschedule the interview. At the interview, I had to wait 45 minutes to interview with the person. The company made me fill out a written application which is difficult for me. When I talked to the person on the phone, I requested to fill out the application electronically. By the time that I got to the interview site, I had to fill out a lengthy application and I had to fill in certain portion of the application. Results: Nothing happened (Waste of Time)
* State Interview (State Department in Norwalk, CA)- I applied for the state department in Norwalk, CA. The interview went like any other state interview. I did well, but I do not think that I made the upper-tier on candidates. I need to focus on making my respones two to three minute
* Private Company (Santa Ana, CA)- Filled lengthy application. Problem with employer was two things: (i) I lost my resume and all of my other supplemental documents on the bus and (ii) I had difficulty on answering the Gap issues. I need to get my DOR consuelor help with answering the gap issue even though I had been working for four months for my landlord.
Well, it looks like Tom Cotton make another dumb gaffe as stated by Talking Points Memo
“Republican Tom Cotton said during an Arkansas U.S. Senate debate on Tuesday that “Obamacare nationalized the student loan industry.”
The first-term congressman added, “That’s right, Obamacare grabbed money to pay for its own programs and took that choice away from you.”
The reality is less simple. Obamacare was paired with a bill that made significant changes to the federal student loan program, largely cutting banks out as middle-men between the government and recipients of the loans. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that the changes would save $58 billion over 10 years, about $8.7 billion of which would be used to fund Obamacare programs.
Of the remaining savings, $36 billion would go to higher Pell grants for lower-income college students, $3 billion for historically black and minority-serving colleges and $10.3 billion to reduce the deficit, as noted by the Washington Post’s fact-checker”
This type of talk is used to persuade backwaters GOP voters that Obama is doing a bad thing. In reality, Mr. Cotton spreads such falsehoods because the backwater GOP votes want to hear that appeal to their common beliefs and not the truth.
Until common sense is knocked into the backwater GOP voters, they will continue to be believe falsehoods spread by the GOP spin machine.