Not really. For low skilled jobs that don't require much English, illegals are going to be as good as locals. Maybe even better because locals who are any good are mostly going to move on to better opportunities.
Yeah this. And warehouse work is all appified and can be configured in any language.
Any American working in an Amazon warehouse will be jumping at the chance to get out of there. So turnover would be really high. Same with delivery stuff, I don't think most Americans would enjoy a job where they don't even get a pee break.
As for legal stuff, I'm sure they'd use intermediaries to cover their ass.
Using intermediaries to hire illegally makes it worse from a liability perspective. Amazon is too big and hires too many people to get away with “oh, we used agencies in all of our markets and audited nine of them and we’re shocked that they didn’t do diligence”. All it would take is one disgruntled hiring manager. And Amazon doesn’t have many gruntled ones.
At the scale of Amazon, law enforcement is no longer bound to the law, it's bound to politics.
Your average local employer with a few dozen people? If he fucks around enough to draw in the attention of OSHA, he will find out. Easy prey and without political connections he's toast.
But Amazon? This company is by direct head count the third-largest employer in the US, second-largest in both the US and worldwide if one excludes militaries [1]. Amazon is frankly too large to enforce laws against and so is similar-sized Walmart (who has been able to extort the government into subsidizing their poor wages with food stamps), too many livelihoods depend on the existence of the company.
IMHO, a lot of the Big Tech and F500 companies should be outright broken up. When a company grows so large that laws cannot be enforced or, worse, laws get willfully ignored because it's cheaper to risk the occasional fine and bad press, eventually the rule of law itself suffers.
How could it make it worse to have someone else to blame? Seems like it could only be better, or at worst exactly the same as not using the intermediary.
IANAL but I believe that gets you into conspiracy territory while also demonstrating that the intent was to break the law. At Amazon’s scale there would have to be a policy to do this, and discovery on that would be a nightmare.
I know this thread is dead, but I should have elaborated. The quality of the individual worker is as good or better with an illegal immigrant, but it's a legal nightmare. If you pay decent wages and have decent working conditions, you don't have to get into that shadiness. There's a reason awful jobs, e.g. roofing, are filled with hard working illegal immigrants and meth heads.
Defacto dictatorship now, but even when there were elections he wasn't exactly popular. In the 2015 parliamentary elections (2 members per district) he actually placed second behind another member of his own party. He became popular during the 2018 crisis then kept proving to be inept.
I really really hate code review now. My colleagues will have their LLMs generate thousands of lines of boiler plate with every pattern and abstraction under the sun. A lazy programmer use to do the bare minimum and write not enough code. That made review easy. Error handling here, duplicate code there, descriptive naming here, and so on. Now a lazy programmer generates a crap load of code cribbed from "best practice" tutorials, much of it unnecessary and irrelevant for the actual task at hand.
I am currently on a team of consultants. Ironically, most of us have more institutional knowledge than the client due to internal churn. Seems like every few years they try to cut our utilization in favor of some off-shore company that's "cheaper", the project blows up, then we have to jump in and save some middle manager's job.
Somehow I missed his passing last year. Harper's was very important to me as a teenager stuck in the cultural wasteland of suburbia. Smart, critical, and often funny, it showed me writing didn't have to suck.
I was trying to come up with a descriptor when I found an obit:
"Lewis was the last of a breed that never had many members to begin with: the patrician liberal."
Theoretically, the motor would be most useful on the climbs of the mountain stages. On the flats a couple of hundred grams don't matter, especially when most of the leaders are hanging back in the group anyway.
That said, bikes can already be made under UCI weight minimums of 6.8kg. Yet from what I've seen, most tour bikes are in the 7-7.5kg range.
The incentive to use PEDs is almost certainly higher in other professional sports than cycling. For athletes in leagues like the MLB, NFL, NBA etc. the average career is quite short and you essentially need to make all of the money for your entire life in 3-4 yeas. Plus the step function of being in the league and making millions vs just missing a roster spot and making almost nothing is so extreme you'd be foolish not to take PEDs to give yourself the best chance at a payday.
Why is pay off greater in cycling than other sports? Salary of the top riders? Compared to say NBA players, pro cyclist make relatively little. Tadej Pogacar (best and top paid cyclist) makes about $8M (euros) in salary per year. Steph Curry (highest paid) NBA player makes $55M (dollars) in salary per year.
Basketball isn’t as demanding physically as cycling. You need to be fit but not to the extreme degree cycling demands. I would expect doping to be most beneficial in sports where pure physicality is needed. Marathon, triathlon, track running.
You can reasonably assume that some NBA players are using PEDs. However, the effect is different. To be an NBA basketball player you need to have several attributes, such as height and hand-eye coordination, that cannot be affected by PEDs AFAIK. If basketbally are using PEDs, it is probably to recover faster, which means coming back from injury or training more. More training can lead to a higher level of skill, but it's a second order effect. It's not like cycling where, for example, EPO directly affects performance on the bike.
yes, but those epo-esque drugs aren't exactly trivial to use these days. the testing process makes the doping process much more difficult for drugs that have these direct performance benefits.
recovery help is where it's at these days i expect, in most sports.
have you seen the physiques and workloads that nba/nhl/mlb players are dealing with these days? these athletes have more incentive than cyclists to dope ($$$), and the testing in those sports is a joke.
there are obvious performance benefits for traditional endurance sports, but the testing infrastructure is pretty robust and the financial incentives are much less than those big team sports. it's harder to dope (and get away with it) and the financial pressure is less.
I totally believe that a lot of basketball/football/baseball players take something. But the effect won’t be as important as in cycling or marathon or 100 m sprint where you need pure physicality.
The effect doesn't really matter. If it gives you a 2% edge, and you don't take it, then you're 2% off the top. That may be the difference between having a career at all and thinking about what could have been at your desk job.
Sure, there's no drugs that will turn you into prime Messi. But there are drugs that will let Messi play like prime Messi for 90 minutes, 3 times a week, 48 weeks a year, which is incredibly valuable.
The "pay off" the commenter is talking about is the results in the sport, not the monetary gain. Cyclists are like the engines in an F1 car. Not saying there is no skill involved, but any skill differences are irrelevant if the other guy is putting out 100W more than you over 200km. So it really comes down to raw power to weight ratio.
That's not the same in basketball or most other sports. You can't just jump on gear, lift weights and suddenly become Michael Jordan. Plenty of people could beat Pogacar if they could use anything they could, though, just like manufacturers could build an F1 car that would dominate every race if they could circumvent the rules.
Because beside some skill needed in going fast during descends at 70-80-90km/h without dying (which is not easy but not extremely difficult either), a cyclist is basically an engine. Most other sports need physical fitness (speed, stamina, strength, endurance etc) AND coordination skills, and the latter is not easy to improve chemically.
I could agree with this. You do need some physical gifts as far as muscular endurance beyond the capacity of most but after that, its a very limited set of movements performed over and over again for hours. Plus a massive amount of will power and pain endurance. No amount of chemicals will turn even most gifted people into an NFL athlete.
Not money. It's highly specialized in what physically benefits it, so even a small doping on that specific physical attribute leads to significant advantage.
