Amazon Rising

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Blossom

Thank you! We are learning just how fierce. Right now a production job would be great. He worked at a factory for the last 5 years so he has plenty of experience. He was the guy who they could put in any position on the line because he knew how to do them all. They moved him around to fill in as people left or missed work. So any factory work he is a quick learner. He applied to some Customer service jobs as well as he did Job Control in the Air Force for about 3 years before they contracted the position out to civilians. Right now he is falling back on HVAC helper work he has 4 years of experience on to pay bills.

Oh, man that is a serious resume.
It may take a while to find the right job but with that kind of real world experience the company with the right fit for the degree is going to jump at him. I didn't much recruiting at the day job but the few times we did the experienced veterans always jumped to the top of the wishlist. Partly because of the "other duties as assigned" freewheeling aspects of the job but also because of the value of mature social skills.
Hang in there, you'll get there.
(And I can appreciate the desire to be close to elderly parents.)
G'luck!

[Blossom]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Oh, man that is a serious resume.
It may take a while to find the right job but with that kind of real world experience the company with the right fit for the degree is going to jump at him. I didn't much recruiting at the day job but the few times we did the experienced veterans always jumped to the top of the wishlist. Partly because of the "other duties as assigned" freewheeling aspects of the job but also because of the value of mature social skills.
Hang in there, you'll get there.
(And I can appreciate the desire to be close to elderly parents.)
G'luck!

Thank you! He was in the military for 9 1/2 years and would have stayed in had they not civilianized his career field. He did ground radio maintenance which I guess now would be outdated then they switched him to Job Control which later they contracted out. He a hard worker but the job market has changed and we are having to relearn it all. Everything here is done online so the resume is the most important thing and now he finally has a more modern one so hopefully something will turn up soon.

[ProfCrash]

The government retirement has changed to a 401 K plan now.

[JSWolf]

Speaking of evil, Target is evil. They alow people with automatic weapons to be in the stores and to congregate in the parking lot and when mothers armed with strollers and signs try to protest, Target ejects them from the parking lot. Target's excuse for this is they don't want the mothers causing a distraction. But I think allowing people to roam Target with dangerous weapons is a lot more distracting then a mother with a baby and a sign.

[sirmaru]

Originally Posted by Blossom

Thank you! He was in the military for 9 1/2 years and would have stayed in had they not civilianized his career field. He did ground radio maintenance which I guess now would be outdated then they switched him to Job Control which later they contracted out. He a hard worker but the job market has changed and we are having to relearn it all. Everything here is done online so the resume is the most important thing and now he finally has a more modern one so hopefully something will turn up soon.

See this link lower down on the page:

http://www.opm.gov/retirement-servic...ervice-credit/

If you deposit 3% of military basic pay, you can receive FERS credit for military time served if hubby gets a Federal Civil Service job. CSRS retirement has slightly different rules.

Plus, the Federal Government Civil Service may have jobs open similar to what he did in the military. Again, those jobs are not advertised. Just have him visit the installations to see the job and test postings. In addition, many hirers in Fed employment tend to favor vets in their decisions.

If he is 40 now, he could retire at 60 with 30 years credited after the deposit. There is no way any private industry job could match that. Plus, vacation and sick benefits cannot be matched anywhere.

PS: I just watched that Amazon Rising Show on my DVR and it validates everything I thought about them for consumer benefits. My only regret is that I purchased a Samsung Galaxy s5 phone in April and now won't be able to buy the Amazon Fire phone until my 2 year contract runs out on the s5. However, I did purchase the s5 from Amazon.

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Your bias about our bias is biased.
So it goes.

To be fair, you can't reduce his point to a self-cancelling circuit involving impossible standards of objectivity. This was his actual point:

Originally Posted by MattW

Folks here on MobileRead sure are a one-sided bunch when it comes to Amazon. . . .
Matt

If Mobile Read had been named IHeartAmazon.com, then I wouldn't be surprised that FJTorres responded to the JSWolf's question about what Rowling, King and Patterson actually said by making assertions about what they could have said and then condemning them for things they didn't actually say. Then I wouldn't be amazed at how frequently we attribute positions and tactics -- particularly shoddy positions and cheap tactics -- to other members based largely on moo-hanking brand loyalty.

But because this is an international forum dedicated to the appreciation of all ereader and ebook tech, I'm disappointed when members are judged by the degree to which they support one particular company.

It would be more fun to engage in debates on MR if we applauded people for the strength of their arguments rather than their support for a single platform, company or product. Some of us make compelling arguments for Amazon and various iterations of Kindles; others make equally compelling arguments against them.

The counterpoint of arguments is what interests me in a place like this. If I wanted to get into tough-offs with the enemies of my home team, I'd join a football forum. In a place like that, reflexive team loyalty is anticipated (if not enforced).

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

To be fair, you can't reduce his point to a self-cancelling circuit involving impossible standards of objectivity. This was his actual point:



If the Mobile Read had been named IHeartAmazon.com, then I wouldn't be surprised that FJTorres responded to the JSWolf's question about what Rowling, King and Patterson actually said by making assertions about what they could have said and then condemning them for things they didn't actually say. Then I wouldn't be amazed at how frequently we attribute positions and tactics -- particularly shoddy positions and cheap tactics -- to other members based largely on moo-hanking brand loyalty.

But because this is an international forum dedicated to the appreciation of all ereader and ebook tech, I'm disappointed when members are judged by the degree to which they support one particular company.

It would be more fun to engage in debates on MR if we applauded people for the strength of their arguments rather than their support for a single platform, company or product. Some of us make compelling arguments for Amazon and various iterations of Kindles; others make equally compelling arguments against them.

The counterpoint of arguments is what interests me in a place like this. If I wanted to get into tough-offs with the enemies of my home team, I'd join a football forum. In a place like that, reflexive team loyalty is anticipated (if not enforced).

To be fair, DiapDealer's response was to someone who was actually kinda passing judgment:

Originally Posted by MattW

Folks here on MobileRead sure are a one-sided bunch when it comes to Amazon.

[...]

And that's why this thread goes on for page after page, one person after another patting each other on the back, reassuring each other that Amazon is great and noble (and, by proxy, so are we) and everybody else just a sore loser in this wonderful new world of technology.

Matt

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

To be fair, DiapDealer's response was to someone who was actually kinda passing judgment:

Exactly so.

He began and ended his post with judgmental generalizations (based on observations that confirmed his bias) concerning the mindset and biases of those in this thread who came down on the side of "not being healthily critical enough of Amazon.".

I tire of the mentality that support is blind brand loyalty--that my "defense" of Amazon in this instance couldn't possibly be the result of careful consideration. That criticism itself implies some higher degree of objectivity in this matter.

My stance was summarily dismissed as brand loyalty. It pissed me off, so I dismissed right back. *shrug*

[fjtorres]

My position isn't pro Amazon or even pro-indie so don't put words in my mouth.
My position is pro cheap books.

(And pro cheap devices. I'm no fan of the FireTV or the Fire Phone. And it was years before I bought a Kindle (for my mother). My primary reader is still a Sony T1.)

I'm against Agency and price fixing.
I'm against predatory contracts abusing and demoralizing authors.
I'm not against tradpub per-se, but the Manhattan mafia makes it hard to be anything but against them.

Don't like my positions?
Challenge them or ignore them, I don't care either way.

But don't think you know me or anything about me or pretend to project your perceptions on me.

Carry on.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

My position isn't pro Amazon or even pro-indie so don't put words in my mouth.
My position is pro cheap books.

(And pro cheap devices. I'm no fan of the FireTV or the Fire Phone. And it was years before I bought a Kindle (for my mother). My primary reader is still a Sony T1.)

I'm against Agency and price fixing.
I'm against predatory contracts abusing and demoralizing authors.
I'm not against tradpub per-se, but the Manhattan mafia makes it hard to be anything but against them.

...agreed! Excellent post.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by Blossom

...as he did Job Control in the Air Force for about 3 years before they contracted the position out to civilians.

Originally Posted by Blossom

Thank you! He was in the military for 9 1/2 years and would have stayed in had they not civilianized his career field.

Air Force

...oh well, I guess that counts as serving in the military

[ProfCrash]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Speaking of evil, Target is evil. They alow people with automatic weapons to be in the stores and to congregate in the parking lot and when mothers armed with strollers and signs try to protest, Target ejects them from the parking lot. Target's excuse for this is they don't want the mothers causing a distraction. But I think allowing people to roam Target with dangerous weapons is a lot more distracting then a mother with a baby and a sign.

Target has to follow the laws of the States and Country it is in. Some States allow people to carry fire arms everywhere and in stores. Target has little that they can do when people are following the law. It is not Target's fault, or Starbucks a few years back, that some folks decided to shop for Oreos carrying semi-automatic rifles and hand guns.

I am not sure that protests with guns are a good thing. It sounds dangerous to me.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by ProfCrash

I am not sure that protests with guns are a good thing. It sounds dangerous to me.

I oppose open carry; but fully support concealed carry. Some monkeys pack

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Don't like my positions?
Challenge them or ignore them, I don't care either way. But don't think you know me or anything about me or pretend to project your perceptions on me.

1. The problem is when you attribute your assumptions and even your words to people and publications with whom you disagree. You do that a lot.

2. The "you don't know me defense" is strangely personal in a conversation like this. I've seen it here before, and what I've noticed is that it's frequently made by people who are themselves in the habit of making assumptions -- often in previous posts in the same thread -- about knowing other people's unstated motives. We criticize in others what we fail to recognize in ourselves.

Beyond that, what's unsurprising is that complaints about others' comments on the recurrence of Amazon cheerleading issue from the same people who defend Amazon aggressively on every thread. If you're not a cheerleader, then you needn't defend yourself against the irrelevant, since you're already who you are and, in your words (roughly), the rest of us "don't know you" in any absolute sense.

The depressing thing is that you're smart and informed and make a lot of excellent points. You don't need to infer shadiness on the part of a person or publication in order to win a debate.

[TimW]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

My position isn't pro Amazon or even pro-indie so don't put words in my mouth.
My position is pro cheap books.

(And pro cheap devices. I'm no fan of the FireTV or the Fire Phone. And it was years before I bought a Kindle (for my mother). My primary reader is still a Sony T1.)

I'm against Agency and price fixing.
I'm against predatory contracts abusing and demoralizing authors.
I'm not against tradpub per-se, but the Manhattan mafia makes it hard to be anything but against them.

Don't like my positions?
Challenge them or ignore them, I don't care either way.

But don't think you know me or anything about me or pretend to project your perceptions on me.

Carry on.

I'm pro-Amazon in cases where our interests coincide. In this case, Amazon wants to retain the ability to discount. I agree with that. I don't even insist on cheap pricing. As long as pricing is a result of unfettered free market forces, that's fine. I can choose to buy or wait. If I had to label my position, it's anti-cartel.