Posts by Thomas Davis4

If I may jump in, this whole discussion regarding Generation Z has actually been quite substantive, and the quality of the debate has been solid. Would anyone have the inclination to clear out the last 10 or 15 pages? A significant number of people here have expressed a desire to see this thread evolve and deepen. It might be worth a quick cleanup just to let the conversation move forward. Only if there’s time and the will to do it, of course.

Jonathan Barnes5 said:What a waste of time... I read these posts and just lose faith...

Babb, you still there?

I honestly can't tell if anyone here has ever actually played a sport...

Apparently, you have. 😁

Listen, he’ll get to the head coach and say, "Don't pick me, I'm not in form."

If the coach is too blind to see it himself—if he fails to notice his player is an absolute disaster and then goes to the media publicly complaining that the guy isn't performing, that he's lost his confidence, and that he's questioning whether he even wants to play for the national team anymore—then yeah. Then he'll step up for the good of the team and admit his confidence is at zero, that he's mentally broken, and that the fans are tearing him apart and putting too much pressure on him.

Who would ever go pro at the highest level if they thought or reasoned in such a retarded way?

It isn't a retarded way of thinking; it's a professional one. Aside from sports, that kind of mindset is used in major corporations all the time. An air traffic controller is a professional who does his job to the best of his ability for a paycheck. If I'm having a bad day, my confidence tanks, or I hit a psychological low, I'm going to tell the shift supervisor that I can't perform properly and ask to be pulled from the roster so someone else can take over. I can't allow my own decline to jeopardize the rest of the team.

If Babb is truly a notorious idiot along with his group of buffoons in the coaching staff, then the player should have just said he wasn't ready to play, and that's that.

Once a player stops believing in himself, he's done... amen... end of story.
A player can be in poor form... he can even get cut by his club... but he can never stop believing in himself and his own talent.

That is exactly what Alilovic did publicly in the media, but it seems we have a shortage of literate people here who can actually read and process that.

Alilovic has completely bottomed out. He doesn't believe in himself, thinks he's failed, and feels he isn't bringing anything to the national team that he doesn't already bring to his club. He has stated four times now that he's considering retiring. You should thank a player like that, and then try to get the others back on their feet as soon as possible.

It's no wonder we aren't winning anything under Ciro and Line when nobody monitors the players' mental state or knows how to motivate them. A player has to give everything. How can he give everything when he's completely sunk? When he's essentially checked out.

Paul Jones7 said:An athlete doesn't react like that. An athlete steps out there and gives it everything they've got. They aren't going to play coach. Besides, nobody else should be doing that either; such an approach just leads to disaster.

And Babić isn't the reason we lost the semifinals, or why we struggled against France.

Babić isn't a coach; he's a joke. Honestly, even a local politician back home could do a better job than him.

It’s not about "playing coach," for God's sake. If Luka Modrić feels off or knows he can't give 100%, he tells the coach, and then the coach makes the call regarding the game plan.

We're looking at a whole spectrum of options here. A good performance can lift a player up, or it can completely drain and exhaust them. You might end up with a good result because the player performed well, or maybe they played terribly but the team dragged them along. Or perhaps they were bad simply because they failed to do their job. In any scenario, the responsibility lies with the coach.

If you have a limited roster and you force a player into the game, you own the consequences.

Samuel Walker7 said:It sounds stupid, but could Mirko rec say, "the national team would be better defended if he stepped up"... Can the players step in here? Maybe some of the coaching staff—Venio, Pero, Matosevic, Balic?

Why does the public see this guy in goal as such a total liability?

Where is Kopljar acting like a captain and telling Babić, "Don't put Mirko in goal"?

Why shouldn't they?

It’s just bad management to keep pushing a goalkeeper into the spotlight when he’s clearly struggling. His confidence is shot. He’s even admitted publicly that he feels lost and isn't playing at his club level. If a player tells you straight up that he’s playing poorly and his mental game is broken, you swap him out. You bring in the other keeper and work with him gradually to fix his head.

If the manager is too blind to see what's happening right in front of him, then someone on the coaching staff needs to suggest it. If they’re all equally clueless, then you’re stuck with Mirko. Mirko himself could have suggested stepping aside for Stevanović if he wasn't ready.

Technically, they aren't a bad squad, but psychologically, they lack the depth to make this believable. Their confidence is completely trashed.

They need a solid sports psychologist and a heavy dose of motivation.

Since I’ve been called out, I’ll give you a quick response (CionistUSA).

Throughout this entire thread, you’ve acted like you’re some kind of untouchable deity. You’re a doctor with a PhD from a top-tier medical school, and in your mind, you're beyond reproach—everyone in the European Union respects you, while doctors from India, China, or an Arab country are dismissed as "unskilled."

The whole time, you’ve been busy belittling anyone outside your field. You dismiss Godiva because she’s a professor, and you look down on me because I work in aviation as an air traffic controller. Yet, the second someone challenges your own expertise, you try to start new threads just to get us banned.

If you feel entitled to label an Indian doctor incompetent simply because of where they were trained, then a Swede could easily call you a butcher. Don't kid yourself into thinking you're some global authority. To people in Northern Europe, regardless of your schooling or your job, you're still just another outsider. They hold the exact same opinion of your profession and your supposed "expertise" as you do toward other countries.

Do you see how ridiculous and hollow your prejudices actually are now? Besides, I don't need anyone's protection. If anyone truly believes I've broken the forum rules, they can report me themselves.

George Ortiz15 said:Add to that the fact that there isn't the kind of workplace bullying you see in Rhode Island. Different standards, set hours, actual days off, zero politics... basically, you can actually have a life and a family.

It beats working for a massive conglomerate like Agrokor any day...

Of course there’s no exploitation. These are serious corporations that actually honor their collective bargaining agreements and contract terms. I mean, surely you wouldn't want to see a headline in the New York Times about how a Ford "mistreats" an employee just because they caught a cold and needed sick leave, or because they stepped out five minutes before their shift ended? It’s quite simple. If your shift is from 9:00 to 3:00, you give them your focus during those hours. After 3:00, your time is your own.

http://www.auto.cz/slovenske-automob...prida-vw-55192

"General Motors employs roughly 7,000 people across its Washington, D.C. and Martinsburg plants, with an average gross salary sitting around $3,500."

To put that in perspective:

"General Motors employs about 7,000 people at its Washington, D.C. facility, with an average salary of approximately $3,500."

That group of 7,000 includes high-level specialists, plant supervisors, administrators, and managers—which explains why that average figure looks so inflated. It’s the same story we saw last year when they claimed the average pay in Rhode Island was roughly $1833, even though I'd bet my life 65% of those employees have never seen that kind of money.

Over at the Chevrolet plant in Romania, assembly line workers pull in between $400 and $600. The average is about $500, which is roughly $1.25. Honestly, you could find workers in Rhode Island making that same amount.

As for the actual plants, look at what happened with General Motors moving operations to Pittsburgh. I heard from a colleague that the Americans were dealing with constant theft; people were stealing iron and pipes straight off the line. They installed security, but it didn't do a damn thing. They faced harassment, nighttime thefts, dogs being killed, fences being torn down—it was a mess. The company begged the Government for protection or police presence because the losses were mounting, but the Government just looked the other way. No one stepped up. Energy costs spiked, theft went unchecked, and the whole operation fell apart.

I have no idea what the Government spends its time doing, but they clearly aren't focusing on the economy. They can't handle current crises, let alone attract new business. An Arab investor once wanted to buy a hotel in Monticello, but they tripped over the paperwork and caused such a headache that the investor just gave up and went home.

Amanda Diaz said:You claim you have "no worries," yet you seem to know everything about how to start and run a business. Bravo. Go ahead, keep laughing... 👍

What are we even talking about here? My entire thesis was focused on aviation management—everything from airline operations to airport logistics and air traffic control. That’s the theoretical side. On the practical side, I spent six months as an intern at a GE Aerospace division over in Sweden, which is where I ended up staying.

Once I finished my Master's, I moved back to the States and started working for the firm. I know significantly more about corporate leadership and management than you do. Then again, I never actually claimed to be an expert on management. I only mentioned a few times that $1000 the pay for a Social Security Administration employee in a plant like that in America is top-tier.

I didn't start the company myself because launching a business in aerospace engineering isn't exactly a walk in the park. It requires serious capital. Besides, I have no interest in running a company; it lacks the necessary dynamism. Air traffic control, however, is right up my alley. Fast-paced and pays well.

Linda Roberts2 said:keyboard warriors

And here we have all you great CEOs and directors. The most "industrial" site you've ever seen is probably one featured on the Discovery Channel. ☕

George Ortiz15 said:Sure, but people overlook the ripple effect. When a massive player like Ford moves in, they aren't just bringing assembly lines; they're bringing a demand for new machinery. That opens doors for machine tool builders—specialized equipment can run anywhere from a few hundred thousand to several million dollars. We're talking mechanical and electrical engineers, installers, machinists. You need people for construction, assembly, programming, robot maintenance, and jig design. All those high-level roles come with global price tags because they're complex. Don't just focus on the line operators; machine building is a massive industry with huge margins.....

And a factory doesn't just pop up overnight.....
Machines come with warranties lasting up to five years. It takes at least six months just to design and commission a single unit, let alone overhaul it after thousands of hours. Think about the scale: thousands of machines mean thousands of people needing housing and food.......

Think about the revenue generated just from housing the crews that install and commission these machines, not even mentioning the precision work involved in measuring parts.

Look at how many Americans are working on installation, assembly, and machine construction all over the US and the world.

Machines need major overhauls. Someone checking if a couple of units need oil or if there's scrap shouldn't be making more than the person who actually engineered the machine.....

Believe it or not, Americans have been building machines for Ford, Mercedes, Ford, Audi, and Volkswagen for a long time now...

If Ford decided to build an engine plant here in Rhode Island, it wouldn't just be about the assembly line workers. You'd see jobs popping up at the Social Security Administration for oversight, management roles, construction crews to actually build the facility, and a whole ecosystem of suppliers providing leather, plastic, glass, and everything else. Take the US for example—right across from a major Ford plant, there's a specialized seat manufacturer. They handle parts for the X3 models. About three hours before the seats hit the line, they get the call with the exact specs, the parts are delivered, and they're installed. It’s a ripple effect. Beyond the factory itself, you'd have serious tier-one suppliers thriving by meeting all those strict quality standards.

Amanda Diaz said:I honestly just want to know one thing: how can people who claim to have all this "expert" insight into corporate operations and massive technical knowledge still not own a single small business with even a few dozen employees? And yet, they have the nerve to laugh at folks who clearly don't grasp how things actually work in the real world...

The reason is simple: working for my current company pays me significantly more than I'd ever make running a shop like that. I show up, do my job, and clock out. No headaches, no sleepless nights, and I come out ahead financially. They can keep laughing if they want.

Betty Thomas56 said:

Michael Collins Asks:
Why aren't people even leaving the US? Not that anyone would bother if all the UN nations opened their borders tomorrow. It’s not like Americans are looking for more work; everyone just wants a slice of the pie through some cushy government job.

Speak for yourself... If you actually know how to do the job and have the drive to climb the ladder, but you can't make it happen here in America, you'll just take those talents somewhere else. That doesn't include the endless army of glorified paper-pushers and lawyers whose degrees are basically useless for anything other than wiping your backside.
Look, when you consider that there are way fewer people like that compared to the total number of incompetent slackers who would just... $1333 God forbid I spend my entire career shuffling papers in some government cubicle until retirement. If we keep going down this path, you really have to wonder: what happens when our pool of actual talent dries up? If we lose our skilled workforce, how on earth are we supposed to convince investors to even look our way?
Things are only going to get worse from here. Over the last decade, our education system has been systematically torn apart. How can we expect anything else?

"Quote:"

Exactly. It’s looking like an 80% shot for Slovakia, maybe 19% for Canada, and everyone else gets a measly 1%.
Even if the administration actually puts together a decent platform—which, let’s be honest, I highly doubt—it still wouldn't bump America's chances up past 20%.

"Quote:"

A good salary for who, exactly? What kind of worker are we actually talking about if that's the budget?
Za $1000 It feels like you can't find enough decent workers in America these days. You know the type—people who actually take pride in their work and won't jump ship the second someone offers them an extra hundred bucks. Is it even possible to build loyalty anymore?

Have you ever actually seen what a Ford plant looks like? I’ve had the chance to walk through one. Robots assemble almost the entire car, except for the interior. Every worker has their specific little slice of the pie. Most of the time, they are just monitoring robots and setting them up. The rest of the crew grabs some plastic, snaps it onto a door, secures it, and passes it along. It’s the same repetitive motion every single day. For $1000. In a serious corporation, where you get actual rights and benefits, paid time off, and all those other perks. For a blue-collar worker who just wants to clock in, finish their shift, and go home, it's the pinnacle. You don't need a Master's degree to install 90% of the equipment. It's quick training and then you're out. Just ask a cashier at Walmart how hard they kill themselves for $2500.

Casey Ramos31 said:compared to the national average of $1833? 😕

$1000 is just a number some random users pulled out of thin air. They’re claiming it represents an average at a plant in either Slovakia or Mexico. Of course, there isn't any actual data to back that up.

The topic at hand is Ford in America and everything surrounding it.

If anyone actually believed Ford was seriously moving to the USA, they’re delusional. Slovakia has an established industrial base, massive tax breaks, and you can clear all the red tape before you even finish your morning coffee. They have the experience. Building a plant outside of Slovakia is nothing more than a pipe dream.

A board member basically admitted they're only looking at other options to squeeze even better deals and incentives out of the Slovaks. It's a cheap management tactic that's been around for centuries. ☕

Amanda Diaz said:Look, I used the average worker salary at those plants—you can find it online if you care, but I’m not digging up links for you again since you clearly don't trust me for God's sake. And what does the standard of living have to do with anything? You honestly think someone from Germany is going to say, "Hey, America is too expensive, let's hike up the wages if we want to build a factory there"? No. They’ll just move to a cheaper country. Period.

Which factory are we even talking about here? How many people work there? What’s the pay scale, from the bottom to the top? And how exactly did you settle on $300 a month?

If you’re going to throw around numbers and data, at least try to back them up. Otherwise, you just look ridiculous. Based on your comments, the only industrial operation you’ve ever stepped foot in is the local bakery down the street.☕

Amanda Diaz said:I never actually claimed the pay would be that high. I was simply comparing it to what workers make in similar factories over in Mexico or Slovakia. If you honestly believe these corporations move their plants abroad out of the goodness of their hearts, that's your own problem.

Do you actually have access to the payroll data from Kia's plant in Zilina? Are you looking at the facility average, or just cherry-picking individual wages? Did you factor in the cost of living and general standards in Slovakia to make a real comparison? Or are we just basing this entire argument on hearsay and gut feelings rather than actual statistics?

☕

Where on earth is this idea coming from—that a worker's salary will be around $1000 a month? All Ford knows right now is that they’re building a new plant outside of Germany. They haven't even decided which models will roll off the line yet, but apparently, everyone here already has the exact pay scales and required qualifications figured out.

Richard Wilson4 said:Ford isn't exactly General Motors, but hey, $1000 it's a decent paycheck considering how bad unemployment is. The real issue is that most folks would rather just sit around on government handouts.

If you turn down a job, they cut your benefits immediately. You lose everything—all your rights and perks. They’ll just hand your spot over to someone else who actually wants to work.

Bale would have been a much better fit. Even if you set his looks aside, it’s the voice that matters. Bale has this incredible ability to mimic a specific vocal tone, much like Agent 47. I was particularly struck by that calm, composed style he pulled off in Equilibrium. He carries a certain charisma that I think would suit the role far more naturally than Walker. I find myself wondering how he’d sound once he actually starts talking. My only fear is that it might end up sounding too juvenile. 🤣

rustysurfer79 said:Tell me something. What were the direct predecessors to those two printers you mentioned? How long were they actually on the market? And more importantly, why were they pulled?

You’re basically giving me two possible answers here:

1. They turned out to be junk, so the manufacturer replaced them with better, more reliable, more powerful machines at the exact same price point.

2. Or, the manufacturer could no longer cover production costs while maintaining a profit margin under intense competition, forcing them to offer an adequate product—both in terms of price and quality.

So, go ahead. Which of these two options matches reality?

Which two printers? What are we even talking about? All I said was that trashing Samsung as an incredibly bad printer manufacturer isn't fair. I've owned two models—actually, I still have them—and they work fine. I never jammed a tray, never had print head issues, never messed with toners or anything else.

No manufacturer is going to swap out a "bad" product for a "better" one for the same amount of money. That's fairy tale logic.

rustysurfer79 said:We actually just laid two ML 1510s and 1520s to rest a few days ago because of constant paper jams. One still had its starter toner left, while the other had already burned through three cartridges. These printers were only three years old. That’s what passes for Samsung quality these days. I suspect the newer models are even worse.

All my IT gear is either HP or Samsung. Honestly, I’ve never had any real trouble with them. I’ve owned two Samsung printers—one lasted three years, the other five. Both still run like they did on day one, though they don't make the ink for the older one anymore. Right now, I’m using an Epson SX, but I want to move to a laser printer. Aside from a mountain of guesswork and endless comparisons, I haven't received a single solid recommendation. Just vague warnings about "what might jam" or "what might break" on specific models. Good grief, it would be a miracle if any of them worked perfectly. But hey, that’s life.

Anyway, after scouring the web and hunting for advice on various forums to find something that actually fits my needs, I've narrowed it down to:
1) Epson M1400 Aculaser
2) Canon i-Sensys LBP 6000

rustysurfer79 said:If you go brand new, look for an HP with a print head featuring plenty of nozzles, continuous ink tanks, and reliable ink. Once you tally everything up, you're looking at about $333. You could get the refurbished version for roughly $267, but you’ll be visiting the "supply closet" half as often. You won't have to refill those tanks nearly as frequently compared to the newer models.

http://adriatix.com/A_PROIZVODI/A_pro...%2B%20CISS.htm
On the other hand, if you're chasing pure price-to-performance, this option simply has no rival. Whether we're talking cost, speed, ease of maintenance, or sheer reliability—it wins. Just today, some guy with a fancy degree dropped off some 110lb cardstock that needed extra printing. This little black devil chewed through it without breaking a sweat. If you don't believe me, just look further down at the request for heavy media... And the ink didn't even smudge on this stock. Quite frankly, I can't find a better printer.

Alright, I feel like I'm being misunderstood here, or perhaps...

Right now, we have a brand new HP printer, maybe a few months old. It's an Expression Home series. Print, copy, scan, whatever else. It has four heads, inkjet style. The problem is the ink disappears far too quickly because my printing volume is massive. It’s just not sustainable. What good would a Canon Pixma do me?

So, let's start from square one. Here is what we need:

A LASER PRINTER
Requirements:
- Budget-friendly (this isn't a corporate purchase; it's for my brother, who's a college student)
- Capable of handling up to 2,000 pages a month
- Black and white printing only
- Toner needs to be relatively cheap; I don't want to be buying a new cartridge every single month.

Basically, skip the inkjets entirely—the ink costs are prohibitive.

Just a laser printer for home use to print out scripts and presentations in black and white... Does that make sense?

rustysurfer79 said:The issue isn't actually print quality. It’s the paper feed mechanism. No Apple or Xerox machine makes it past its third year because of those reliability issues. That's why buying a low-cost Apple printer is a trap; they swap out the chips twice a year just to keep you on a leash. Pretty soon after you buy one, you'll realize you're forced to spend a fortune on nothing but OEM cartridges.

You can't even refill that starter toner, so that initial 500 $200 page yield quickly turns into an 1100 $400 headache. For what you'd spend on that, you could probably snag a much better laser printer that comes with 14,000 prints already baked into the price. And as for the paper jams? They should be fixing that at the design level, not expecting the user to call a repairman every month.

Use your head.

So, what's the actual advice then? What should I be looking for given all that? I need something for student life—around 1,500 to 2,000 pages a month—where the ink refills won't bankrupt me. I'm not looking for a heavy-duty office laser; I just need something to handle a college workload. Presentations, study guides, e-books... just general academic clutter.