Quite the sh!t show breaking out between MAGA populists and Trump's DOGE crony billionaires. Anti-immigration MAGA cult members ain't taking kindly to Musk and Ramiswanny's desire for HI-B visa tech workers.

The tech industry claims there aren't enough skilled tech workers to meet needs in the US. So they're demanding that Trump allow more HI-B immigrants be allowed into the US, juxtaposed against Tump and MAGA's clamor for deporting immigrants (legal and illegal). Trump cut the number of HI-B visas during his first term, but now says he likes HI-B visas and has many of such workers employed at Mar a Lago. Trump loyalist Steve Bannon leveled a barrage of MAGA hate against HI-Bs and Elon Musk in his hate meets greed video. The drama is the best entertainment of the week.

Musk is the kind of billionaire Trump would like to be, so of course he's gonna' cater to Musk. And Musk, like Putin, learned that the admiration of an insecure chump like Trump can be had by flattering him. So Musk showered Trump with a $250 million campaign donation, and now Musk owns Trump. So far Musk got useful payback in Trump mandated legislation to drop self-driving auto accident reporting and restrictions on investing in China, where Musk has his largest Tesla factory and is breaking ground on the world's largest auto battery factory. Musk will likely make back his entire investment in Trump even before inauguration day.

Trump has already backpedaled his campaign promises to lower the cost of groceries and gas. It's gonna' be interesting to watch how MAGA reacts to being stabbed in the back by their cult leader Trump.

Good roll on that bait Salmo. Should get bites. Like a fat kid on a donut

CFS=Tacoma Power Greed

I’ll bite.

I can’t speak for the cultists, but my guess is they are primarily against illegal immigration, not people coming legally with work visas. The majority of us non-cultists who voted Trump only because he was the lesser of the evils, also believe this.

Nice strawman, Salmo.


Streamer

Lots of US citizen techies were laid off various companies in the past year or so. Why doesn't Musk and Ramaswany hire them? Could it be that the Hi-Bs will work for less than the US citizens? And have no power in the workplace because if they are laid off then they have to leave the US? In which case the MAGAs are correct that immigrants are taking jobs from US citizens.

Do you have information to corroborate the claim that there is all these unemployed techies that haven’t returned to gainful employment? Or is it also possible that citizens aren’t filling the demands in the job market?

Many people in the tech field are overpaid anyway, so maybe they should be willing to work less if they risk not getting a position. Also, maybe all these tech layoffs would suggest a decreasing demand in the tech sector, so then where would the incentive be for the “Hi-Bs” to come for work? Maybe all this is not as big of an issue as you’re making it out to be.

You often talk out of your a$$ and don’t know what the fukk you are talking about. You are so deranged from your unjustified hatred for Trump that you can’t even evaluate a situation in an objective manner. You risk being inaccurate on a topic for the sake of getting a jab in on Republicans and Trump. Man TDS must really suck. I’d hate to be you.


Streamer

Really? I read news articles about tech industry layoffs. Are they wrong? I don't work in that industry and am not familiar with details, only the news I read. The thing of it is, neither you nor I appear to know with certainty what the domestic work force supply is compared to demand. Companies say they need more HI-Bs. Workers in the industry say that is because companies are trying to suppress wages. Logic suggests that HI-Bs will work for less and be more compliant. My information comes from what I read in the news. What have you got?

BTW, I have zero hatred for Trump. Hate requires energy, and I don't care to waste mine. I simply think Trump is a despicable piece of sh!t for reasons I've explained. I contend that TDS is what Trump supporters have. How else to explain defending such human excrement?

Salmo,

You didn’t answer my question. We agree that there have been layoffs, but I asked for evidence showing they haven’t returned to gainful employment. The tech sector evolves rapidly and there is constant change. Techies are also overpaid relative to other fields that require the same or more training or education. You are quick to defend and assume techies are being screwed. Logic actually suggests that companies might also be correct in needing “Hi-Bs” in order to either fill positions or minimum bring down costs in an overpaid sector.

If you admit to not know what the domestic work force is or the demand, then maybe you shouldn’t be so quick to assign blame to Republicans. Clearly you are out of touch on this topic. But keep trying. It’s very amusing to see your TDS in action.


Streamer

Streamer,

If I had the answer to your question I would have posted it. On the flip side, do you have evidence showing that the tech workers have returned to gainful employment? Also, kind of judgemental to claim that an occupational sector is over paid. It's more likely that they are paid according to supply and demand, supported by the corporate request for more HI-Bs to provide relatively cheap labor. I don't seem to be any more out of touch than you on this. Glad to amuse you. We should get together for a beer and talk and laugh.

Salmo,


I wasn’t necessarily looking for the answer, more merely shedding light on the fact that you are drawing inferences without evidence that are speculative at best. The alternatives I suggested are also highly possible, but you didn’t mention those as it would take away from your ability to throw a jab at Trump or Republicans. This demonstrates how hijacked your mind is to your ideology at the expense of logic and objectivity.

We agree that they are in fact paid according to supply and demand, but is some Bachelor’s level schmuck worth twice YOUR salary with your Master’s degree? Maybe your degree is one of those worthless ones (I don’t think at least) but if a bunch of Hi-Bs can come in and undercut wages in a sector that has high demand and low inventory, then what’s the issue? You scared of a little competition, bruh?

I like beer and entertainment!


Streamer

Talk about minds hijacked by ideology at the expense of logic and objectivity, we currently have hate meeting opportunity. Trump, Vance, and a number of Congressional Republicans have seen fit to blame "poor governace by Democrats" for the LA wildfires. Some R members of Congress want to tie aid to CA to the adoption of "Republican" policies. Gentlemen, I give you: idiots talking out their azz.

Protecting the delta smelt in the lower Sacramento River and delta area are completely and totally unrelated to the delta smelt. Water is diverted from the lower Sac via the Central CA water project that sends water to CA's Central Valley. That water is not piped to LA because it isn't and never was meant to go to LA. LA gets its water via the Owens River water project that starts in the SE Sierra Mountains (and the people of the Owens River Valley would say that LA steals the water, but that's a different topic.) Fire hydrants went dry that were located at or near the ends of water mains that were feeding "upstream" fire hoses. Since Republicans don't believe in science, they would never study enough hydrology to understand that there is a maximum limit to the amount of water that can be sent through a pipe. The pipes are sized to serve neighborhoods, including fire fighting water. But no one ever dreamed that every pipe and hydrant would be maxed out all at the same time. Only a cretin could fail to understand that the natural forces of wind and fire absolutely overwhelmed the plumbing system. There are 16,000 professional fire fighters fighting the LA wildfires. They know how to fight fires. Republican critics only know how to talk out their asses.

Blaming Democrats for the LA wildfires is simply as stupid as it would be to blame Florida and Georgia Republicans for the hurricanes that damage the SE. Maybe those states should adopt some good Democratic policies going forward. Further, tying federal aid to changes in CA policies is beyond disingenuous. CA contributes 40% more money to the federal treasury than it receives back in federal money. CA, along with WA and several of the NE states literally subsidize those money-sucking red states that don't generate enough federal revenue to cover their costs in federal funds. Red states are a drag on the federal economy and budget. CA absolutely deserves federal aid for a natural disaster crisis with no strings attached. It's no wonder that level headed Democrats and liberals know that Republicans have lost their fvcking minds! Because they have.

Do you ever copy and paste?

Lol.

This is actually laughable. It isn’t a matter of qualifying for or receiving federal aid, rather about lack of preventative measures that could be taken in order to reduce or mitigate risk. The biggest and rightful criticism from Republicans is that California’s leadership chose to prioritize other things above public safety.

For example, Gavin Newsom decided to cut spending in several different wildfire and resiliency programs over $100 million dollars, while the California budget has $17 billion in reserves. Fighting climate change also means adapting to shifts in environmental needs. With reduced water, drier seasons with windy conditions, it makes for increased likelihood to experience problems related to wildfires. The prudent decision would be to fund wildfire prevention and response.

Also, as Oregon intended to provide assistance, why were their trucks stopped in a Sacramento and required to pass emissions testing? Seriously? Does California really want the help? Their leadership has really dropped the ball here and deserving of criticism.

But hey, the important thing is that they increased funding for LGTBQ programs by millions of dollars. Good to see unnecessary social programs are the highest priority above all else. Hey, I know some people who also seem to value social issues above all else. Maybe they should move to California?


Streamer

Lol all you want. It doesn't make you appear smarter, quite the contrary. But your R oligarchs have been recorded saying exactly that CA should be required to adopt R approved policies as a condition of aid. Be honest, should the SE states have been required to adopt D-approved policies to receive hurricane relief?

CA has been developing measures to prevent and fight wildfires for years. If you think that CA leadership didn't prioritize public safety, then how about put up or shut up. Let's make the price of criticism that you tell us and everyone how and what CA leadership should have done and be doing that they didn't. I think you're going to find that CA spends more on wildfire prevention and response than any state. CA is likely the richest state, and if they choose to support LGTBQ programs in addition to public safety, that is their prerogative. Oh that's right, you're opposed to freedom of choice except for the choices you prefer.

Apparently you're a sucker for internet disinformation and misinformation. Fire trucks did not go to Sacramento to pass emissions testing. That was debunked early on; please try to keep up. Trucks from WA and OR didn't even drive through Sacramento on their way to LA.

Oh, and you no doubt heard Trump criticize CA for preventing water coming from the north - Canada even - down to LA. And the believers of misinformation are too stupid to know when Trump is talking out his azz. A large team of fact checkers could hardly keep up. The next 4 years will be comedy gold.

Occasionally, but not often. Why?

Wow, Salmo. You seem rattled.

The devil is in the details. Looks like I was incorrect that vehicles are not being emissions tested, however it does appear that according to Oregon Live that trucks are still being stopped for safety checks and inspections. If you read down at the bottom of the article it admits that vehicles are being stopped and required to be inspected. So it looks like there is a lot of truth that trucks were still being stopped and required to have checks, just not for smog or emissions. But I wouldn’t count on you to be truthful about this. Just simply clamoring about minute details of misinformation to make digs at Trump or Republicans like the shill you are. You are from here on out referred to as shillster 2.0.

Back to the discussion about aid. It’s important to make a distinction that wildfires can largely be contained/controlled with preventative measures whereas hurricanes are a bit different. Apples and oranges. This was a case of clear intention to shift from prevention to reaction in order to rely on aid money instead of preventative money. Why use state dollars (when you have a surplus of $17 billion ironically) when you can cry and play victim for federal aid dollars?


Streamer


https://www.oregonlive.com/wildfires/202...the-rumors.html

You are both wrong about this. Salmo you get misinformed by the legacy mainstream media. Streamer gets misinformed by the alternative media. I do not need any sources of information, it all gets revealed to me in visions and dreams, just like Rich G.

Fire trucks from Oregon underwent routine 15-minute safety checks in Sacramento, on I5 on their way to LA, rather than emissions tests. These checks were conducted to ensure the vehicles were mechanically sound and safe for use. No fire engines were turned away during these checks,and all necessary repairs were completed either on the same day or the following day. The safety checks helped ensure that the equipment, which does not regularly travel hundreds of miles at a time, was safe for the firefighters to use. So Streamer was wrong that they stopped in Sacramento for EMISSIONS testing and Salmo is wrong that they didn't even drive through Sacramento on their way to LA, which is absurd, since it's on I5 and also wrong that they didn't get tested at all.

Trump is of course wrong about where the river water comes from and coming down from Canada, the Klamath, the bay area, ect, however this is a small detail he is wrong about when he is right about the big picture which is that there is a lack of water in LA hydrants.

OK so my questions to you Salmo, on the big picture of the lack of water, are:

1) Why is the Santa Ynez Reservoir empty? This is the proximate reservoir to the Pacific Palisades and the reservoir’s absence likely contributed to some diminished pressure and dry hydrants in upper regions of the Palisades.

2) California Proposition 1, approved in 2014, taxed and allocated $2.7 billion for water storage projects, including new reservoirs. The initial timeframe for these projects was set by Proposition 1, which required that by January 1, 2022 all project proponents must have completed feasibility studies, released draft environmental documents for public review however, the actual construction and completion of the reservoirs have faced delays. For instance, the Willow Springs Water Bank Project is the only project in the LA area, aims to store up to 1 million acre-feet of water--it hasn't been built. As of January 2025 zero new reservoirs have been built, with critics arguing that the pace of construction is too slow, due to bureaucratic inertia, extensive planning, engineering and environmental review. So my question is why haven't any new reservoirs been built?

Basically just, why is the existing reservoir empty and why is the new reservoir that people voted for and paid taxes for not built? My answer is because democrats are terrible at governing but since you don't believe that, I'd like to hear your alternative explanation.

Streamer posted: " It’s important to make a distinction that wildfires can largely be contained/controlled with preventative measures . . ."

You're out of your mind if you believe that. If such containment or control were even close to true, the natural resource agencies would have solved the problem years ago. The fuel supply for wildfires is immense and in most cases self replenishes. The collective resources of all the natural resource agencies in the country is nowhere close to enough to effect that scale of containment. I don't know what drugs you're using, but you are not even close to being grounded in reality. Additionally you apparently don't understand what a shill is either. A shill is one who defends or promotes a product or person beyond the merit of said product or person, kinda' like you supporting Trump, whose negative attributes outnumber any positive ones (if there are any) by an order of magnitude or more.

FP,

At least you're being honest with the source of your information, unreliable as it is.

1. The Santa Ynez reservoir is empty because it's down for maintenance. Part of the cover was damaged and is scheduled for repair. So why does it need a cover, you may ask. Because it's LA drinking water with air pollution and birds crap in it and stupid people would swim in it or pollute it.

2. I don't know. I saw the architect's rendering of the proposed mega reservoir a couple years or so ago. I haven't seen anything since. It's a major project and in order to be feasible, there has to be water to fill it. I believe it was intended to store some of CA's share of Colorado River water. If you've been following that, there is presently a dispute among the 7-state Colorado River Compact because the individual state shares add up to more water than the Colorado River produces. The compact dates to a time where the period of record for water supply was weighted to more wet years than dry years. Now the reality of there being less water than originally estimated has come home to roost. The Glen Canyon reservoir is trending toward the elevation where it will no longer be possible to deliver water to the dam's turbines that produce electricity. I don't know, but it could be that the feasibility of that proposed new reservoir is in question. BTW, I think the Willow Springs project is a different one, and if so, I'm not familiar with it.

You're also wrong about Democrats being terrible at governing; rather both Republicans and Democrats are terrible at governing. It's just that Republicans are more terrible at it than Democrats. It's a lesser evil sort of thing. BTW, politicians are notoriously bad at this stuff because they don't understand economics, engineering, or how the natural world functions. For starters, and probably a lot more.

Wrong… literally about everything in your above statement. You have yourself so convinced of your own bullschit that you overlook the most basic of science that suggests the complete opposite of what you said. Have you not ever heard of controlled burns?

Controlled burns are lit for a number of reasons. By ridding a forest of dead leaves, tree limbs, and other debris, a prescribed burn can help prevent a destructive wildfire. Controlled burns have become more important as fire suppression efforts have grown over the last century. Historically, smaller fires occurred in forests at regular intervals. When these fires are suppressed, flammable materials accumulate, insect infestations increase, forests become more crowded with trees and underbrush, and invasive plant species move in. Controlled burns seek to accomplish the benefits that regular fires historically provided to an environment while also preventing the fires from burning out of control and threatening life and property.

The fuel supply for wildfires is controlled or mitigated with controlled burns. Making this a regular practice allows for new growth to occur that is less flammable. The Palisades and Eaton fires are close to developed areas and would benefit from scheduled and strategic control burns to limit impacts on a geographic area.

Agencies could have made a meaningful impact on the fires. We don’t know to what extent fully, but when a governor cuts $100 million in funding for fire protection, a large degree of culpability falls on the governor as the fires likely wouldn’t have reached this magnitude with proper funding and measures.

I provided evidence directly refuting and disqualifying your claims. It would appear that I am grounded in reality and that you are an unhinged shill who is more interested in adhering to the guidance of your TDS at the expense of science and what is true. With some hesitation, I voted for Trump in only 1 election and articulated the benefits of doing so while also highlighting his deficits. That’s a far cry from “shilling” for Trump. Nice try.




We agree that Democrats and Republicans are terrible at governing. With that said, the slightly better approach is to then have less people governing with reduced size of government. It isn’t necessarily a great solution, but it is the best solution. Republicans tend to prefer smaller size and scope of government, which makes them the lesser of the two evils.


Streamer


https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/controlled-burning/

how do you not know how controlled burns are good for keeping massive raging fires supressed?

jeezuz....

lay off the sauce...