Good luck finding people willing to immigrate to the USA at this point, where the administration is (literally!) disappearing them by revoking visas and arresting them without legal recourse. Non-citizens are one intemperate op-ed away from living the rest of their days in a Louisiana jail without trial. That sounds so ridiculous that you'd think it had to be hyperbole, but it's literally happening now.
No, the days of the US being a mecca for global tech workers are over.
It’s amusing that you acknowledge your comment is hysterical hyperbole preemptively as if that will defeat any rebuttal. Guess I’ll just take your word for it then!
The truth is you still have a far greater chance of getting in trouble for saying the wrong thing in most of Europe than you do anywhere in the US.
Also, enticing Europeans to move to the US is exceedingly easy. You ask, “do you want to 4X your current salary with 20% less taxes?” The answer is usually yes.
Maybe one day the 600 million people in Europe will decide to start finally integrating their countries for real and collaborate with each other on building and innovating like the Americans and Chinese. Until then, disjointed euro micro states are sitting ducks for getting stripped of their best talent and companies.
> Also, enticing Europeans to move to the US is exceedingly easy. You ask, “do you want to 4X your current salary with 20% less taxes?” The answer is usually yes.
I don't really understand why people make claims like that. To me it's obvious that the vast majority of people are not particularly motivated by money. They would like to have more money, but once they have reached the standard of living common in developed countries, they are not willing to make the kind of life choices that would give them more money.
Finnish nurses are a good example. They would have a better standard of living in Norway. As Finnish citizens, they have a subjective right to live and work there, even stronger than in the EU. The language would be easy to learn. The culture and the society are very similar. And it's close to Finland, making it easy to visit your friends and family any time. But few nurses actually move there, because most people need better reasons than money for moving to another country.
This is ironic since I actually live in Finland, and know exactly how wrong your comment is.
1. Finnish nurses need to learn to speak Norwegian to work there (nursing is not tech, you can't get by speaking english with your 75 year old patients).
2. Finnish and Norwegian are not at all related linguistically. Also, english fluency in the Nordics (and Europe in general) is grossly overstated by Americans whos only experience of Europe was spending a few months in a capital city with international students doing an exchange at Uni. English fluency declines dramatically among the general population each kilometer you move outside the capital and away from workers at international companies (same can be said for fluency decline by old age).
3. Nurses make only marginally more in Norway than they do in Finland, and when adjusting for cost of living (which is higher in Norway), depending on where you live you could make less. Best case you're looking at an extra 15,000 euro per year (with high taxes on that extra amount). Not an extra 300,000 per year with dramatically lower taxes like a talented engineer moving to the US would get. One is an actual opportunity to build financial independence. The other is a few bucks to piss away on a slightly nicer holiday.
4. Nurses in Finland are predominantly female (92%), and females are less likely than males to move countries for a job (not by a ton, but relevant for this analysis).
Even considering (4), I can assure you with 100% certainty, that if there were no language barrier and a nurse in Norway could make 350,000 euros per year you would see Finnish nurses making the move en masse. Finnish women are not stupid.
Nurse salaries have been a major talking point for decades. While only a small fraction of nurses move to Norway, it's still enough people that it gets mentioned in the news once in a while. Especially around elections.
The official languages of Finland are Finnish and Swedish. If you speak one as a native language, you must learn the other. If you work as a nurse in Finland, it's quite likely that you have to use Swedish at work. At least occasionally. If you are comfortable doing that, learning Norwegian is not such a big deal.
I studied computer science and eventually ended up in the US. And I'm still here after a surprisingly long time. Based on what I have personally seen, Finns who move to the US for work are less likely to stay than those who move to Sweden, UK, or Switzerland. The culture is just too different. And if you have kids, the salaries are not actually that high. The consensus seems to be that for those with kids, 300k in the US is worth about as much as 100k in Finland. At least in the areas where immigrants with nominally high salaries are likely to live.
I have lived in both countries, and 300K in the US goes much further than 100k in Finland (we're talking FIRE money vs. paycheck-to-paycheck living). The people saying this are likely Nokia transfers who only have experience living in Silicon Valley.
300K as a family in even midwestern US cities (far cheaper than the coasts) is not crazy for a college educated couple. My US friends and entire extended family earns roughly 100-150Kish per year living in the US midwest (so roughly 300k household income per couple, yet at much lower tax rates).
On this salary they afford childcare, houses 2-3X the size of the average Finnish house in Metro-Helsinki (not kidding), expensive vacations, two new cars, fantastic health insurance via employer, and maxing out retirement accounts -- which has MASSIVE benefits over the Finnish pension system where the government takes control of your money and invests it in crap 0% yielding bonds. I personally know many US couples who are liquid millionaires already by their mid 40s just from working normal jobs w/ 401ks, and much of this is tax free wealth that importantly, they have full control over.
In Espoo/Helsinki/Vantaa, 100k household income gets your family a tiny 3-bed row house, one used Passat, a trip to the canary islands, and yes government childcare/healthcare. The main difference though, the Finnish family making 100k never accrues any actual wealth or sizable investment assets like stocks (And even if they did, government eats 20% more than in the US with higher cap gains tax). They will never reach financial independence. They will be begging the future austerity government for permission to retire at 70 (age keeps going up, so not unlikely). Hopefully the economy doesn't keep stagnating and the population doesn't keep declining, because it's not even really their money, it can easily be squandered by the collective.
We are talking about immigrants, not US citizens. If you come to the US in the normal H-1B to green card pipeline, your employer decides where you are allowed to live. Which is usually in an area with very expensive housing.
You have more options once you get a green card. But with the initial uncertainty and delays in getting H-1B, the employer choosing not to sponsor a green card immediately, and the years of bureaucracy for getting the green card, that can easily be a decade after the initial offer. Which is plenty for people who don't particularly like the American culture to decide to go to somewhere with lower salaries, lower costs, and more freedom to make your own choices.
You are comparing the most expensive area in Finland to areas you consider cheap in the US. But from a Finnish immigrant's perspective, the reasonable comparison would be the opposite. You are forced to live in an expensive area in the US, but if you return to Finland, you can choose a cheaper city. €100k/year would be close to the median for a family with kids in Helsinki but a pretty good income in other cities.
> To me it's obvious that the vast majority of people are not particularly motivated by money.
Are you sure we are living in the same world?
Also the example you provide is not pertinent. There is a reason why Software devs move the most. There are barriers for other professions. It is not easy to move as a doctor, lawyer, civil servant, etc...
Software developers are often the ones who move back. When you can have good enough standard of living anywhere, you may start paying attention on where you actually want to live.
The best predictor for moving permanently to another country for work seems to be a PhD. Jobs are scarce in the academia. And even if you are in the industry, you are probably the kind of person looking for the most interesting jobs.
I think you overestimate that. In the end, I'm sure there will be still a lot of people willing to go, who maybe ignore politics and so on. Salaries in USA are just that much higher, especially if you're an expert in your field.
>Good luck finding people willing to immigrate to the USA at this point
My German boss just moved to the US. He really loves it there. He said he's also getting better healthcare for his child which has some rare form of autism or something, at which only the US has invested into research and cures at this point.
No doubt this is true in this specific case, but does this example extrapolate to the general case?
The original point was that given the US government's openly hostile attitude towards immigrants who simply exercised free speech, would the average highly qualified immigrant be more or less predisposed to want to immigrate.
This is made worse by the fact that there appears to be no goal to all this beyond intimidation and chilling effect. Even if you deported every single Palestine protester it would make a zero impact on the stated policy goals of mass deportation of illegal immigrants. None of the recent high profile protester cases were in the country illegally. They simply stated their opinion, and in one case, in an op ed for the student newspaper.
Note that the US has touted freedom of speech frequently and loudly when chastising autocratic foreign powers. So, when a smart software engineer in Europe sees that the current US president is willing to crush the most fundamental of civil liberties to make examples of a handful of legal immigrants, which will in no way do anything to meet his stated policy objectives, what do you think that engineer is likely to conclude?
>US government's openly hostile attitude towards immigrants who simply exercised free speech
Source for such claims please? German and UK governments are even more authoritarian on free speech. You can get arrested for a tweet insulting a politician: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bMzFDpfDwc
>the US has touted freedom of speech frequently and loudly when chastising autocratic foreign powers
So did Germany and Austria and most of western EU. They were buddy-buddy to Putin in the past for their gas, and now they're buddy-buddy with Azerbaijan who's slaughtering Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh because EU needs their gas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nagorno-Karabakh_conflict
>to make examples of a handful of legal immigrants
Source for such claims please? How many skilled legal immigrants have been deported or subject to illegal government oppression?
There have been many such cases in the news recently: Mahmoud Khalil, Rumeysa Ozturk, Yunseo Chung, Momodou Taal...
According to US Sectary of State Marco Rubio, the Trump administration is currently seeking to deport over 300 students, purely for criticizing Israel. None of them has been accused of any crime. The Trump administration calls anyone who protests against Israel a Hamas supporter and terrorist, cancels their visa, and tries to deport them.
None of them did anything even remotely similar to "inciting domestic terrorism" or "vocally support[ing] terrorist groups" (though the latter would actually be protected by the 1st Amendment).
If they had been in any way involved with domestic terrorism, then they could be charged, sentenced, and probably deported as a consequence. But what they actually did was peacefully protest, write Op-Eds, and generally speak their minds. That's 100% covered by the 1st Amendment.
The Trump administration hasn't charged these students with anything. It's asserting the right to deport legal immigrants purely based on their political opinions, which is an obvious breach of the 1st Amendment.
>None of them did anything even remotely similar to "inciting domestic terrorism" or "vocally support[ing] terrorist groups"
They were political agitators. A visa is a privilege not a right, and may be revoked for any reason, you don't have to commit a crime.
>though the latter would actually be protected by the 1st Amendment
The 1st amendment applies to US citizens, not guests on visas.
Why do you move to a country on a visa and then protest against it? Name me a country who accepts that from its visitors.
A visa to move to a country is a privilege, not a right. If you're protesting the government who gave you that visa and you're not a citizen, then get out, good-bye, nobody wants extra trouble makers, you can legally protest by leaving the country you dislike.
How is this even a conversation? Imagine you invite a guest in your house starting to annoy you the hell out. You'd want them out even though they haven't committed any crimes worth calling the police.
Political agitation is Constitutionally protected in the United States. In fact, it's one of the most important activities that people like Jefferson and Madison wanted to protect.
> A visa is a privilege not a right, and may be revoked for any reason
No, it cannot be revoked for any reason. Revoking visas because of Constitutionally protected speech is a clear violation of the 1st Amendment. The government is not allowed to retaliate against people (not just citizens - anyone) for speech.
> Name me a country who accepts that from its visitors .
Every liberal democracy.
> nobody wants extra trouble makers
Nobody wants fascists, but we're not kicking you out.
> Imagine you invite a guest in your house
This isn't your house. It's the United States of America. There are laws and Constitutional rights. If you don't like it, how about you go somewhere more suited to your tastes - somewhere without freedom of speech and due process.
It's the classic case of the US being great when you've got a lot of money. Which is why a company full of highly skilled engineers threatening to relocate to the US isn't an empty threat. These are exactly the kinds of people who would have a pretty good life there, so I doubt they'd find any issue bringing many along.
Doesn't have to be the US. Switzerland is also a magnet for top companies and skilled people, especially the German ones, due to language and culture similitudes in some regions but with less taxes and red tape and higher standard of living.
And of course highly skilled people who work hard, want to be in a place that compensates them highly for their efforts, otherwise what's the point of busting your ass for decades if you're gonna be getting the same mediocre quality services as people on minimum wage?
I have to wait 3 weeks for a doctor appointment in my utopian European nation. I also have to pay for it since I earn too much money after being taxed >40% on my slightly-over-us-median income.
Thankfully I’m not in need of dental surgery, else I would be waiting 4 years.
I doubt anywhere in the USA is that bad. To me it looks like health insurance is baked into the cost of living. Obviously bad for poor people and should be addressed but I imagine anyone on the median wage should be fine?
clearly he was planning this move ahead of time with one goal in mind, that is to get specialized help for his kid thanks to amounts of money he has
of course he would be happy with this move even if "normal" people would burn around him because he and his family is shielded and have gold parachute that allows him to go back to eu within hours
What? You realise that even in say, Europe, for example in France, parties like Le Front National get almost half of the votes? Germany also has a lot of voters for their own extreme right wing parties.
I know it might seem weird when you are in a hive mind but a lot of people do agree with whatever trump does. Even in places where you'd expect them not to. I'm in Morocco for example right now and most people either I've talked to are either ambivalent or slightly like Trump (or dislike him due to his position on Gaza, but Biden was even worse in terms of total inaction).
But I won't blame people for thinking that whatever is popular on Reddit or Blue sky actually is a majority opinion, just because of how insanely one sided and dramatic those places and people who spend a lot of time there tend to be. It's really brain rot inducing.
This is what people mean by "polarisation". Parties (and party members) are less defined by what they stand for and more, A LOT more, by that they hate each other. On fox news this is easy to see ("Far left threatens European peace treaty ..."), but in reality you see similar things on the right part ("The brazen hypocrisy of the right's Tesla protest outrage ...")
Both parties are trying to demonize each other. Biden did not fuck up the country with communism, obviously. But Trump is not hitler ...
Meanwhile I've seen democrats spit on other democrats because they were pro-Israel. It's not just on the right. And then you read about republicans responding to someone's wife getting deported by stating she deserved it. Fucking hell, where are we going?
People need to come together again. And yes, Trump is not making that easy, but it is the way forward.
Here I am. I am pro-Israel, I can even defend Netanyahu (well, his actions in a war defending Israel, where I have issues is him turning authoritarian). I am pro-Ukraine, pro-EU-US cooperation. I am anti-deportation (isn't everyone?) and pro-science. I am anti-mass-layoffs in government. I DO see the democrats as the party of the rich (WHY are they doing this btw? Are these people morons? If Trump manages to get the poor on his side, even with lies, and the democrats keep doing their poor=dumb thing, even when it's true, the democrats will lose every time). I was an Obama democrat (and since didn't vote).
Where should I go, if I don't want to be attacked.
The thing about fascism is that you don’t actually have to be guilty of the things they claim because they’ll just deport you or jail you regardless.
Europeans are getting interrogated in US airport detention rooms over liking tweets critical of Trump. If they choose to make an example of you, they will, and it doesn’t matter if your visa or green card was in perfect order.
They’re supported by an endless supply of online bootlickers who will believe and parrot any justification given. “Of course we sent this Czech citizen to El Salvador in chains, look at his middle name!”
> Europeans are getting interrogated in US airport detention rooms over liking tweets critical of Trump
Oh no, they’re being asked about tweets? Is that worse than the UK arresting its citizens in the middle of the night over their tweets? Or threatening to extradite Americans over their tweets? Thank god America has Europe to look to as a bastion of liberal democracy.
Oh no, what-about-ism. The US was known for having incredibly liberal free speech laws, not only on the books but in actual, honest-to-goodness, practice.
Well, that's gone, and what's worse, so is the reputation. The rule of law can be restored tomorrow. The perception of rule of law, will take generations to fix, if ever.
That's not what whataboutism is. Bringing whataboutism here is just pure deflection. A European being concerned about getting arrested for his tweets in the US makes just as much sense as an American not wanting to go to Europe because of gun violence in Europe.
Perhaps you’re not American and unfamiliar with the situation here, but Trump’s election was largely a reaction against the Democratic Party’s abandonment of the rule of law.
This played out at the local level, with progressive district attorneys and progressive judges refusing to prosecute or sentence criminals. And at the national level with the Biden administration failing to enforce a sensible border policy, against the wishes of the majority of Americans.
Is Trump going too far in the opposite direction? Maybe, but the prior administration did far more to destroy the perception of the rule of law than Trump has so far.
Going too far in the opposite direction? Even if what you are saying is true, I don't think "breaking the law" and "breaking the law even more" are opposite directions.
It’s interesting because many Europeans would be safer from fascist government overreach in the U.S. than they presently are in Europe, despite what you saw on MSNBC.
Agreed. I have here in this document that you are an illegal immigrant. You are not you say? I'm sorry, you're not owned any due process. Swift exit with you.
It’s not actually that hard to verify whether someone is a U.S. citizen.
Despite what they’d like you to believe, it does not require months of detention, or release into the country on blind faith that you’ll show up for a court hearing in a year.
Rule of law is universal. If they are illegal immigrants, it should be established by law and proper legal procedures. Otherwise, it is you who can be an illegal immigrant tomorrow, just because some dictator says it. You can prove otherwise? Good luck, you are an illegal immigrant, you can't.
In point of fact they are already trying to take away birthright citizenship. So clearly this is an endgame for them. “Oh that was a pretty critical tweet a few years ago citizen. Bring me documentation that one of your ancestors passed through Ellis Island from this brightly lit cell or we’ll deport you.”
Birthright citizenship has been enshrined in the US Constitution for nearly 160 years.
Calling it into question is a massive attack on the basic Constitutional framework of the country, and will immediately affect tens of millions of Americans. Are you a citizen? Sorry, you'll have to prove that your parents were citizens, and that their parents were citizens, and that their parents were citizens. It's a nightmare.
Why would you claim that existing citizenship would be revoked? Ex post facto laws are incredibly rare in the US, and the executive order explicitly said it “shall apply only to persons who are born within the United States after 30 days from the date of this order.”
Also, why are you implying that the US Constitution is immutable? Birthright citizenship was enacted by the 14th amendment, which as the name implies, was a change to our “enshrined US Constitution.” The founding fathers themselves passed amendments. They recognized that no constitution could possibly anticipate every future circumstance or challenge that a nation might face. They viewed this as a feature, not a bug.
The Trump administration is claiming that the 14th Amendment does not confer birthright citizenship. In their view, no ex post facto law is needed. With that logic, they can argue that tens of millions of Americans never legitimately obtained citizenship.
Stephen Miller, Trump's chief advisor on immigration, has promised to start aggressively de-naturalizing US citizens. This is how these people talk, and it has to be taken seriously.
> the executive order explicitly said it “shall apply only ...
The very fact that the President of the US is trying to abrogate a Constitutional right by executive order is incredibly alarming. Trump started with this order. If he's successful, he won't stop there. You're trusting in his own self-restraint, which is very unwise.
> Birthright citizenship was enacted by the 14th amendment, which as the name implies, was a change to our “enshrined US Constitution.”
Birthright citizenship was the norm in the US since the founding. The 14th Amendment formally guaranteed what was already the status quo, and made sure that it was applied without regard to race. The Supreme Court's majority opinion in the Kim Wong Ark case has a good discussion of this.
As well as being disingenuous your whole argument is beside the point. ASML isn’t threatening to move to the US.
The current administration has created day light between the US and EU governments and ASML is using this leverage to try and get the Dutch to ignore US export bans.
Here are some choice exerts so you can continue to avoid clicking on TFA:
> The pressure on asml began to build in 2019, when the Dutch government, at America's urging, barred the company from exporting its advanced euv machines to China... President Donald Trump's second term brings the threat of still tighter controls
> Referring to the Dutch government's willingness to follow America's lead on export bans, Mr Fouquet says that Europe must "decide for itself what it wants" and "should not be dictated to by anyone else".
I’m trying to move there. And that is a hyperbole. It’s a tiny amount of cases being reported by the media as being de facto what’s happening.
It’s the same with all of the so-called travel warnings issued by some Western countries. The “warnings” were literally just to have your paperwork in order I.e., obey the law and don’t overstay your visa. It’s far more strict than previous admins but certainly nothing that would deter me from moving there (just yet) at least.
I don’t think Americans have any idea how good they have it under any administration, especially if they are in tech. The lauded benefits of Europe are grossly exaggerated for the most part.
Khalil and Ozturk broke zero laws and had permanent residency. They are now in jail essentially forever simply because the administration doesn't like what they were saying.
Agree completely. I was referring more about entry to the US in the first place.
I suppose the current admin doesn’t believe the first amendment applies to non-citizens. I think I saw that judges are trying to block it. Do they have a point? Does the second amendment apply for non-citizens?
The entire Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments) applies to everyone, not just citizens.
The Bill of Rights never mentions citizens. It was formulated as a set of restrictions on what the federal government is allowed to do. The government shall not censor opinions. The government shall not establish a national religion. The government shall not jail anyone without due process. And so on. The Bill of Rights doesn't contain any clause like, "... except for non-citizens."
What Trump is trying to do flies in the face of more than two centuries of Constitutional practice.
Honestly, and cynically: it doesn't matter at this point. You can't put that genie back in the bottle. We can now take political prisoners in the US, and it won't stop at these two. Realistically it won't stop with this administration.
The tools are too useful and too tempting.
Well it depends on what you are referring to. If it’s people not being allowed into the US for various reasons I don’t think that has anything to do with the constitution. But yeah obviously these people being rounded up and being sent to Ecuador and whatnot definitely seems to fly in the face of the founding fathers
Did you even read the article? ASML is chaffing against American-led export regulations. The Trump government is still very keen on restricting China’s ability to make cutting edge chips.
The threat to move is probably empty. But it’s not a threat to move to the place that is generating their head winds.
> Hi,
I made this page to contextualize 13 billion euros (or 14): an amount due to Ireland in an EU Apple tax case and all over the airwaves here this week. I use some pretty silly back-of-the-envelope type calculations
It’s in the post. You asked a shitty question. Don’t be rude.
A lot of folks aren't great with numeracy, so I think it's good to use examples to help people understand how much tax Apple didn't have to pay that they themselves would have had to pay if they earned as much as Apple did.
Yes, explaining 13bn in terms of how many Children's Hospitals or Special Needs Assistants or Tablets per school child is very helpful in understanding how much money were taking about, and has no political agenda whatsoever.
King Leopold II established his brutal fiefdom in the "Congo Free State" in 1885 .. school shootings in the US and mass shootings from Las Vegas Hotels, etc are all rather this decade.
You have a stale point, Europe has moved on from colonialism and hasn't engaged in the home soil atrocities to the extent embraced by the US.
I'm not sure what I think about it, but I have heard the statement that "Hitler didn't do anything that the Empire[0,1] hadn't done before him; his mistake was in not realising one was supposed to limit that kind of activity to brown people".
[0] or others: let's give Leopold a hand, everyone.
[1] Having been reminded by the recent unfortunate fall of an imperial cosplayer: I have lost an image that was floating around the innrnetz, of a stormtrooper in a locker room, half in (or is it half out?) of uniform, sitting dejected on a bench with their hands facing us and I M P E clearly tattooed on one set of knuckles, with the other set reading R I A L.
I’m sorry but this is rather stupid. Europe has done incredible damage to the world that persists to this day. Until they address this damage, it absolutely is not a stale point. Assuming you are European, do not attempt to weasel your way out of your debt to the world.
I get what you’re getting at but you’re engaging in whataboutism. Just because parts of Europe also did damage to the world does not mean we get to ignore or dismiss what this person is saying especially when it’s pretty on the nose. Firthermore (and I don’t really think it matters regardless), this comment or could be from some small European country that did nothing major and you’re accusing them of a cognitive dissonance that may not exist.
With the exception of the Brits (whose deconstruction from its Empire days keeps fucking stuff up to this day, just look at Israel/Palestine or Pakistan/India), we have learned from our mistakes.
I'm not foolish enough to claim we're perfect - far from it, especially when it comes to restitution towards former colonies and looted art from there - but at least we recognized how and where we fucked up, and we're teaching our children about that in school. We don't skip over the horrors of WW1, we don't skip over WW2 and what led up to it, we don't skip over the various genocides committed on European soil. We acknowledge and own the stuff that our ancestors did.
In contrast, as I mentioned, more and more American schools outright ban books and teaching about its problematic past, or (like MKULTRA) it isn't taught about at all.
So what mistakes do you believe you have learned from? From here, it appears you have very much retained your paternalistic European attitude toward other cultures which you deem to be less learned or morally inclined.
While you scratch around for an answer, you might also like to remind yourself that European countries maintain undue influence in their former colonies to this very day.
Look, they are comparing Europe to the US, the current hegemon, and criticise that the US does not include it's history of violence and abuse in its curriculum to the same extend as they do in Europe.
I honestly don't think your comment addresses this criticism at all. You seem to look for reasons why the US shouldn't be criticised to start with, which sort of strengthens the point op made.
> From here, it appears you have very much retained your paternalistic European attitude toward other cultures which you deem to be less learned or morally inclined.
Well, the current issues that the US face are so large they are hardly to ignore here. Y'all's regular occurrence of mass shootings even makes national headlines in our media, and we see the cultural issues seeping from US-made media (both entertainment and social media) into our societies. We don't have a real answer to that other than regulation though.
> While you scratch around for an answer, you might also like to remind yourself that European countries maintain undue influence in their former colonies to this very day.
Fair point, France does have its issues in Africa, but at least the colonies are their own independent nations (and do exercise that right, as we've seen the last few months).
The parts I love are where I get to make my own decisions locally, with people who are directly affected (which to be fair, is the majority).
The parts I hate are those planned centrally; which thankfully right now are mainly limited to IT, budgeting / expenses, etc. You can completely tell that at the CTO level it looks like we're saving gobs of money by planning centrally; but at the local level you can see that in fact what's happening is the costs are being externalized into other areas in ways that are difficult to measure, but probably end up costing the company at least 3x.
Some of the best jobs are in remote corners of large companies, in particular something that is very needed but nobody can or want to do, and thus people will leave you alone enjoying freedom and a big company paycheck. Like dealing with the legacy system that actually keeps the lights on while MBAs are drafting strategies to build one failed system after another.
I like each in their own way, I may be more biased towards Kubrick as I consider the Shining one of my top 3 movies of all time. Lynch may be the ultimate auteur in making a certain type of movie or tv show that really no one else was making or thinking about(Blue Velvet, Mulholland dr. etc). Twin Peaks season 3 might be one of the best tv shows ever made(and also one of the weirdest) and its why I like David Lynch so much. Kubrick touched on that side a bit with 2001(my second favorite of his movies) but his style is much more traditional.
Yes. But how much of their results is due to their attitude, versus just a coincidence?
I like movies, but admittedly know nothing about making them.
Big budget movies require hundreds of people with their own opinions working together to work towards a single vision. I don't find it impossible that demanding, narcissistic, and disagreeable people may have an advantage in that regard.
and it’s equally as possible insufferable directors make it worse far more often than they make it better.
there is no shortage of absolutely elite tier directors who exhibit exceptional abilities to work well with others.
in fact. on the spectrum where most coworkers “would _love_ to work with them again” to “nope, not a chance they were awful humans” i’d make a confident bet there are far more elite tier who lean towards the former.
