WAPO: How DARE Visa Officers Look at Applicant's Social Media

The Washington Post is furious that officers are looking at the social media of visa applicants when considering their applications. Indeed, they are so angry that they are even mad at Obama for allowing such a policy to be put into place: he should've known there was a risk that the American people might let us all down by not electing Hillary!

Of course, American citizens are more or less used to having employers (and prospective employers) and even US government agencies track their social media. But, making sure that huge tech companies don't have employees who engage in crime think is FAR more important than a silly thing like deciding who we let into the country. That would be downright UNAMERICAN.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Response to Lion of the Blogosphere on Abortion

Lion of Blogosphere shares this comment on abortion: in his latest post: No one that I personally know has ever gotten an abortion. My main objection to pro-lifers is that they create a burden on taxpayers. This is my main reason for supporting abortion. My family pays way too much in taxes as it is. It’s unfair to my mother, who has worked so hard to create wealth, and to support myself and my chronically ill father, to have to pay for the Section 8 and food stamps for low IQ people’s children. As for myself personally, I don’t have any reason to ever get an abortion. I’m getting married soon to the only partner I have ever had, whom I started dating in high school. I just want other women to get abortions, because i don’t want my future kids to have to share a classroom with low IQ violent bastard kids. LOTB seems to approve of this quote and agree with its underlying logic.... but is it accurate? Does abortion have a eugenic effect? Personally, I don't really ca...
Read more

Female Privilege and Suffrage

Here's  a politician named JB Sanford arguing against women's suffrage in 1911: "Suffrage is not a right. It is a privilege that may or may not be granted. Politics is no place for a women consequently the privilege should not be granted to her. ...The men are able to run the government and take care of the women. Do women have to vote in order to receive the protection of man? Why, men have gone to war, endured every privation and death itself in defense of woman. To man, woman is the dearest creature on earth, and there is no extreme to which he would not go for his mother or sister.  By keeping woman in her exalted position man can be induced to do more for her than he could by having her mix up in affairs that will cause him to lose respect and regard for her. Woman does not have to vote to secure her rights. Man will go to any extreme to protect and elevate her now. As long as woman is woman and keeps her place she will get more protection and more consideration t...
Read more

Vox: Trump Administration Not Doing Enough to Help Giant, Global Tech Companies Underpay Workers

Vox has a new article  freaking out that the US government isn't doing enough to make sure tech companies get cheap labor from abroad to code. They might even have to (GULP) pay competitive wages in order to get techies to work. Or else they might move to Canada! Canada! I'm a former libertarian and someone who's area of study was economics. So I understand the logic of "if we aren't nice enough to big corporations they might move abroad" type argumentation. Indeed, you might find me on one of my old blogs making the same kind of argument when I was opposing minimum wage hikes or supporting corporate tax rates. It's one of those things that's tempting because there is a bit of truth to it. If a nation puts onerous enough regulations, taxes, etc on companies and there are much more convenient alternatives abroad that are easier to move to, it can have adverse impacts. One thing I also learned as I moved away from libertarianism/free markets (whateve...
Read more