Some organizations in my industry require them, so guess it depends.
Regardless of if it's required, however, I would still argue that it's good even if you don't have to send it to the company. To me, it helps me put my head in the right mindspace to argue for myself and make a case that I'm the person for them.
To me, I don't understand why someone would proofread their resume but not their cover letter.
Then again, I'd be someone that would put in the same degree of effort to the resume as the cover letter. Not everyone is like that.
Guess it just depends on if you find it worthwhile or not. If you can't seem to land jobs following interview after interview, it might be worthwhile to look into cover letters if only to help you orient yourself better to the job and company.
Great dialogue!
I think cover letters are still absolutely relevant to the job process.
I liken cover letters to cheat sheets that you prepare for an exam. You may not need to make one to be successful, but can be very helpful.
Usually with cover letters, I try to make the argument that I'm good for the company, and the company is good for me. This usually allows me to frame the way I look a new job as a business agreement where both parties can benefit, and that I'm not a parasite taking from them and not giving.
I don't make cover letters for each and every position I apply to or look into, but for those ones i think I have a good chance of landing and those companies I believe in, I'll absolutely put in more effort with cover letters.
After looking into the data, I'd probably agree with you.
The US USDA ERS estimates that urban area land use is the lowest of all categories, but is rising. Yet NASA found that turfgrass represents the largest irrigated crop in the US, 3 times as much as corn.
I will have to say that the research on this is quite outdated, with newer research seemingly coming from industry groups associated with the golf sector and giving rise to conflicts of interest.
But I generally agree with your sentiment. Place the blame on the individual, the citizen, rather than the corporations and economic industries. I'd tend to agree with you, although I wonder if the issues are necessarily mutually exclusive. Sure we might prioritize the latter, but the former gives people tangible reasons to point to and continue in their advocacy for the latter.
"Pruning" is a specific action defined in Marvel's Loki where a timeline that branches away from the Sacred Timeline is destroyed for fear of it causing problems, so no the original commenter wasn't talking about the Tennessee Valley Authority.
It's been a while since I've seen the data, but isn't the American lawn considered a major biome now? At least compared to wildlands.
Between lawns and monocropping in the US, yes we need to fight back against those activities and favor rewilding.
For those reading, start by introducing native plants to your parcel. Let nature do it's thing. Then, consider going vegan since animals need multiple times the amount of land and water to grow: resources to grow the plants, then resources to grow the animals. Then, consider donating to organizations like The Xerces Society, the Wildlife Conservation Network, or MarAlliance. Better yet, find something local to you and join up!
The Left did organize. It was during the 2016 election season. Bernie Sanders was on his way to warning the endorsement for presidential frontrunner, when the DNC fucked him over.
There are a lot of monied interests looking to keep the working class split and divided by prohibiting a pro-labor candidate from reaching society at large.
Looks like Harris did lose by about 79,000 votes in Michigan.
Comparatively, about 44,500 went to Stein.
We don't ultimately know how the uncommitted movement voted. If they were a monolith throughout, we'd expect 100k for Stein. If some abstained and some voted for Harris or Trump, that would've split the movement.
If all of Stein's voters went to Harris, however, that wouldn't have changed the outcome. Harris would have still been short ~34,400. So if you wanted to make the argument that the uncommitted movement was a voting block, then the entire ~44k block voting for Harris wouldn't have changed the outcome.
Overall I don't see Michigan outcomes changing my argument. If Dems were more persuasive, even if they lied about Gaza, they could have sweeped the nation. And even if the uncommitteds chose the lesser of two evils, Kamala still lost all other swing states. You can't chock the outcomes of those states up to the uncommitteds, because the largest organizational presence was in Michigan.
Thank you for voicing this opinion in this thread, and bringing the receipts.
I want to buy a Framework laptop soon. I have the option to choose which Linux distro is best for me and load that on.
Any suggestions?