There's an interesting series of articles in Slate. There's a link reference to a historical article...written by out (overarching) division director. There is absolutely no mention of our division--at all, whatsoever. Not in the historical article, not in the Slate piece (as far as I've read). Even though our division has been producing the stats for this since it was charged by Congress to do so in...1917? Something like that. Longer than almost anyone else.
Nice. So nice to have been shafted by the woman who then went on to become our director. Nice to see that she thinks so highly of our division's work and research. Nice to see that she's willing to completely write off one of the five major components that she oversees. Way to go, Director. Thanks for nothing.
somthing similar happened to a friend of mine; she did 6 months research ( being a very intelligent girl Cambridge post graduate and all and her boss published her work under his name with not so much as an acknowledgement of her input - which was 95%) and who did she work for? Transparency International!!!
__________________ “If you really want to learn tango, first of all remember to do as you’re told. In the real world, women rule, but here men give the orders. We like to fantasise that we’re important for a couple of hours”
Said to Miranda France by a Buenos Aires tanguero from her book 'Bad Times in Buenos Aires.'
'ing cakes is bad for your health> 
Linear Mode
