You don't need to cherry pick data because you're obviously starting with the conclusion and not bothering to even look at the data.
I don't know why India is building more power plants, but I suspect part of the motivation is politics. Toshiba filed for bankruptcy after buying Westinghouse because of cost overruns in Georgia and SC. The US Department of Energy says that for new energy generation before subsidies wind energy is comparable to natural gas production, solar is about 20% more expensive, and new nuclear and coal plants are about 80% more expensive than wind and natural gas. https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.eia.gov%2Foutlooks%2Faeo%2Fpdf%2Felectricity_generation.pdf (note: had to go to 2015 to get coal).
No, you've been listening to the right wing media, because the mainstream media hasn't been making these claims. Take a look at the Clinton Foundations tax filings, like I did, or factcheck.org did, and you'll see that your claim is bullshit. Yes, the Clintons made a boatload of money with speaking engagements, but they take no salary from the foundation, maybe just travel expenses. BTW, by your token, I'm no leftwind wingnut, I voted for Bush in 2000.
From Factcheck.org http://www.factcheck.org/2015/06/where-does-clinton-foundation-money-go/
Asked for some examples of the work it performs itself, the Clinton Foundation listed these:
To bolster its case, CARLY for America noted that the Clinton Foundation spent 12 percent of its revenue on travel and conferences and 20 percent of its revenue on salaries. That’s true. But the Form 990 specifically breaks out those travel, conference and salary expenses that are used for “program service expenses” versus those that are used for management or fundraising purposes.
For example, nearly 77 percent of the $8.4 million spent on travel in 2013 went toward program services; 3.4 percent went to “management and general expenses”; and about 20 percent went to fundraising.
As for conferences, nearly 98 percent of money spent was tabbed as a programming expense. And when it comes to salaries — which includes pension plan contributions, benefits and payroll taxes — about 73 percent went to program service expenses.
The point is that some foundations actually do the charitable activities themselves instead of paying other charities to do that work for them, and the Clinton Foundation is one of them. If you hadn't been listening to the right wing lies, you would have known that instead of propagating the lies. Is it a good, effective charity? I really don't know, but by repeating this nonsense, you're doing a disservice to the 2,000 CF foundation employees who are trying to make a difference.
I'm not a Hilary Clinton fan, and she was a crummy candidate who clearly has spent the last 17 years believing that she deserved to be President someday. If the Democratic party wants to win in 2018 and 2020, they need to start pointing out that trickle down economics has never worked, the upcoming "tax reform" is going to increase the deficit, make the rich richer, the companies will use their tax cuts for things like higher dividends and stock buybacks instead of investing in new equipment and better pay for employees who are not top executives like they did with the 2004 tax amnesty, and that Trump's cabinet is doing stupid things like making energy more expensive by pushing coal and nuclear energy, the EPA is allowing more pollution, the Interior Department is basically letting mining and logging go in to national monuments, forests to do things like strip mining, the Republicans voted to limit abortion, but couldn't pass a children's health insurance bill, the HUD secretary grew up getting HUD benefits but wants to dismantle the program. And when the Democrats make these points, they need to also explain how they're going to do a better job. If they can't do that, they'll lose again, because people like you are believing the lies the Republicans keep repeating.
Meanwhile, Russia is doing its best to antagonize Hillary, Obama, and Kerry, to the point of directly funding their opposition in Syria with weapons and overt personnel/expertise. If Hillary gets elected, I can virtually guarantee that we will end up in a shooting war with Russia...probably via proxy, possibly even directly.
It's a good thing that Putin's fanboi Trump is going to win the election then?
My employer outsourced about 200 people to IBM Global Services about 5 years ago, hiring maybe 30 of them to stay for 2-4 years. About 6 months into the program, he had the gall to stand up at an IT wide meeting and admit that they "didn't get the A-team, they didn't even get the B or C-team, but he would fix it". Two years later, he was gone. We still have IBM and Cognizant at our shop, and they're still not the A-team. Don't get me wrong, some of them are excellent, and most of them are the on-shore team, the off-shore team is always hit-or-miss. I only know of one personal that we've ever managed to "fire" for cluelessness, most of them disappear because they got a better job across the street back in India. The Cognizant folks actually have tried to bring in some modern practices, unlike the IBM group, who couldn't even be bothered to learn to use a newer version of an IBM product (with practically zero differences). When either company brought in "experts" in technologies we are using, they never knew more than our own people did, and often less.
Maybe it's our contracts, but I know of plenty of cases where we've asked for statement of work to do stuff, and the internal folks report that something that ought to take a couple of hours gets padded out to several weeks. If I were a CIO, I'd build my own internal contractor pool before outsourcing to India. With an internal pool, there's more stability and accountability, and you can salt it with people from your company who actually understand the business.
The system was down for backups from 5am to 10am last Saturday.