Then don't be a single income family. Then don't have kids. Those are choices you made. The tradeoff of making them is that you lose flexibility at work. Obviously you thought that's worth it.

Its also not as hard as you think it is. Go back to basics. Don't eat out- ever. Don't by gizmos and gadgets. Don't go on expensive trips. My family lived on a single teacher's income in the 80s. And we still managed to save money. My father's income then would have been less than 40K, that equals about 80K in today's dollars. If you're making less than that as a programmer you're fucking up majorly.

I have a decade and a half of experience, I've been tech lead at 2 successful startups that sold for large profits and a principle at a 3rd. I have CEOs and VCs who would go to bat for me, so no I have 0 worries that I personally will be unemployable. Nobody with experience should have that worry- if you're any good you have former coworkers who will vouch for you.

And your fear of gaps is overwrought. I've also had multi-month gaps in the past- in 2009 because I decided I'd rather not work for the assholes who bought one of those sartups any longer, even if the economy sucked and in 2012 because I took the profits from the sale of the 2nd and decided to travel for 6 months. After the second one I ended up making 30K more a year than I was before. I've never had more than a casual question on either gap. Nobody gave a fuck.

Because they pump in water from non-desert areas. Not all of CA is a desert, but much of it is. Nor is "dry barren area" the definition of a desert- a desert is defined by the amount of rainfall a year. Most of southern CA qualifies.

The bubble isn't really tech. Its some aspect of tech. Just like the .com bust was caused by too much money in startups without legitamate ways of raising revenue and the 2008 collapse wasn't a banking collapse, it was a ssubprime mortgage collapse. Figure out what the cause will be, and find a company that is not in that subfield and has minimal reliance on it. This won't allow 100% avoidance, but will limit your exposure.

FWIW I expect the eventual burst to be due to an advertising collapse- someone has to actually sell something at some point. Established companies that sell physical goods should be immune, firmware would be a good call.

Also, the best way to be bubble immune- cash in the bank, so you can ride it out. I don't need to work this decade, so a few months without a job won't hurt me.

Then save some money. We make a ton of it as programmers, there's no excuse not to have at least 6 months, preferably more, in your emergency funds. I have enough I don't need to work this decade. If any employer wants to abuse me, I say "no". If they threaten to fire me I say "go ahead"- it will cost them tens of thousands of dollars to find my replacement, and I'll have a job inside 3 weeks. Hell it would be a nice little surprise vacation.

From the dead? Sure, why not? Prioritize from areas that would be covered at burial.

Better solution- make all organs automatically donated upon death. The owners don't need them anymore. Then no money needs to be involved at all, and we'd have a ready supply. The family can get what's left of the body after any usable organs have been harvested. Bonus- a system that's actually fair, rather than making money the determining factor.

But a slower moving car is less likely to cause injury in a crash and a rear collision is less dangerous than a side crash. Given a choice of those two, I'd risk being rear ended. But it sounds here to me that either approach alone may have worked, the switch in the middle failed miserably.

Mandriva still sounds like a gay porno.

The debt grew under Reagan. It was 907B in 1980 and 2600B in 1988. Even as a percent of GDP, that's an increase

Source: https://www.treasurydirect.gov...

No, it comes down to explicitness is always better than explicitness. There is no case in which yours is better, or even usable code.

Don't worry- Java people are learning how to make up for that by creating whole incomprehensible sublanguages based on annotation processing that make C macros look good.

Totally disagree. If I see

for(int i: items) {
  if(i<10){
    results.add(i);
  }
}

I know exactly what it does. Anyone who has done any programming in any language can guess what it does. Its simple, easy to read, and if you want can be pulled into a function. Your haskell and Python implementations are unreadable and requires the user to think about each line. They're inferior to straight forward programming by orders of magnitude and should never be used.

They're going to love a new currency. Look at how much they can manipulate a regulated currency to fuck over people and enrich themselves. Image what they can do with an unregulated one.

Its not possible to stop murder. So we should get rid of the laws against it, why bother if it's not possible?

Just because perfection can't be achieved doesn't mean something isn't worth doing.