Here's the thing, though: I am needed. But unfortunately, I'm one of the few.

But that's besides the point. What matters is that the replacement rate of young people vs. old people is only at about 80%. And that's not gonna change in the near future. For every 5 people leaving the workforce, only 4 will join it. Save immigration, of course, but let's face it, you only need so many goat-herders...

And that's the point. It's not just the burger flippers and shelf stockers that retire. It's also the researchers and doctors, the finance gurus and the engineers. Yes, there has never been a shortage of unskilled idiots. And that shortage sure isn't in any danger of growing, considering that the bar to enter the workforce sure rises yet again with AI taking over more and more unskilled jobs. So I don't fear for the low level jobs that they may go unfilled.

What I fear is that high level, senior positions will be hard to fill. For two reasons: First, the aforementioned 80% replacement rate. But even with 100% replacement rate, if we replace our juniors with AI, where should they get the experience to become those hard to find and highly sought seniors?

How about this one?

For SX to set up a base on the moon and mars, they will need 2 different types of landers: Cargo and Manned.
With manned, it is easy enough for ppl and supplies to be transferred from space-only to the lander. The question becomes, what about the cargo version?
So far, SX has shown a door on the side, but I believe that there is NO WAY that is going to work. The reason is that the cargo will be pulled out and then have to be stacked directly below the door. In addition, assuming that lunar and martian cargo systems never return to earth surface, then we need a way to move cargo from the starship leaving earth to the lander, or possibly something in-between.
With that in mind, about the only system that I can imagine would be to use the nose opening, docking nose to nose, and then having containers, moved from 1 system to the other. Finally, when landed, the nose is opened up again, and a crane on the inside is used to pull the container out and place it on the side. What is interesting is that the crane could be attached to the rocket via a track that runs on the inside so that it can rotate around the lander and drop off containers directly to the ground as opposed to being forced to stack them.

Now, as to starship:
1) trivial for it to reach orbit. It was not because they are not working on orbiting, but on all of the stuff in-between such as take-off, separation, fuel pump testing, re-entry and landing on a single spot.
2) It is highly likely that SX will launch a couple of starlinks sats on this next launch. If not, it will almost certainly be the one after that. IOW, they will start using it for Cargo. 3) Re-fueling in orbit is not a big deal. They tested this in the last launch, internally. In addition, liquid transfers have been done for a long time (water, lox, fuel for ISS and other modules). They will need to build a tanker and a fuel-depot, but tanker will likely happen this year.
4) manned rating for launches will take a number of launches. Of course, that is exactly what SX intends to do with starlink cargos. Even if landings are not working yet, they will continue to use this to put up their starlinks that can not go on F9 ( though possible on FH ). The interesting item is how to test the life support. I suspect that they will be putting up 1 or more of these as space station module. Each 1 has more volume than the entire ISS (and far more than China's space station). Just by putting up the first one as a regular starship, they can sort things out for the ECLSS as well as layout, etc. Ideally, they would build several of these with later ones have multiple docking ports. That would enable these to quickly replace the ISS, while others continue to add their units to these for testing of their modules/ECLSS.

And yes, of this could be done before 2026.
Of course, that leaves the lunar lander. I would have to guess that once SX is able to land booster and starship on earth, they will have no issues landing on either the moon/mars. The only real issue will be (re-)entry into mars. The atmosphere is thin, but it is still there.

You don't consider it serious that you're essentially indentured servants of corporations and that they can easily circumvent due process and force you into settling on their terms?

O... kay...

Yeah, there's a lot of lamenting, but face it, it's tantamount to complaining that the Beef Wellington isn't exactly medium on point where everyone around you is starving to death.

Compared to the problems you face, we're actually, I hate to say it, pretty well off.

You are aware that the replacement rate of young people is not up to what it used to be, yes? For every 5 people you fire, you can only hire 4 new ones.

In a red state, the money would just be embezzled and then some semblance of the project is realized, preferably in a way that nobody can or would ever use, so nobody notices it's unusable.

You have to drive them horizontally. Not vertically.

Of course you're breaking ground if you slam a high speed train right into it. Jeesh.

We are talking about an IT person getting fired for being "too old". The athlete is something that was compared to.

What makes you think that someone who is considered "too old" at 35 for an IT job would get some other job?

Do I really have to explain how analogies work?

It's less that, it's more that I can't just tell me to fuck off and leave. That works in an abusive relationship, but what can you do if you notice you share a body with an asshole?

It's harder to exploit older people, that's true.

They have already heard all the bullshit and empty promises and just don't fall for them anymore.

And even if you fire most 35 year olds, there is always a need for someone to train the next generation of layoffs.

But like with coaches and trainers, you need far fewer than you need players.

You think?

Tell me one good reason why I would not put such a clause in a burger flipper job contract to ensure my burger flipper will think twice before bailing from the horrible boss I am, knowing he will never flip a burger again if he does, and he already has a non-compete from his time at Target.

There are only so many no-skill jobs in a town, and once you're barred from all of them by ridiculous non-compete clauses, you have to stay with that last one that gang-pressed you into indentured service, because you have no way out anymore.

What exactly is sensible about that? You're punishing someone for creating a successful business by disallowing him to compete with the company that was stupid enough to buy it from him.

The idea of the EU, and one of the few ideas hatched by politicians that actually worked out 100% perfectly, was to intertwine and mix the economies of European countries so deeply that it would be economic suicide for anyone to go to war with a neighbor.

Germany and France have been at war, on and off, since the partition of the Frankish Empire into an eastern and western part, somewhere in the 9th century. Those (almost) 80 years of peace between these two countries that we had for the past (almost) 80 years are unprecedented in recorded history.