Signal jamming seems safer, I suppose this technique would be also allowed.

These products don't pretend they are *actually* meat-based steak, sausage, or burgers. They proudly describe themselves as plan-based meat substitutes. Doesn't it make sense to call the product something like "hamburger substitute" or "plant-based burger"?

Whatever the rich people are thinking about, I'm pretty sure it has nothing to do with imaging a world without money. Money is literally what they live for, every second of every day. Why on earth would they imagine a future without it?

Because McKinsey is in the business of reducing headcount. If they can't help customers do that, then their own revenues take a hit. Follow the money.

The headline reads:

This implies that the number of fees is a reason for the proposed requirements change. The number has nothing to do with the proposal, rather, the attitude of the new leadership of the FCC, is entirely responsible for the change. The new FCC wants to cater to (right-leaning) businesses, even if it screws the people. It's as simple as that.

That is your opinion, which is not the same as it being factual. Show me your source, where research has shown that Windows is somehow inherently less secure than other operating systems. The truth is, every OS is insecure. Heartbleed infected millions of Linux servers, phishing doesn't care what OS you are using.

The amount that a job is "worth" isn't based on how difficult or back-breaking the job is. That is a complete misconception of what makes a job "valuable."

It's also not the case that a job that requires more hours, is "worth" more.

Instead, the value of a job is based on how hard it is to find someone who can do the job well. Childcare is difficult work, but there is a huge number number of people who can and are willing to do it, depressing wages for that line of work. Same goes for trash collecting or fast food work. On the other hand, software development requires little physical work, mostly just sitting at a desk all day. But because there is demand for skilled developers, and skilled developers are hard to find, the pay is relatively high.

The back-breaking nature of a job doesn't inherently make the job more valuable. If your friend wants to make more money, what he needs is to learn a skill that qualifies him for other work that is more valuable.

Sure, but this is more a problem with insurance, than with doctors or with disease labeling. It's important to better understand the different forms of autism in order to better understand how to properly manage the various conditions, even apart from insurance payment structures.

So how is that any different from iOS, or Android, or OSX? All of those OSes are nearly constantly accessed remotely by the companies that made those OSes. And as for Windows, it doesn't matter if your login is a Microsoft account or a local account, Microsoft still controls updates and runs processes on that machine, without your knowledge or explicit consent (other than the broad consent you give them when you agree to their TOS).

I can see that you have a beef with Microsoft. But the truth is, every single OS ever built, is insecure. There is nothing particularly insecure about Windows, compared to every other OS. Linux, OSX, iOS, Android, doesn't matter, if a hacker wants in, there are ways to get in.

Wait, so you're suggesting that money buys things? And that more money buys nicer things? And that lots of money buys luxury things? Who would have thought?

And on the income side, people who do work that is more valuable to the person doing the paying, get paid more. What on earth?

SOME people (like me) even choose to make *less* money because they value work-life balance more than a bigger paycheck. Maybe, just maybe, we let people decide for themselves how much work, and what kind of work, they want to do to achieve whatever income level they consider important.

The Las Vegas Fry's is still vacant, too. Best Buy has this market to itself.

Interesting theory, but again, not supported by the facts.

In 2022
- The top 1% of taxpayers paid 40.4% of all income taxes collected.
- The top 50% of taxpayers paid 97% of all income taxes collected.
- The bottom 50% of taxpayers paid 3% of all income taxes collected.
https://taxfoundation.org/data....

That bottom 50% includes about half of the middle class, and pay less than 3% of the total. These numbers do not support your statement that the majority of taxes "fall on the shoulders of the 'shrinking' middle class". (And I'd remind you here, the middle class is primarily shrinking because they are moving into the upper class.)

So while you might be right that top earners pay less of a percentage of their earnings than lower earners, they still do pay the vast majority of all income taxes.

How exactly does the "gap" between the wealthiest and the poorest cause problems?

Elon Musk's income has zero impact on my personal quality of life, or yours, or on the quality of life of those in the lower income group.

No. The percentages in the Pew Research are not the percentages of the total amount of wealth, but on the *number of people* in each income category. So when it says that more people moved from the middle class to the upper class, Zuckerberg's wealth has nothing to do with that number.

The way the CPI works, is that it takes into account all of the types of things a person buys, including housing, food, electronics, and everything else. https://www.bls.gov/cpi/overvi... You can't just cherry-pick one element of the CPI and say "See, this one component inflated at greater than the rate of inflation!" It's true, but it also ignores that other elements of inflation actually deflated.