Ok, ok. But it's usually enough outside the world of 24.
Careful there. A lot of people trying to make an example created a martyr.
I'm advocating social peace.
Sorry, I don't believe in compassion and charity. Never worked, never will. Aside of stripping needy people of their last remaining dignity, it's also something you simply cannot rely on once time get rougher, i.e. exactly when those in need feel it the most.
That the supply side can fix problems is a myth. Sorry. It cannot. Mostly because there is no incentive. The economy is in the slumps because the demand is missing. And that in turn is something you can only fix if people HAVE TO spend when the economy would make it more appealing to refrain from doing so, i.e. exactly when the economy would need you to spend to keep it running.
Now, whether people spend money depends mostly on two factors: First, whether they want to. And second, whether they have the means to. You might notice that the economy actually kept going for a while even after the steam was off. That's because people still had money to spend. The recession came when this was over, when people could no longer spend because they had nothing left.
Our whole economy in the west is very heavily dependent on services. Services otoh are also the first thing people cut back on when money gets tight. What's higher on your priority list: Haircut or food?
There is a very easy reason why countries with traditionally "socialist" systems were hit far less heavily by the recession. Mostly because even poor people still have money to spend.
Why not? Upsetting fanatics is a great pastime.
It's trivially easy to do that. All it takes is a redefinition of the value of numbers. Or have some fun with subclasses.
I know what you're trying to say, but you're dealing with people here who do math for fun. If anything I dare say that you should have someone coming up with at least five ways to prove you wrong before the sun goes up today over California.
Well, on the other hand, OTPs are the wet dream of our law enforcement.
"And here we have the decoded text, it clearly tells us that he's behind every crime committed in the past 20 years, at least that's what it decrypts to..."
You underestimate the stupidity of your adversary. And their sadism.
Or, in other words, just 'cause you can't confess doesn't mean the torture ends.
Another reason why biometry is great to establish identity but poor for authentication.
True, but why should we get monkeys as politicians forever? I dare say we deserve better!
The problem is that in a market where supply outmatches demand by a sizable margin, capitalism cannot provide an equilibrium. And workforce is such a market. Supply outmatches demand by at least tenfold. And the usual market instrument of capitalism will not produce a sufficient solution, i.e. the supply simply vanishing because there is no demand.
People refuse to simply vanish because you don't "need" them. They'd probably rather kill you to get your money than die off peacefully.
Maybe answer the question? Should the "permission to breed" depend on your job?
Usually such a thing happens when a butt-kiss artist meets a boss who is susceptible to being kissed up. Sadly our system does support such moochers. That has less to do with being sober or being on time, or even with competence. It's just that con artists will always prevail as long as people suffering from inflated levels of stupidity and people able to spend money are not two distinct groups.
Really? In a recession companies cut down on pet projects?
I'm taken aback, really!
Other way 'round it is, if you only pay minimum, you get morons. Don't expect anything other than monkeys if you offer just peanuts!
So only rich people should be allowed to breed? Hey, now it all makes sense. After all, reproduction is the most capitalist of all kinds of things humans can do, the production means are fully in private hands!