/facepalm

Ok I'll actually spell this out:

Without realizing it, you're trying to attribute to the Baumol effect what is better attributed to Bowen's law. In 2006, two economists tried to pin this on the former after literally decades of attribution to the latter (well before the student debt crisis.) But then 2008 happened, and what we saw what happens when a decrease in demand results in a decrease in revenue.

Furthermore, as the first link I gave showed, there's only evidence in support of colleges actually reducing their efficiency. But how can they get away with that? Easy; Bowens law, which itself is enabled by the overabundance of student loans.

This has been examined and reexamined by many economists. Actual economists, not illiterate ones like you. And, if you had actually gone to a university before, you'd know that students can't bid on admissions, rather schools simply cap them. So it's driven by revenue, not demand. As 2008 showed, demand only affects costs when there's insufficient demand.

Have fun.

You're calling yourself stupid then given Tesla, not SpaceX, gave him that trillion dollar pay package.

That wasn't Elon's decision.

https://spacenews.com/shotwell...

If that was arranged though the Pentagon, it probably would have gone off without a hitch as it would have absolved SpaceX of any legal liability.

You guys are working on the very bad assumption (made by a guy who has no idea what he's talking about) that this information is even available to SpaceX to begin with. The only way to determine the precise location of a terminal is with plain old GPS, and that isn't at all foolproof.

This is quite false. It can only be known which cell the dish is in. You're thinking (likely without realizing) about Doppler. It doesn't work that way. And even then, it can still be slightly outside of that area. Photons don't work the way you think they do. The cell only guarantees where you'll get an adequate signal for service, it does NOT guarantee that you won't get an adequate signal outside of that area.

You're making a ton of wild assumptions here, and no doubt you're predicating even those on top of your first assumption, which itself is very wrong.

Are we talking abou the same person? Dr. Jonathan Haidt, NYU professor and acclaimed researcher? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Uh, you might want to check with Reality on that. Last I heard Grandpa is back on the front lines because most of the sons and grandsons are already dead. And that goes for both sides. Not exactly a good sign of being able to sustain this much longer.

As far as folding, this ain’t a card game. Death is the price paid. There won’t be many winners of this war no matter where blood lines end up drawn in the dirt.

Oh, you mean all that shit that was allowed to metastisize under the Dumb and Dumber DEI dementia regime for years?

Don’t dare ask yourself what created President Trump. Twice. You just might find the root cause and accountability you don’t CARE to admit or accept.

A wholly unqualified Biden started working for an energy company in one of the most corrupt countries on the planet.

Just a few years later, that same country would receive over one-hundred billion dollars in warmongering funds, provided by American taxpayers.

A now-infamous Bahamian crypto orgy fund was donating to the DNC considerable millions for the midterm elections in 2022. And we don’t have to wonder how easy it would be for an offshore crypto fund to manage funding transfers from American taxpayers via Ukraine.

You tell me if “siphon” is a strong enough word to describe that. Hunter Biden could start his own line of commercial smokers at this point. He’s already a world renowned artist.

Because not even the billionaires want to pay $200 for a fucking pizza. That’s why.

You’d think COVID would have made the problems of rapid unjustified inflation quite obvious. About 98% of the world still remembers pre-pandemic pricing. The only reasonable price tags that survived that were under the category of mass addiction. Go figure.

And I’ll believe that $100 GDP value as soon as the AI overlords agree that $300/hr is the standard corporate tax penalty for AI entities that replace human workers, with at least half that going towards funding UBI. Until then, it looks like pointless girl math that ignores every problem with rampant inflation taught in history class while ignoring the growing problem of AI driven unemployment.

So many questions, so many dollars.

And wham, pre-reviews show folding and creases, like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Thick and heavy for a phone, but if you want something that can be an actual tablet, you gotta make some serious trade-offs. When when using it as a phone OR tablet on a table, there is that bulge with the cameras so it can't sit flat. And that inner big screen is soft and scratch-prone. Hmm.

There are more than just pretty pictures on that page. It has letters too. Those letters make words. Those words make sentences. That means you read it, not gawk at it.

Qualified economist my ass, you obviously don't even understand the concept of money supply, or worse, you probably think that only relates to how much money is in circulation. More like simpleton economist in your case. In this context, demand only comes into play when there's a lack of it, which you could have actually inferred from the pretty pictures, combined with what anybody who has actually completed college would already know about college. Obviously, you're not one of them. Instead of doing a ctrl-f for "demand" (LOL) try another word. Hint: It starts with a B. Literacy helps too.

A lot more than you do.

Totally false -- we measure a lot more than that, such as outcomes, regional availability, time to care, and many more. But wait, what's that I hear about context again? Idiot.

>"In practice, it is seen more as an unwanted evil, like car crashes, than as bad choices that needs the attention of family members or mental health professionals."

What it needs to be is children not having unsupervised access to devices that have unrestricted internet access. Social media is certainly detrimental, but there are millions of other "dangerous to children" sites/apps, not to mention texting or media'ing to/from strangers. Children cannot comprehend or deal with the crap they read/see/hear on the Internet. In many, it can cause all kinds of agitation, addiction, bullying, psychoses, dysmorphia, depression, obsession, suicidality, etc.

Children do not need smart phones. If the parents want their children to have them, then the responsible thing is to lock them down with a very small whitelist of safe sites and apps, and call/text/media only to/from known contacts that the parent knows and approves. Same goes for tablets/laptops/desktops.

There is tons of good educational stuff available for devices without the risk of being brainwashed, picked on by other children, sucked into conspiracies, led down who-knows-what rabbit holes with hallucinating AI's, groomed by pedophiles, amplifying any stupid thing they might have ever written, lured into scams, thrust into adult concepts and conflicts, etc. It is hard being a minor, why would a parent want to make it 100 times worse? So it is convenient to shut them up? Because "all my friends do it"? Because it is cheap "entertainment"?

See the work of Jonathan Haidt. He ruled out latchkey and other alternative methods explantations ; it is the phones pure and simple.

Handing a child a machine that vends entertainment, porn, social media etc, and seeks every ounce of their attention surely will be fine, right?