OPINION: Using per capita (per person) deaths with a number over 1 is just stupid or a sign of trying to deceive. However, to make that intelligible the rate is 0.1% and 0.3%. so to make that thousands your capita must really be somewhere per million to 5 million people. Just say 2 per thousand it makes it seem less dishonest.
I think his point is one of poor person mentality instead. While not a fixture of being poor it's often aligned with the direction you are headed.
In general it's summed up by what you would do if you got a 10% bonus today. The poorest choice is to use it to commit to a long-term spend with little gain (think better car you can't afford long-term). The richest choice is to use it to break into some financial level goal (banked, debt, emergency fund,
As it sounds like they ended up slightly financially worse off it implies more on the poor side than the rich which is long-term concerning unless you are trying to breed dependence.
First, not sure who's boots you think are being licked but you do seem to be cornering the market on horseshit.
You referenced the stupid quote from a speech given by an economist who worked with Reagan in the 70s talking about exactly what I referenced. Hell, the fact that you just referenced two words with no context is spot on normal here (wanting to invoke the narrative without the actual quote). The actual quote is..
"We are in danger of producing an educated proletariat [underclass]. That's dynamite! We have to be selective on who we allow to go through. If not we will have a large number of highly trained and unemployed people. That's what happened in Germany. I saw it happen." (San Fran Chronicle, 10/30/1970)
Who would have thought someone would have been warning about creating a glut of Gender Studies PHDs ^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H baristas? Not just that but it was something in his field of study and he lived though it. Sounds like some pretty good evidence there. What it isn't good evidence of is that it was a plan to keep people stupid. Yet here you go being part of that big old misinformation machine (extra funny given the article).
Add to that your first world problems of "oh god, I'm a success but the paroles won't do what I tell them" (parody not a quote for anyone too stupid to understand) it's pretty weak. I am pretty sure 10k pissed recent grads who can't find jobs because we created a glut of them is a larger problem than a handful of hippy reminiscers in their 70s.
Please tell me my sarcasm detector is broken. There are tons of things to hate about Trump but not knowing there is a list of crap he keeps yelling he will do seems impossible unless you live under a rock.
On the other hand the VP was actively dodging putting forth anything, then anything not a cliche, and only recently is down to anything real.
Guy gives a speech and points out how over educating people beyond what the market can bear leads to fascism as people despair no good prospects for what they worked for...
Proved out pretty well in Germany where he had direct experience...
Looks headed that way in USA...
Any thoughts on his actual point instead of the normal disinformation campaign on what you wish he said?
Studies show "eating....women" is not a significant source of dietary iron. Well, at least not while being legal in most places.
Yep, most people who are poor were born into repressive regimes like China.
Or were you talking in the USA? Sorry, to make that work you have to claim your "poor" line at something close to 50% of the population. But if you do that your whole statement is meaningless, as anyone can see. Every study I have seen on economic mobility says you have a 20-38% chance of staying in your parent's quintile. While the middle three quintiles are closer to 15-25% chance that the next generation lands in each of the quintiles. There is obviously something at the high end that skews it some (maybe up to 15% in some estimations) but that is likely a combination of many things. On the low end there is also something skewing it, but again we are talking maybe 10% or so (yes, 10% of 20% so you are talking about something like 2% of the total population).
So yes, the GP is way overstating the second side as no value is highly improbable. Rewording it as less value than they consume would be more fair. However, not only is the idea that poor people usually stay poor incorrect it is also, by some people, attributed as being one of the causes of the lower end skewing. No better way to keep someone poor than to convince him not to try.
Just find some way to roll them in with the phone bill, car payment, or mortgage payment. Most people seem to be more than happy to sell their future selves into bondage.
Soylent pizza, made with chainsaws... This is sounding interesting.
You started so good and then devolved into the whole arrest the other guy bit and save the druggies bit. Why arrest anyone? Why save anyone? If you believe in doing one its going to lead you to try to do the other. Adults should be allowed to find their own path. The rules should be informed consent (and children can't give informed consent) and then anything goes.
I don't think you could get that passed into law however. On the other hand I think if you added some provision like "once a mind altering drug is taken, with consent, all actions taken while under the influence are considered with consent and premeditation" along with making giving a mind altering drug without consent a death sentence, then you could harness the tough on crime vote and the libertarian vote which would probably be enough.
You might have to add some provision to keep the aggressive druggies off the streets, however. That being said in most places the laws are already there they just have to be enforced. I am pretty sure we could tweak the system a bit to ensure the adversarial system works.
Hmm, I see these two posts together and now I want to hear more about reducing drug abuse through chainsaws. Probably has some soylent green possibilities.
Its amazing, that isn't far off from what I have seen. We usually peg it as 5x the cost in general (with another doubling if you are using some of the services instead of just basic resources). There are some things that are better as services (ASR and TTS) probably due to all the cost being licenses I would guess they got a sweetheart deal. Sometimes it's worth it but I would be very leery of getting locked in.
I understand where you are coming from here, and agree mostly, but there is some nuance here so I wouldn't have said "always".
If you...
- are technically savvy
- use significant resources
- have steady enough load to use resources at 1/5th your max capacity needed
It seems that you are better off doing it yourself.
However, there are some side things that can push you out there (at least in part)
- Extreme peaking requirements
- Data residency requirements in places you don't or can't have people in
- Some unique licences are better on cloud as services
If you are big enough for it to matter then you are big enough to study or trial it. If you just shift it and get hit with a big bill, you got exactly what you deserve.
Interchangeable parts won't.
