Dude we live in a different world than most Americans.
We must, or something...
I read somewhere that 40% of americans have no savings. Those that do only have $4,000 saved!
Yea, I've read that too, and it is sad. I wonder if the problem is that our schools don't actually teach how money works, how to save and invest, etc. Or worse, how INTEREST works... interest can work for you or against you.
I'm 40 years old, my house is now 50% paid off, I could take the rest of the year off and go on a very long vacation and not run out of cash.
I could afford a larger house, but I'm looking forward to having this one paid off completely in 7 years.
Why don't more people do that? Live beneath their means?
1 out of 3 car loans according to David Ramsey are sub prime. Meaning 18% - 25% interest??!
That is insane, I sure hope that isn't true.
Both of my vehicles are financed, one is at 0.0% interest the other is at 0.9% interest. At those rates, I'd be nuts to pay them off, I have stocks that pay 5% dividends.
True everyone is too ashamed to drive a car more than 5 years old
My first car in 1993 was a 1984 Nissan Stanza, and I loved it. Who cares that it was 9 years old, it was a CAR! I could take girls out in high school, that rocked!:)
My next car was a Nissan Sentra. I didn't actually buy a brand new vehicle until I was 36 years old. All my other vehicles until then were pre-owned.
David Ramsey also quoted a MSNBC news article about a kid making $26,000 ayear saying it is his right for a new $26,000 civic and he can't figure out why he is so broke etc.
Some people are bad at math, and some people just don't care. It is the latter group that I have little empathy for, but the former group may simply lack knowledge. See above on education.
$250 when living pay check to paycheck means eviction or starvation. When rent is $1,000 a month for a 1 bedroom in the big cities where are people with families who only pull $15/hr or even $40,000 a year supposed to live and pay off that fine?
Yea, that sucks. All I can say is that people shouldn't end up in that situation and if they are there, they need to leave. I have no problem helping people who are down on their luck through no fault of their own. I get that some people really do have crap hit them hard that knocks them down. On the other hand, I ALSO get that WAY too many people do it to themselves.
I started my first business when I was 19 years old. I didn't get a bunch of money from my parents, I started my first business on a few hundred bucks (web business in the 90s). It lasted almost 6 years, before the dot com bubble burst and 9/11 happened, then I switched to flying helicopters. 5 years ago I left that and went back to tech, been doing just fine.
I've fallen down, had hard times, been through a serious relationship breakup, but none of it is an excuse to say "woah is me, life sucks, someone owes me something". That is a load of crap. Go cry for a bit, then wipe the tears away and put your big boy boots back on and carry on.
Sure, and I have been too. I've probably gotten a dozen speeding tickets in my life. Every single time, guess what...
I was speeding!:)
I've had maybe 2-3 parking tickets, and I once had the police called out to my apartment when I was younger at about 2am because we were being loud and stupid and the people below us called and complained.
When the cops showed up at the door you know what I did? I spoke respectfully and said, "officer, how can I help you?". He replied, "we have had noise complaints, there seems to be too much going on here." To which I replied, "I'm very sorry sir, we'll stop and be quiet, you won't have to come back". He replied, "thank you, have a nice evening".
This was NOT in a rich part of town at the time, it was a cheap apartment in a higher crime area (I was poor back then). But I stood up and spoke respectfully and addressed the officers concerns without a "but, but, but" load of crap, because he doesn't care.
And guess what? We broke up the party, some people went home, and it wasn't a problem. But imagine how many other ways those conversations go...
You'd need to show the areas he said charge for public defenders actually do not charge for public defenders. Which you did not do.
No, I'd only have to show that one fact was wrong in ALL his shows for my statement to be correct. I'm sure they are right 98+% of the time, but no one is 100% correct all the time. Newspapers print corrections every week, we're only human.
If you've never had a parking ticket, you're simply lucky that everywhere you've parked has been well-labeled and unsurprising.
I've had maybe 2 or 3 in my lifetime. Where I live there aren't a lot of places to get one, outside of parking in a fire zone (which would be stupid, they are painted red!).
They are usually $20 or so, I just pay them because I was in fact parked illegally.
Even if I wasn't, that is a trivial amount and not worth fighting over.
Something â" it is not clear whether it is the stun gun â" is either tossed or knocked to the ground behind the two men, and Officer Slager draws his gun, the video shows. When the officer fires, Mr. Scott appears to be 15 to 20 feet away and fleeing. He falls after the last of eight shots.
Mr. Scott was guilty of a serious crime...
Contempt of cop... I know cops, it is a real thing.
Regardless of your beef with the law, courts, or anything else, never fight with cops, they'll just get tired and shoot you, if they feel like it.
The people who are getting shot are people who are being stupid. I'm not saying they deserve it, they don't, but they are still being stupid.
The cop can still be wrong, without making Mr. Scott right. Both were fools.
On the other hand, you might consider they thought it through very well.
This is merely another way to send poor people to jail.
Ding, ding... we have a winner...
So, the result is they go to jail, and the tax payers then pay even more money to house and feed them, but...still never get the original fine, do we?
Why do you think obtaining the original fine was the goal? It is a nice side effect when it happens, but it really isn't the goal.
Hell, I'm well off and even I know this.
Meanwhile, when they're in jail, they're being housed likely by a 3rd party whose making money on keeping people in jail, because they're providing security or food, or the physical facilities, or the parole services you offer when they get out, but they can't pay that either...so they go back to jail, where the cycle never ends.
Congrats, you just figured it out!:) Give the man a prize.
Granted, the 8th amendment does say that we are not a country of debtors prisons and as such unreasonable fines shall not be levied, so assuming that the majority of people who don't pay the fines simply can't afford it, one does wonder how it doesn't violate the 8th amendment.
It does violate the 8th amendment, but the courts don't care.
The US Constitution hasn't been properly followed since the Civil War, and perhaps not even before then.
It is a nice concept, but we really don't pay that much heed to it.
Once, when I was a contractor for the City, I had to go to court for a speeding ticket. I just took the morning off, and came into court with my City ID badge around my neck. Instead of the normal "standing in front of everyone", they took me into a back room. Once there, the TOTAL "fee" was $50, about 1/4 of the ticket alone. I didn't ask for this, but of course I didn't argue either.
Why are you shocked?
Everyone is equal, but some people are more equal than others.
A friend of mine is a pilot for the local sherrif's office, I taught him to fly about 10 years ago. I have his business card in my wallet. I've never needed it, but one day it might come in handy, you never know.
It works this way EVERYWHERE in the world, this isn't unique to Texas or anywhere.
If you are poor in america, the courts are an injustice system.
While that is largely true, it is also true that the poor tend to do more things that are stupid and land them in court in the first place.
I've never been charged with a crime, much less arrested. I've never seen the inside of a police car.
Why would I? I comply with the law, I pay my taxes, and I don't do stupid stuff.
Yes, I probably have more money than most people, but perhaps there is a reason for that. I'm not an idiot that does stupid stuff that attracts the police's attention.
Inversely, I think at some point it's your responsibility to insure your own items. If you want to drive an $80,000 car, you better make sure you can afford to handle a collision. I'm driving my $600 beater, minding my own business, but sometimes shit happens.
If you hit my car and total it, it is not my responsibility to fix it, it is yours.
I understand that some people think that they don't have to be responsible for their actions, that someone else should pay for their makes, but they are generally wrong in that assessment.
The only people who think the cost of insurance should be borne by others, are insurance executives and weasels. Insure yourself, then you have nothing to worry about. I'll worry about my stuff.
That statement implies that you could go along and smash someone else's car and say "hey, they should have had insurance, not my problem".
Yes, your point of view is really that stupid, you're welcome.:)
The reason to require insurance is to protect the injured party, not the one doing the injuring.
I'm well aware that people who are judgement proof often don't carry insurance because they don't see how it benefits THEM, but that is a very selfish and self centered view.
That is why we have insurance laws in the first place, to protect those who would be injured by such people. But the dollar amounts of that insurance are not nearly high enough.
I'm your style but I remain concerned of the possible holes in coverage and whether the company would try to get out of paying some or any. It's only when it happens that you know if it was worth it or not..
That is a fair point, but there are limits to what a lay person can do to cover such holes.
I personally feel that while it costs a bit more, going with a large, well known insurance company at least has the chance of having the lawyers care, and the chance of publicity if the insurance company turns into a weasel.
I've never actually had a serious liability claim, so I really don't know how that would go, but between my home/auto policies and the umbrella policy, my hope is that they would see fit to defend me to the best of their ability should the worst happen.
Well you have to understand that a lot of us are driving around cars worth only just a bit more than the deductible. The vast majority have just the minimum required by law liability insurance. That is if they have any insurance at all.
Liability insurance does not have a deductable, the point of it is to cover damage to persons or property that you cause.
If you carry the minimum amount, which is often less than $50K, you can't even cover the damage to someone else's nice car, much less their injuries.
If you total someone's luxury car, your liability insurance has to pay for that, but if you have only $40k of coverage, that isn't going very far. You're then liable for the difference.
Now you might be judgement proof, you can even declare bankruptcy, but those options suck in their own ways.
---
Example: You crash into my truck and total it. It is worth more than your insurance will cover. Your insurance will pay the first $40K, my insurance will cover the difference (since I have what is called underinsured motorist coverage that makes up such gaps).
Now you become subjugated to my insurance company, which has the legal right to come after you for the difference. You aren't at risk of being sued by me, but by my insurance company, who has the time and resources to come after you, at least to the extent to force you into bankruptcy, at which point they go away.
The problem is that we allow people to buy just $40K of liability coverage in the first place. Given the price of cars and medical treatment, that number should be much higher.
As for not having insurance at all, that is being irresponsible, since you likely lack the means to cover damage that you cause out of your own pocket. The penalties for not having insurance are not nearly harsh enough, IMHO...
My take on having an umbrella policy is not that I can over an accident as much as my insurance company is more likely to fight it than write a 50k check and then say "you're on your own..." if they are potentially on the hook for a couple of million.
In general, insurance companies are not allowed to do that. They are required to provide you with a legal defense and attempt to settle the claim if possible.
They can't just pay the person the $50k and leave the lawsuit open against you.
Damn, though, I'm going to have to rethink my $50k policy if getting in a wreck costs me $8 million. It's not like I've got the other $7950k just laying around.
Actually, almost everyone is horribly underinsured, but for some reason, we all just accept this.
I have $300k of liability on my auto insurance and a $2 million umbrella policy that covers beyond that, for just the reasons linked here.
If I cause an accident that hurts someone that badly, $50k is just a drop in the bucket.
If 5G will allow more devices to work from the same tower at the same time, due to faster burst, then that would be a reasonable answer to my question.
It doesn't help me specifically, but if it allows far more people without congestion, then that does help me in the long run.
I just didn't see a need for it personally, but that answer makes sense.
We are continually moving towards more and more peaceful times. We are coming to the end, though it may still take 100s or 1000s of years, of the primitive aggressive parts of our brains running our society. We are still a primitive, young society, but we are so much better than any generation in the past.
Many young people have said this MANY times over the years, they have all been wrong.
But don't worry, I'm sure it must be right THIS time.
Human nature hasn't really changed, we still use violence to resolve our disputes.
Slashdot Mirror
Dude we live in a different world than most Americans.
We must, or something...
I read somewhere that 40% of americans have no savings. Those that do only have $4,000 saved!
Yea, I've read that too, and it is sad. I wonder if the problem is that our schools don't actually teach how money works, how to save and invest, etc. Or worse, how INTEREST works... interest can work for you or against you.
I'm 40 years old, my house is now 50% paid off, I could take the rest of the year off and go on a very long vacation and not run out of cash.
I could afford a larger house, but I'm looking forward to having this one paid off completely in 7 years.
Why don't more people do that? Live beneath their means?
1 out of 3 car loans according to David Ramsey are sub prime. Meaning 18% - 25% interest??!
That is insane, I sure hope that isn't true.
Both of my vehicles are financed, one is at 0.0% interest the other is at 0.9% interest. At those rates, I'd be nuts to pay them off, I have stocks that pay 5% dividends.
True everyone is too ashamed to drive a car more than 5 years old
My first car in 1993 was a 1984 Nissan Stanza, and I loved it. Who cares that it was 9 years old, it was a CAR! I could take girls out in high school, that rocked! :)
My next car was a Nissan Sentra. I didn't actually buy a brand new vehicle until I was 36 years old. All my other vehicles until then were pre-owned.
David Ramsey also quoted a MSNBC news article about a kid making $26,000 ayear saying it is his right for a new $26,000 civic and he can't figure out why he is so broke etc.
Some people are bad at math, and some people just don't care. It is the latter group that I have little empathy for, but the former group may simply lack knowledge. See above on education.
$250 when living pay check to paycheck means eviction or starvation. When rent is $1,000 a month for a 1 bedroom in the big cities where are people with families who only pull $15/hr or even $40,000 a year supposed to live and pay off that fine?
Yea, that sucks. All I can say is that people shouldn't end up in that situation and if they are there, they need to leave. I have no problem helping people who are down on their luck through no fault of their own. I get that some people really do have crap hit them hard that knocks them down. On the other hand, I ALSO get that WAY too many people do it to themselves.
I started my first business when I was 19 years old. I didn't get a bunch of money from my parents, I started my first business on a few hundred bucks (web business in the 90s). It lasted almost 6 years, before the dot com bubble burst and 9/11 happened, then I switched to flying helicopters. 5 years ago I left that and went back to tech, been doing just fine.
I've fallen down, had hard times, been through a serious relationship breakup, but none of it is an excuse to say "woah is me, life sucks, someone owes me something". That is a load of crap. Go cry for a bit, then wipe the tears away and put your big boy boots back on and carry on.
Everyone is wrong occasionally.
Sure, and I have been too. I've probably gotten a dozen speeding tickets in my life. Every single time, guess what...
I was speeding! :)
I've had maybe 2-3 parking tickets, and I once had the police called out to my apartment when I was younger at about 2am because we were being loud and stupid and the people below us called and complained.
When the cops showed up at the door you know what I did? I spoke respectfully and said, "officer, how can I help you?". He replied, "we have had noise complaints, there seems to be too much going on here." To which I replied, "I'm very sorry sir, we'll stop and be quiet, you won't have to come back". He replied, "thank you, have a nice evening".
This was NOT in a rich part of town at the time, it was a cheap apartment in a higher crime area (I was poor back then). But I stood up and spoke respectfully and addressed the officers concerns without a "but, but, but" load of crap, because he doesn't care.
And guess what? We broke up the party, some people went home, and it wasn't a problem. But imagine how many other ways those conversations go...
You'd need to show the areas he said charge for public defenders actually do not charge for public defenders. Which you did not do.
No, I'd only have to show that one fact was wrong in ALL his shows for my statement to be correct. I'm sure they are right 98+% of the time, but no one is 100% correct all the time. Newspapers print corrections every week, we're only human.
If you've never had a parking ticket, you're simply lucky that everywhere you've parked has been well-labeled and unsurprising.
I've had maybe 2 or 3 in my lifetime. Where I live there aren't a lot of places to get one, outside of parking in a fire zone (which would be stupid, they are painted red!).
They are usually $20 or so, I just pay them because I was in fact parked illegally.
Even if I wasn't, that is a trivial amount and not worth fighting over.
Something â" it is not clear whether it is the stun gun â" is either tossed or knocked to the ground behind the two men, and Officer Slager draws his gun, the video shows. When the officer fires, Mr. Scott appears to be 15 to 20 feet away and fleeing. He falls after the last of eight shots.
Mr. Scott was guilty of a serious crime...
Contempt of cop... I know cops, it is a real thing.
Regardless of your beef with the law, courts, or anything else, never fight with cops, they'll just get tired and shoot you, if they feel like it.
The people who are getting shot are people who are being stupid. I'm not saying they deserve it, they don't, but they are still being stupid.
The cop can still be wrong, without making Mr. Scott right. Both were fools.
Sure if you can afford a random $200 cost appearing out of nowhere, it's not going to be a problem for you.
To be blunt, if you can't afford a random $200 expense, you have made a whole series of really crappy life choices.
Most likely... there ARE exceptions, but they are exceptions for a reason.
All too often, it is the 21 year old kid with the $650 iPhone bitching about his $200 fine.
Yea, yea, cry me a river... make different choices in life and that won't happen to you.
Someone has not thought this through, completely.
On the other hand, you might consider they thought it through very well.
This is merely another way to send poor people to jail.
Ding, ding... we have a winner...
So, the result is they go to jail, and the tax payers then pay even more money to house and feed them, but ...still never get the original fine, do we?
Why do you think obtaining the original fine was the goal? It is a nice side effect when it happens, but it really isn't the goal.
Hell, I'm well off and even I know this.
Meanwhile, when they're in jail, they're being housed likely by a 3rd party whose making money on keeping people in jail, because they're providing security or food, or the physical facilities, or the parole services you offer when they get out, but they can't pay that either...so they go back to jail, where the cycle never ends.
Congrats, you just figured it out! :) Give the man a prize.
Granted, the 8th amendment does say that we are not a country of debtors prisons and as such unreasonable fines shall not be levied, so assuming that the majority of people who don't pay the fines simply can't afford it, one does wonder how it doesn't violate the 8th amendment.
It does violate the 8th amendment, but the courts don't care.
The US Constitution hasn't been properly followed since the Civil War, and perhaps not even before then.
It is a nice concept, but we really don't pay that much heed to it.
Once, when I was a contractor for the City, I had to go to court for a speeding ticket. I just took the morning off, and came into court with my City ID badge around my neck. Instead of the normal "standing in front of everyone", they took me into a back room. Once there, the TOTAL "fee" was $50, about 1/4 of the ticket alone. I didn't ask for this, but of course I didn't argue either.
Why are you shocked?
Everyone is equal, but some people are more equal than others.
A friend of mine is a pilot for the local sherrif's office, I taught him to fly about 10 years ago. I have his business card in my wallet. I've never needed it, but one day it might come in handy, you never know.
It works this way EVERYWHERE in the world, this isn't unique to Texas or anywhere.
If you are poor in america, the courts are an injustice system.
While that is largely true, it is also true that the poor tend to do more things that are stupid and land them in court in the first place.
I've never been charged with a crime, much less arrested. I've never seen the inside of a police car.
Why would I? I comply with the law, I pay my taxes, and I don't do stupid stuff.
Yes, I probably have more money than most people, but perhaps there is a reason for that. I'm not an idiot that does stupid stuff that attracts the police's attention.
Food for thought...
It's really evil. See John Oliver show for details.
I love his show, he is funny as heck...
But he isn't 100% correct on everything, a number of his shows have factual errors or are VERY heavily biased for the purpose of being funny/liberal.
So you have to take it all with a grain of salt.
Inversely, I think at some point it's your responsibility to insure your own items. If you want to drive an $80,000 car, you better make sure you can afford to handle a collision. I'm driving my $600 beater, minding my own business, but sometimes shit happens.
If you hit my car and total it, it is not my responsibility to fix it, it is yours.
I understand that some people think that they don't have to be responsible for their actions, that someone else should pay for their makes, but they are generally wrong in that assessment.
The only people who think the cost of insurance should be borne by others, are insurance executives and weasels. Insure yourself, then you have nothing to worry about. I'll worry about my stuff.
That statement implies that you could go along and smash someone else's car and say "hey, they should have had insurance, not my problem".
Yes, your point of view is really that stupid, you're welcome. :)
That torture has to be illegal first, before you can do that. It wasn't at the time and actually still isn't.
The reason to require insurance is to protect the injured party, not the one doing the injuring.
I'm well aware that people who are judgement proof often don't carry insurance because they don't see how it benefits THEM, but that is a very selfish and self centered view.
That is why we have insurance laws in the first place, to protect those who would be injured by such people. But the dollar amounts of that insurance are not nearly high enough.
I'm your style but I remain concerned of the possible holes in coverage and whether the company would try to get out of paying some or any. It's only when it happens that you know if it was worth it or not..
That is a fair point, but there are limits to what a lay person can do to cover such holes.
I personally feel that while it costs a bit more, going with a large, well known insurance company at least has the chance of having the lawyers care, and the chance of publicity if the insurance company turns into a weasel.
I've never actually had a serious liability claim, so I really don't know how that would go, but between my home/auto policies and the umbrella policy, my hope is that they would see fit to defend me to the best of their ability should the worst happen.
Well you have to understand that a lot of us are driving around cars worth only just a bit more than the deductible. The vast majority have just the minimum required by law liability insurance. That is if they have any insurance at all.
Liability insurance does not have a deductable, the point of it is to cover damage to persons or property that you cause.
If you carry the minimum amount, which is often less than $50K, you can't even cover the damage to someone else's nice car, much less their injuries.
If you total someone's luxury car, your liability insurance has to pay for that, but if you have only $40k of coverage, that isn't going very far. You're then liable for the difference.
Now you might be judgement proof, you can even declare bankruptcy, but those options suck in their own ways.
---
Example: You crash into my truck and total it. It is worth more than your insurance will cover. Your insurance will pay the first $40K, my insurance will cover the difference (since I have what is called underinsured motorist coverage that makes up such gaps).
Now you become subjugated to my insurance company, which has the legal right to come after you for the difference. You aren't at risk of being sued by me, but by my insurance company, who has the time and resources to come after you, at least to the extent to force you into bankruptcy, at which point they go away.
The problem is that we allow people to buy just $40K of liability coverage in the first place. Given the price of cars and medical treatment, that number should be much higher.
As for not having insurance at all, that is being irresponsible, since you likely lack the means to cover damage that you cause out of your own pocket. The penalties for not having insurance are not nearly harsh enough, IMHO...
Your understanding is likely based on some half-truths and missing details.
Insurance is a highly regulated product, the companies generally can't just do whatever they like, even if they wish they could.
My take on having an umbrella policy is not that I can over an accident as much as my insurance company is more likely to fight it than write a 50k check and then say "you're on your own..." if they are potentially on the hook for a couple of million.
In general, insurance companies are not allowed to do that. They are required to provide you with a legal defense and attempt to settle the claim if possible.
They can't just pay the person the $50k and leave the lawsuit open against you.
Damn, though, I'm going to have to rethink my $50k policy if getting in a wreck costs me $8 million. It's not like I've got the other $7950k just laying around.
Actually, almost everyone is horribly underinsured, but for some reason, we all just accept this.
I have $300k of liability on my auto insurance and a $2 million umbrella policy that covers beyond that, for just the reasons linked here.
If I cause an accident that hurts someone that badly, $50k is just a drop in the bucket.
Then why isn't it single payer?
Because despite what you believe, democrats don't actually want single-payer health care.
They are in bed with the insurance companies, Clinton is ripping Bernie over his health care plan, saying Obamacare is "great".
If 5G will allow more devices to work from the same tower at the same time, due to faster burst, then that would be a reasonable answer to my question.
It doesn't help me specifically, but if it allows far more people without congestion, then that does help me in the long run.
I just didn't see a need for it personally, but that answer makes sense.
No, but it also means you can't judge its success or failure in its first year of operation.
Sure I can... Not everything requires 20 years to see if it will succeed or fail. Some things do, but not everything.
This is one of the latter...
Already people are dropping back out of it as the premiums rise and people discover that it isn't as easy to use as they thought it was...
The system is broken, giving a broken system time won't fix it.
That "Repeal and Replace" needs to have the Replace in existence at some point.
I completely agree... Anyone who says "repeal" without having "replace" ready to go, is not helping.
Even something like Medicare for all
I have already voiced my support for this.
We are continually moving towards more and more peaceful times. We are coming to the end, though it may still take 100s or 1000s of years, of the primitive aggressive parts of our brains running our society. We are still a primitive, young society, but we are so much better than any generation in the past.
Many young people have said this MANY times over the years, they have all been wrong.
But don't worry, I'm sure it must be right THIS time.
Human nature hasn't really changed, we still use violence to resolve our disputes.
DUCK Season!!!
WABBIT Season!!!
Do a search on slashdot for "seems fast enough to me" for any article 5 years or older, and have a laugh.
While that is a totally fair point, it is also reasonable to ask when something really IS good enough...
The joke, of course, is "640K ought to be good enough for anyone"... which he claims he never said...
How about 640TB of RAM? Would that be good enough for anyone (personal use computer)?
There has to be some number where it becomes true
---
Car example:
My 2014 Ford Taurus has a 3.5L V6 engine that makes 290HP, it does zero to 60 "fast enough".
They make an SHO version with a Twin Turbo version of that engine that makes even more. It is nice, but not needed.
You could say "yea, but next year we're going to 500HP!"
Great... why do I need 500HP in that car? Answer: I don't... and no one else does either.
Oh sure, someone wants to have it so they can show off or do runs at a drag strip or something, but that is like 1/10 of 1% maybe.
I asked "what do I need the speed for?". Not "I want to brag about having it".
3G wasn't fast enough to watch 1080p video, it wasn't fast enough to upload 1080p videos that I took in a reasonable time.
4G is. I just had lunch with my son today, I shot a video of him on my iPhone 6 and sent it to multiple people. They had it within a minute.
That is "good enough". I can facetime in good quality, I can open web pages as fast as the browser can render them.
More speed is "nice", but it isn't needed. I'm asking, "what in the future will we NEED it for?"
It is an honest question.