My high school had a Home Economics class that did, in fact, teach some basic economics. It wasn't how to bake a loaf of bread or whatever like a lot of other schools.
We learned things like:
1. Compound Interest and how it relates to investment for retirement. 2. How much a 30 year mortgage really costs. 3. How to budget. 4. How to eat healthily on $5 a day. 5. How insurance works.
I've rarely come across other people that had this kind of a class in their high school. It's weird to me that people are graduating high school when they're supposed to be fully functional, legal adults, ready to live an adult life, and they can't even track their own spending habits - but that's what the schools are churning out. Older children with no life skills.
Parents: Home school your kids, or at least supplement their public/private schooling with some stuff that actually matters. I know, I know, it means you have to spend time with your kids and actually be a parent, not a friend.
Exactly - this is what should be obligatory in every grade of school from the time kids can count. Also maybe why it's not good to accept all those credit card offers that get thrown at you as you're entering collage / Uni (which is what happened to me - 'no problem I'll pay it when I get out' - riiiiight....Debt Trap that it took me quite a few years to get out of.
On top of the mechanics of it, kids should learn what happens to people who don't budget; who spend more than they earn - the consequences of financial mismanagement. The question then being how to get it to soak into their heads of course.
In fact, why not start with a five real dollars (or whatever) in the first year of school and show what that becomes after 13 years of school and good financial management. Savings account in the beginning, safe investments later on, etc.
Maybe two accounts - each one that starts with the same amount of money; one that they're not allowed to touch and the other that they can use to buy whatever they want...and this way they can compare the two accounts at the end each year.
I don't think diesel passenger cars will be a thing much longer in North America after this. And time to change the tests to measure results in real world usage conditions.
Paris is planning on blocking diesels from the city by 2020 - if other cities follow suit I think diesel may not be so popular in Europe either.
What's bizarre to me is that France subsidizes diesel so the actual cost to use it is lower than gas / petrol.
What's really needed are courses in things like "How not to fall into the debt trap" and "Why being educated is actually worth some effort so you don't end up on welfare", etc.
I've heard that 5G was to use both the 2.4 GHz and 5GHz unlicensed bands simultaneously, to the detriment of home routers. source
Extending LTE to unlicensed spectrum at 5GHz is an enticing prospect
Extending LTE-Advanced to unlicensed spectrum is a major feature of 3GPP Release 13, due to be frozen in March 2016. Previously this was referred to as LTE-Unlicensed (LTE-U), but 3GPP uses the name LAA to reflect the role of licensed spectrum in its operation.
Yep - I think the phrase 'sub-6Ghz' was to avoid the conflict around the attack on our 5Ghz wifi
The OBD-II port allows access to the life-safety systems of the car. It is a private unsecured network that performs no authentication.
These dongles allow arbitrary access to the car bus, limited only by their buggy software. They shouldn't even be manufactured.
I'm sure that car manufacturers would agree with you as this would then make third party products (including diagnostic tools), 'unlicensed' (by the manufacturer) mechanic work (including do it yourself) and so forth difficult to impossible resulting in even higher manufacturer prices for the same thing.
So no, I'll keep that open port open, thanks just the same.
Yeah unless the wind stops blowing then waddya gonna do then huh? HUH?
When the wind stops you use a natural gas power plant. Duh. DUH!
The point is to reduce the amounts of fossil fuels used to generate electricity. If you still need it sometimes, who cares. You have still reduced the amount of fossil fuels used.
Batteries are becoming cheaper and more reliable. In the end, we will likely store large amounts of power in battery banks when the wind blows and the sun shines. This will further reduce our reliance on fossil fuels. Maybe we still need fossil fuels in the future, but our consumption of them will be reduced by 80%. It won't be the end of the world. Except if your entire fortune is based in the fossil fuel business.
Sorry I was making an attempt at being ironic but, being American, I can't do irony very well.
It's almost impossible to compare because figures for the externalized costs of coal and gas are very hard to calculate. It's difficult to evaluate the value of health and a human life, or how much damage can be attributed to energy production and not other things.
In any case, as wind gets cheaper its capacity factor is rocketing up too.
Yeah unless the wind stops blowing then waddya gonna do then huh? HUH?
Its disgraceful that money is being pissed away on a lightly used, space center gamble, but would the money be "available" for the local budget otherwise?
If Facebook wants to require real names, fine by me, I don't have to use the service...
There are companies that won't hire people who don't have facebook profiles (presumably in their own names).
Not saying it's a good thing, and it never caused me personally a problem, but I've got a very long CV to rely on and young people just starting out won't have that.
The US government can rarely agree on any one subject and this secret treaty has everything including the proverbial kitchen sink (made in Taiwan) in it.
You said "the middle class is shrinking", which is not supported by the facts.
Your references support the fact that there are a small number of rich people in the US getting richer is true.
However you will also find that CBO numbers show income for the middle quintile rising from $61,200 in 1979 to $76,600 in 2010 (in 2010 dollars).
"Since 2000, the middle class has been shrinking for a decidedly more alarming reason: Incomes have fallen." http://www.nytimes.com/interac...
"The study found that the percentage of middle class households (as defined above) has shrunk in all 50 states since 2000." http://uk.businessinsider.com/...
"Median household income fell for the fifth straight year in 2012, the Census Bureau reported on Tuesday, to $51,017. That was the lowest annual income, adjusted for inflation, since 1995." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
But hey - free market is good and socialism is bad, right?
Mostly yeah. As much as capitalism sucks, and it does, everything else we've tried has been worse. I'm open to suggestions if you have a new alternative.
As my/. name suggests, I am for a balance between capitalism and socialism. The problems are (a) gaining that balance and (b) keeping it in the face of corruption and greed.
The US was headed in the right direction for a long time but now I feel that we are heading, very quickly, in the wrong direction altogether.
And people wonder why rich are getting richer and the middle class is shrinking.
The facts don't agree with this statement.
I don't know what 'facts' you're referring to so please feel free to present something more substantial.
Here are some references supporting my statement:
"...economic inequality has worsened significantly in the United States and some other countries. The richest 1 percent in the United States now own more wealth than the bottom 90 percent." http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07...
"University of California, Berkeley research published in June showed America's richest 1 percent captured 55 percent of total real income growth between 1993 and 2014. " http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/09...
"There is no dispute that income inequality has been on the rise in the United States for the past four decades. The share of total income earned by the top 1 percent of families was less than 10 percent in the late 1970s but now exceeds 20 percent as of the end of 2012." http://fortune.com/2014/10/31/...
"...with the share of total household wealth owned by the top 0.1 percent increasing to 22 percent in 2012 from 7 percent in the late 1970s" http://fortune.com/2014/10/31/...
Slashdot Mirror
My high school had a Home Economics class that did, in fact, teach some basic economics. It wasn't how to bake a loaf of bread or whatever like a lot of other schools.
We learned things like:
1. Compound Interest and how it relates to investment for retirement.
2. How much a 30 year mortgage really costs.
3. How to budget.
4. How to eat healthily on $5 a day.
5. How insurance works.
I've rarely come across other people that had this kind of a class in their high school. It's weird to me that people are graduating high school when they're supposed to be fully functional, legal adults, ready to live an adult life, and they can't even track their own spending habits - but that's what the schools are churning out. Older children with no life skills.
Parents: Home school your kids, or at least supplement their public/private schooling with some stuff that actually matters. I know, I know, it means you have to spend time with your kids and actually be a parent, not a friend.
Exactly - this is what should be obligatory in every grade of school from the time kids can count. Also maybe why it's not good to accept all those credit card offers that get thrown at you as you're entering collage / Uni (which is what happened to me - 'no problem I'll pay it when I get out' - riiiiight....Debt Trap that it took me quite a few years to get out of.
On top of the mechanics of it, kids should learn what happens to people who don't budget; who spend more than they earn - the consequences of financial mismanagement. The question then being how to get it to soak into their heads of course.
In fact, why not start with a five real dollars (or whatever) in the first year of school and show what that becomes after 13 years of school and good financial management. Savings account in the beginning, safe investments later on, etc.
Maybe two accounts - each one that starts with the same amount of money; one that they're not allowed to touch and the other that they can use to buy whatever they want...and this way they can compare the two accounts at the end each year.
I don't think diesel passenger cars will be a thing much longer in North America after this. And time to change the tests to measure results in real world usage conditions.
Paris is planning on blocking diesels from the city by 2020 - if other cities follow suit I think diesel may not be so popular in Europe either.
What's bizarre to me is that France subsidizes diesel so the actual cost to use it is lower than gas / petrol.
I can't for the life of me figure out why, say, a Scandi cares about H1B tech hires in California.
Because the same techniques that outsourcing firms use to justify H1B tech hires in Cali, they use again in Europe even if the visa isn't called H1B.
What's really needed are courses in things like "How not to fall into the debt trap" and "Why being educated is actually worth some effort so you don't end up on welfare", etc.
I've heard that 5G was to use both the 2.4 GHz and 5GHz unlicensed bands simultaneously, to the detriment of home routers. source
Extending LTE to unlicensed spectrum at 5GHz is an enticing prospect
Extending LTE-Advanced to unlicensed spectrum is a major feature of 3GPP Release 13, due to be frozen in March 2016. Previously this was referred to as LTE-Unlicensed (LTE-U), but 3GPP uses the name LAA to reflect the role of licensed spectrum in its operation.
Yep - I think the phrase 'sub-6Ghz' was to avoid the conflict around the attack on our 5Ghz wifi
Then how do you interpret 'sub-6Ghz' ?
"Huawei's network operates in the sub-6GHz frequency band"
Is that the unlicensed 5Ghz band?
The OBD-II port allows access to the life-safety systems of the car. It is a private unsecured network that performs no authentication.
These dongles allow arbitrary access to the car bus, limited only by their buggy software. They shouldn't even be manufactured.
I'm sure that car manufacturers would agree with you as this would then make third party products (including diagnostic tools), 'unlicensed' (by the manufacturer) mechanic work (including do it yourself) and so forth difficult to impossible resulting in even higher manufacturer prices for the same thing.
So no, I'll keep that open port open, thanks just the same.
Yeah, I think it came off as sarcastic.
But what do I know?
signed, 'Nother 'Murican.
:-)
Yeah unless the wind stops blowing then waddya gonna do then huh? HUH?
When the wind stops you use a natural gas power plant. Duh. DUH!
The point is to reduce the amounts of fossil fuels used to generate electricity. If you still need it sometimes, who cares. You have still reduced the amount of fossil fuels used.
Batteries are becoming cheaper and more reliable. In the end, we will likely store large amounts of power in battery banks when the wind blows and the sun shines. This will further reduce our reliance on fossil fuels. Maybe we still need fossil fuels in the future, but our consumption of them will be reduced by 80%. It won't be the end of the world. Except if your entire fortune is based in the fossil fuel business.
Sorry I was making an attempt at being ironic but, being American, I can't do irony very well.
At any rate I wasn't serious...
It's almost impossible to compare because figures for the externalized costs of coal and gas are very hard to calculate. It's difficult to evaluate the value of health and a human life, or how much damage can be attributed to energy production and not other things.
In any case, as wind gets cheaper its capacity factor is rocketing up too.
Yeah unless the wind stops blowing then waddya gonna do then huh? HUH?
WOW, seriously???
Can you name some of these companies? That would be a real eye opener....!!
http://tech.slashdot.org/story...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ka...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ka...
You do not "need" to have any more kids.
That being said, most kids grow up to vote so having more kids = supporting your way of life.
Its disgraceful that money is being pissed away on a lightly used, space center gamble, but would the money be "available" for the local budget otherwise?
Probably as there is mention of 'increased taxes'
If Facebook wants to require real names, fine by me, I don't have to use the service...
There are companies that won't hire people who don't have facebook profiles (presumably in their own names).
Not saying it's a good thing, and it never caused me personally a problem, but I've got a very long CV to rely on and young people just starting out won't have that.
It was a private citizen who appealed to the EU highest court that caused this.
Who is unfortunately probably now on the US 'no fly list' for life.
Which means Amazon SaRL will be unconnected to Amazon.com and effectively competing against each other.
Which will never happen because then Amazon.com would have to actually pay taxes.
That block belongs to the Japanese "Ministry of Agriculture,Forestry and Phisheries - Agriculture,Forestry and Phisheries Research Council".
FTFY
*sigh* Apparently you didn't listen a thing I said.
Sure I did - sucks nothing better etc.
You aren't hearing what I'm saying though, choosing instead to focus on 'new' or 'band-aid' which doesn't matter.
Whatever -
The US government can rarely agree on any one subject and this secret treaty has everything including the proverbial kitchen sink (made in Taiwan) in it.
Your comments lack a bit of substance.
So do your solutions.
Sure - enjoy your capitalism without balance. I hope it works for you in the future.
You said "the middle class is shrinking", which is not supported by the facts.
Your references support the fact that there are a small number of rich people in the US getting richer is true.
However you will also find that CBO numbers show income for the middle quintile rising from $61,200 in 1979 to $76,600 in 2010 (in 2010 dollars).
"Since 2000, the middle class has been shrinking for a decidedly more alarming reason: Incomes have fallen."
http://www.nytimes.com/interac...
"The study found that the percentage of middle class households (as defined above) has shrunk in all 50 states since 2000."
http://uk.businessinsider.com/...
"Median household income fell for the fifth straight year in 2012, the Census Bureau reported on Tuesday, to $51,017. That was the lowest annual income, adjusted for inflation, since 1995."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
That's not really a new system, it's just duct tape around some stuff that doesn't work quite right.
So what?
I never said it was new. I said that capitalism, of which you've learned the same catchphrases as I did obviously, is out of balance.
Your comments lack a bit of substance.
But hey - free market is good and socialism is bad, right?
Mostly yeah. As much as capitalism sucks, and it does, everything else we've tried has been worse. I'm open to suggestions if you have a new alternative.
As my /. name suggests, I am for a balance between capitalism and socialism. The problems are (a) gaining that balance and (b) keeping it in the face of corruption and greed.
The US was headed in the right direction for a long time but now I feel that we are heading, very quickly, in the wrong direction altogether.
And people wonder why rich are getting richer and the middle class is shrinking.
The facts don't agree with this statement.
I don't know what 'facts' you're referring to so please feel free to present something more substantial.
Here are some references supporting my statement:
"...economic inequality has worsened significantly in the United States and some other countries. The richest 1 percent in the United States now own more wealth than the bottom 90 percent."
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07...
"University of California, Berkeley research published in June showed America's richest 1 percent captured 55 percent of total real income growth between 1993 and 2014. "
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/09...
"There is no dispute that income inequality has been on the rise in the United States for the past four decades. The share of total income earned by the top 1 percent of families was less than 10 percent in the late 1970s but now exceeds 20 percent as of the end of 2012."
http://fortune.com/2014/10/31/...
"...with the share of total household wealth owned by the top 0.1 percent increasing to 22 percent in 2012 from 7 percent in the late 1970s"
http://fortune.com/2014/10/31/...