Okay, let's bring it back to the US. In the United States - in the rural area that i reside, we are limited to two options: dial-up or satellite. While satellite internet has recently improved its speeds, and now gives us something relatively close to what you fancy big-city folks get, it is still limited in one respect: bandwidth caps. Right now, per month, I have a bandwidth cap of 25 GB. No, I did not mis-type that. 25.G.B. Your 250 GB is a FUCKING EXTRAORDINARY amount compared to that.
Yep. In the rural area I live: right now I have the fun choice of either sticking with my two year old technology that gets terrible download and upload speed, but can be canceled at any time because there is no contract, or upgrading to download speeds that are almost as good as what most people have had in suburban areas for about three years, but being tied to a minimum two year contract.
Because there's not a shit-ton of us out there, we just get shit-on.
Education salaries are usually modest but aren't "pittances", Im guessing you and your wife pull in between 60-90K combined, which would put you in the top 40 - 20 percent of household incomes (median somewhere around 45k). So you aren't roughing it too bad.
Our combined income is around 45K, but I'm not sure that this is the median salary. Again, it depends on where you live. What I find fun (and is another discussion) is that we're both highly educated (Masters for both, I just started the doc), highly motivated, and rate highly on every metric given to us. Welcome to the US educational system. How's that for embarrassing?
Also how do you pull off 67 acres and a house without a huge mortgage? Thats gotta be at least
500k in land alone. So I wouldn't judge your friends too harshly,
It's called financial planning. We bought it in cash, in 4-10 acre increments. And apparently land is worth quite a bit more wherever you live - here it's worth just shy of 250K for the whole works, without the house.
I really do apologize for that. It was the only way to prove my point, without being too vague.
I find it interesting that telling people how I'm fiscally responsible is seen as bragging, when most people brag about their giant tv's and new cars, etc.
It depends on what your end game is. If you want to work in a large, urban center, yes. But in my instance, it's folks that are staying in the area, and would be better served by the local schools. And in these schools' cases, it's because of the local media. They are both regionally well-known for certain departments - engineering and education are the two stand-outs. BUT, the local media only reports on the stories that are completely related to drinking.
It's poor choices and bad critical thinking skills all around.
You're telling me that in countries such as France, Germany or Switzerland, that there is *no* possibility of being abducted by anyone, at anytime, for any reason? This is all hyperbole.
Yes, Guantanamo exists, and Yes, it should be shut down. But, what are the realistic chances of being mistaken for a terrorist (or child pornographer or pirate, or whatever buzz-word we're using right now) and locked up? Is that chance enough to dictate counting out traveling to a country with a good portion of the world's weird shit to look at?
AND,
I do not feel that insecure about living in the US, but it is also clear that the possibility of being mistaken for somebody else and suddenly taken to a torture prison is possible when visiting the US. That is a little scary, even if only a remote possibility. It is a possibility that does not exist when visiting France, Germany, or Switzerland. In that respect, yes, visiting the US is more akin to visiting Iran, where there is a low but real risk of being subjected to arbitrary treatments from the state.
Is like saying, "I don't go outside, because you can get hit by lightning."
Saying that the US is like IRAN because of this is absolutely absurd, in my opinion.
No, technology isn't an impediment to saving, lack of discipline is the impediment to saving.
Ex-fucking-actly. There could be hookers and coke for sale on every street corner I pass, but my own decisions will dictate whether I buy them or not.
It's just like when people talk about certain colleges as party schools. YES, there is drinking in college. YES, most colleges do have bars near them. NO, no one is going to pour it down your throat. Make good choices, and that 'party school' just becomes 'school'. Make good choices, and 'technology makes it harder to save' becomes 'hey, look, my savings account isn't empty because I'm not an idiot.'
I think I might have the explanation for why there's always a next big thing in technology: R&D and Engineering? Technology has gotten better in the past 20 years? That's less of a conspiracy, and more of a fact.
If I had my current pc when I was starting school, I would have thought it was from outer space. Hell, my phone has more power than my first desktop pc. It's not that it's a massive conspiracy to make money, it's that companies that make the technology want to stay in business, so they innovate.
Saying that there is a conspiracy to make us buy new technology is like saying there is a conspiracy to switch from stone tablets to paper.
But I do agree with the correlation between the explosion of consumer electronics and credit card debt. I don't know why, but that just seems right. There's unprecedented access to credit, but we're still operating as if credit cards are cash money in our pocket. Schools need to (some are, poorly) improve the financial literacy offerings they currently have. We didn't cover credit cards when I was in high school, but then again, I would have been instantly denied at age 18. Anymore, 18 year olds will get one, charge it up and watch their credit scores tank.
Because it means that those of us 'young folks' (less than 30) in the USA who can actually plan their finances stand to be KINGS and QUEENS in the future. My wife and I live very, very comfortably on what my friends would call a meager pittance (we both work in education, thank you). Our stuff isn't as nice as what they have, but we also don't have the crushing burden of debt looming in our future. We may not have a MONDO flat screen, but we do have a high speed internet connection and access to as many movies and television shows as we need. We may not have a $70k car, but what we do have is reliable and gets 35-40 mpg. Our house might not be a McMansion, but our small house does sit on 67 acres of woodland. . . .
We're saving for a college fund for children we don't have yet, saving for early retirement and generally living the life of leisure.
Why am I saying all of this? Because, not all Americans are idiots. Most that I know are kind of stupid, but really not that bad.
And some, like my wife and myself, are actually quite bright. Not meaning to brag, just meaning to point out that people like us exist.
I talk about Khan as if it is a tool to get your feet under you, for this reason. You can take a small bite of a large apple, to see if it's something you want to spend a metric butt-ton of money on in an IRL campus. As far as specialization using Khan (and most other on-line academies), though? Not so much.
Neither am I. I'm just using them as proof to state my case - the places that s/he listed as being as dangerous as the US are WELL known for their blatant disregard for their populace. So, it follows that this disregard is one sort of red flag for safety.
How many foreign folks have been unjustly charged and held in the US? What are the real chances that you, Mr. Frenchy Von Frenchenstein (not trying to be racist[?] that name just amuses me), are going to be hauled off in chains? -Slim.
The U.S. has joined Iran, North Korea etc. on my list of "Places that are too dangerous to visit right now."
This makes me believe that you've never been to any of those places, and that you spend too much time listening to lunatics on-line/in print/on television.
Sure, we've passed some wacky laws recently, but for 99.999999999999999% of people here, life hasn't changed a ton since the 90's (except maybe a bit less financial stupidity). That opinion might not be popular if you live in Detroit or any other large, industry based city, but it's true.
The closest center for urban decay to my geographical location is Chicago. Even its worst neighborhoods are startlingly safe compared to what the media would have you believe. SURE, don't walk around flashing money, but that rule applies in every urban center, regardless of crime rate.
It has been my experience that the people that bitch the loudest about how terrible it is here are the people who have never really traveled outside of their county, let alone state, or (God forbid) country.
Or, I could be all wet on this one, but I doubt it.
OR, maybe he still lives there??? Have YOU seen him in person? I sure haven't. Those dirty Hollywood movie tricksters have probably photoshopped him into every picture and news reel we've seen.
I bet he's hunting lions, or eating turtles, or whatever those people do.
I don't know that I agree with your end result, I firmly believe that we need just a little nanny state to help most people make the right choice, but not to force them to make it. BUT, I do understand where you're coming from (as it is the same place I'm coming from). Thank you for the lively debate, Anonymous Wisnoskij. Now I have to go be productive at work.
So it's a catch-22, then. If we allow individuals to decide, most of them are flighty idiots, if we allow democracy to rule, see previous argument. So anonymous internet wisnoskij, do you honestly advocate for independent decision without some oversight? I think we're saying the same thing, just different ways - you think the option should be there, but you should be allowed to choose. I believe the option should be highly suggested, but you should be allowed to choose.
How do we take the ignorance out of the equation? That's an honest question, I don't have an answer, I'm hoping you have some idea that I haven't thought of.
is the issue. Can you tell me that you trust the general public to be well informed and competent? I, for one, do not. A quick headline with the right marketing can sway the herd in one direction or the other - regardless of the content of the article.
That is my problem. Ideally, everyone is well informed. Everyone makes rational choices (rational being a relative term - I might not agree with it, but it does have logic behind it). Everyone makes informed decisions.
In reality, people are flighty, panicky monkeys hell bent on listening to the best sound bite, without analyzing it, to form their opinions.
You are using hyperbole to state your case. That is rarely an effective conversational tool (although I do love it, and regularly use it).
There is always compromise. I am a firm believer in the 2nd amendment. I personally own several firearms, and am an avid hunter. I also firmly believe in concealed carry laws. What I don’t believe in is that any idiot should be allowed to own and carry a firearm without training. There should be a strict licensing procedure, training series, and background check (kind of like the ones we currently have in most states). To conceal carry, YES, you should have to register. If I am a cop, and I’m pulling you over, I don’t want a gun to surprise me. What if I try to grab that gun, because it surprised me, and it harms you or myself? Who is at fault there? I was protecting myself in a shitty situation (in my head) you were simply exercising your right.
It's not always black and white, anonymous internet person called wisnoskil. Most of life is shades of gray. I do not have the solutions, you are correct there. BUT, I'm not willing to discount immunizations because of a random article that says that maybe this immunization isn't going to last as long as we previously thought, and therefore we need to re-evaluate our SPACING IN TIME that the shots happen.
In other words, please don't leap to conclusions that aren't stated. Again, my original post simply called for compromise and rational thought.
Personal choice only goes so far. If your personal choice puts my family at risk, then it ceases to become a personal choice. You do realize that there is a compromise between "ALL HAIL THE GOVERNMENT OVERLORD" and "FUCK THE FED", right?
Perhaps vaccinations aren't bad? If they're properly researched and proved effective, they might even be good?
Yeah, but that's just one specific instance (it sucks, btw, sorry). The previous post stated something ominous about the way the western world is developing. I was really hoping for some clarification, but now I see that it was just blowing smoke.
As life advice - never overlook full-time retail work as a temporary position. Okay benefits, okay wages (unless you work for Wal-Mart), easy exercise (you're walking all day), the work isn't hard, and it'll get you by in a tough spot - I worked retail for a bit when I was between real gigs. It keeps food on the table, and pays the bills.
Slashdot Mirror
Okay, let's bring it back to the US. In the United States - in the rural area that i reside, we are limited to two options: dial-up or satellite. While satellite internet has recently improved its speeds, and now gives us something relatively close to what you fancy big-city folks get, it is still limited in one respect: bandwidth caps. Right now, per month, I have a bandwidth cap of 25 GB. No, I did not mis-type that. 25.G.B. Your 250 GB is a FUCKING EXTRAORDINARY amount compared to that.
Where's your justice there?
Yep. In the rural area I live: right now I have the fun choice of either sticking with my two year old technology that gets terrible download and upload speed, but can be canceled at any time because there is no contract, or upgrading to download speeds that are almost as good as what most people have had in suburban areas for about three years, but being tied to a minimum two year contract.
Because there's not a shit-ton of us out there, we just get shit-on.
I would argue that it isn't. People pay to use facebook, and they pay quite a bit ------> Privacy. That is the new currency.
While it is terrifying, I find it fascinating that we're actively having our old currency replaced by an entirely new one.
Education salaries are usually modest but aren't "pittances", Im guessing you and your wife pull in between 60-90K combined, which would put you in the top 40 - 20 percent of household incomes (median somewhere around 45k). So you aren't roughing it too bad.
Our combined income is around 45K, but I'm not sure that this is the median salary. Again, it depends on where you live. What I find fun (and is another discussion) is that we're both highly educated (Masters for both, I just started the doc), highly motivated, and rate highly on every metric given to us. Welcome to the US educational system. How's that for embarrassing?
Also how do you pull off 67 acres and a house without a huge mortgage? Thats gotta be at least 500k in land alone. So I wouldn't judge your friends too harshly,
It's called financial planning. We bought it in cash, in 4-10 acre increments. And apparently land is worth quite a bit more wherever you live - here it's worth just shy of 250K for the whole works, without the house.
I really do apologize for that. It was the only way to prove my point, without being too vague.
I find it interesting that telling people how I'm fiscally responsible is seen as bragging, when most people brag about their giant tv's and new cars, etc.
It depends on what your end game is. If you want to work in a large, urban center, yes. But in my instance, it's folks that are staying in the area, and would be better served by the local schools. And in these schools' cases, it's because of the local media. They are both regionally well-known for certain departments - engineering and education are the two stand-outs. BUT, the local media only reports on the stories that are completely related to drinking.
It's poor choices and bad critical thinking skills all around.
You're telling me that in countries such as France, Germany or Switzerland, that there is *no* possibility of being abducted by anyone, at anytime, for any reason? This is all hyperbole.
Yes, Guantanamo exists, and Yes, it should be shut down. But, what are the realistic chances of being mistaken for a terrorist (or child pornographer or pirate, or whatever buzz-word we're using right now) and locked up? Is that chance enough to dictate counting out traveling to a country with a good portion of the world's weird shit to look at?
AND,
I do not feel that insecure about living in the US, but it is also clear that the possibility of being mistaken for somebody else and suddenly taken to a torture prison is possible when visiting the US. That is a little scary, even if only a remote possibility. It is a possibility that does not exist when visiting France, Germany, or Switzerland. In that respect, yes, visiting the US is more akin to visiting Iran, where there is a low but real risk of being subjected to arbitrary treatments from the state.
Is like saying, "I don't go outside, because you can get hit by lightning."
Saying that the US is like IRAN because of this is absolutely absurd, in my opinion.
No, technology isn't an impediment to saving, lack of discipline is the impediment to saving.
Ex-fucking-actly. There could be hookers and coke for sale on every street corner I pass, but my own decisions will dictate whether I buy them or not.
It's just like when people talk about certain colleges as party schools. YES, there is drinking in college. YES, most colleges do have bars near them. NO, no one is going to pour it down your throat. Make good choices, and that 'party school' just becomes 'school'. Make good choices, and 'technology makes it harder to save' becomes 'hey, look, my savings account isn't empty because I'm not an idiot.'
I think I might have the explanation for why there's always a next big thing in technology: R&D and Engineering? Technology has gotten better in the past 20 years? That's less of a conspiracy, and more of a fact.
If I had my current pc when I was starting school, I would have thought it was from outer space. Hell, my phone has more power than my first desktop pc. It's not that it's a massive conspiracy to make money, it's that companies that make the technology want to stay in business, so they innovate.
Saying that there is a conspiracy to make us buy new technology is like saying there is a conspiracy to switch from stone tablets to paper.
But I do agree with the correlation between the explosion of consumer electronics and credit card debt. I don't know why, but that just seems right. There's unprecedented access to credit, but we're still operating as if credit cards are cash money in our pocket. Schools need to (some are, poorly) improve the financial literacy offerings they currently have. We didn't cover credit cards when I was in high school, but then again, I would have been instantly denied at age 18. Anymore, 18 year olds will get one, charge it up and watch their credit scores tank.
Because it means that those of us 'young folks' (less than 30) in the USA who can actually plan their finances stand to be KINGS and QUEENS in the future. My wife and I live very, very comfortably on what my friends would call a meager pittance (we both work in education, thank you). Our stuff isn't as nice as what they have, but we also don't have the crushing burden of debt looming in our future. We may not have a MONDO flat screen, but we do have a high speed internet connection and access to as many movies and television shows as we need. We may not have a $70k car, but what we do have is reliable and gets 35-40 mpg. Our house might not be a McMansion, but our small house does sit on 67 acres of woodland. . . .
We're saving for a college fund for children we don't have yet, saving for early retirement and generally living the life of leisure.
Why am I saying all of this? Because, not all Americans are idiots. Most that I know are kind of stupid, but really not that bad.
And some, like my wife and myself, are actually quite bright. Not meaning to brag, just meaning to point out that people like us exist.
I talk about Khan as if it is a tool to get your feet under you, for this reason. You can take a small bite of a large apple, to see if it's something you want to spend a metric butt-ton of money on in an IRL campus. As far as specialization using Khan (and most other on-line academies), though? Not so much.
Neither am I. I'm just using them as proof to state my case - the places that s/he listed as being as dangerous as the US are WELL known for their blatant disregard for their populace. So, it follows that this disregard is one sort of red flag for safety.
How many foreign folks have been unjustly charged and held in the US? What are the real chances that you, Mr. Frenchy Von Frenchenstein (not trying to be racist[?] that name just amuses me), are going to be hauled off in chains? -Slim.
welcome our new Descoladores overlords.
NO ONE ACCEPTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION
Wait, that's still not right. Stupid English language, and you're stupid malaprops and homonyms.
The U.S. has joined Iran, North Korea etc. on my list of "Places that are too dangerous to visit right now."
This makes me believe that you've never been to any of those places, and that you spend too much time listening to lunatics on-line/in print/on television.
Sure, we've passed some wacky laws recently, but for 99.999999999999999% of people here, life hasn't changed a ton since the 90's (except maybe a bit less financial stupidity). That opinion might not be popular if you live in Detroit or any other large, industry based city, but it's true.
The closest center for urban decay to my geographical location is Chicago. Even its worst neighborhoods are startlingly safe compared to what the media would have you believe. SURE, don't walk around flashing money, but that rule applies in every urban center, regardless of crime rate.
This tells me that crime rates are dropping across the nation. There are more out there, a quick search turned up two other sites to support my claims.
It has been my experience that the people that bitch the loudest about how terrible it is here are the people who have never really traveled outside of their county, let alone state, or (God forbid) country.
Or, I could be all wet on this one, but I doubt it.
Here's your citation for the most common cause of glass-based item breakage.
OR, maybe he still lives there??? Have YOU seen him in person? I sure haven't.
Those dirty Hollywood movie tricksters have probably photoshopped him into every picture and news reel we've seen.
I bet he's hunting lions, or eating turtles, or whatever those people do.
Can you provide proof of this, Mr. Cornelius?
I don't know that I agree with your end result, I firmly believe that we need just a little nanny state to help most people make the right choice, but not to force them to make it. BUT, I do understand where you're coming from (as it is the same place I'm coming from). Thank you for the lively debate, Anonymous Wisnoskij. Now I have to go be productive at work.
Have a lovely rest of your day.
So it's a catch-22, then. If we allow individuals to decide, most of them are flighty idiots, if we allow democracy to rule, see previous argument. So anonymous internet wisnoskij, do you honestly advocate for independent decision without some oversight?
I think we're saying the same thing, just different ways - you think the option should be there, but you should be allowed to choose. I believe the option should be highly suggested, but you should be allowed to choose.
How do we take the ignorance out of the equation? That's an honest question, I don't have an answer, I'm hoping you have some idea that I haven't thought of.
as long as the owner is informed and competent.
is the issue. Can you tell me that you trust the general public to be well informed and competent? I, for one, do not. A quick headline with the right marketing can sway the herd in one direction or the other - regardless of the content of the article.
That is my problem. Ideally, everyone is well informed. Everyone makes rational choices (rational being a relative term - I might not agree with it, but it does have logic behind it). Everyone makes informed decisions.
In reality, people are flighty, panicky monkeys hell bent on listening to the best sound bite, without analyzing it, to form their opinions.
You are using hyperbole to state your case. That is rarely an effective conversational tool (although I do love it, and regularly use it).
There is always compromise. I am a firm believer in the 2nd amendment. I personally own several firearms, and am an avid hunter. I also firmly believe in concealed carry laws. What I don’t believe in is that any idiot should be allowed to own and carry a firearm without training. There should be a strict licensing procedure, training series, and background check (kind of like the ones we currently have in most states). To conceal carry, YES, you should have to register. If I am a cop, and I’m pulling you over, I don’t want a gun to surprise me. What if I try to grab that gun, because it surprised me, and it harms you or myself? Who is at fault there? I was protecting myself in a shitty situation (in my head) you were simply exercising your right.
It's not always black and white, anonymous internet person called wisnoskil. Most of life is shades of gray. I do not have the solutions, you are correct there. BUT, I'm not willing to discount immunizations because of a random article that says that maybe this immunization isn't going to last as long as we previously thought, and therefore we need to re-evaluate our SPACING IN TIME that the shots happen.
In other words, please don't leap to conclusions that aren't stated. Again, my original post simply called for compromise and rational thought.
Unfortunately, most people will take this and generalize it to "vaccines don't work!!!"
Yeah, there is that. Though there really isn't enough detail in the article to make that conclusion.
How many people will RTFA in the greater community, instead of simply seeing the sensationalist headline?
Personal choice only goes so far. If your personal choice puts my family at risk, then it ceases to become a personal choice. You do realize that there is a compromise between "ALL HAIL THE GOVERNMENT OVERLORD" and "FUCK THE FED", right?
Perhaps vaccinations aren't bad? If they're properly researched and proved effective, they might even be good?
Yeah, but that's just one specific instance (it sucks, btw, sorry). The previous post stated something ominous about the way the western world is developing. I was really hoping for some clarification, but now I see that it was just blowing smoke.
As life advice - never overlook full-time retail work as a temporary position. Okay benefits, okay wages (unless you work for Wal-Mart), easy exercise (you're walking all day), the work isn't hard, and it'll get you by in a tough spot - I worked retail for a bit when I was between real gigs. It keeps food on the table, and pays the bills.