I notice you're keen on paragraph breaks, reflecting a common preference in readers. Do you suppose that preference is because your brain has been conditioned to expect breaks between paragraphs? Or is it because the way the eye and brain work together means that interruptions in text are more easily read because it allows the brain to break down what is written into smaller, linked bits of information, rather than trying to parse it all together?
I personally think the preference for a visually distinct spacing led to two spaces, not the other way around, and that the switch to single spacing came a result of people wanting to cram in more information per inch, or to improve "aesthetics" without considering how the user interacts with it. The choice certainly wasn't made because of readability, as this study clearly demonstrates.
... it's literally a person jumping out from a shadow at the last possible moment on a large thoroughfare nowhere near a crosswalk.
If by "jumping out from a shadow" you mean "slowly crossing the street", and by "at the last possible moment" you mean "and had nearly crossed all three lanes", ignoring that there's plenty of evidence that the released video did not even vaguely show the actual level of light in the location.
So, you're saying the market is willing to pay more for quality and features. Why not fuel economy too? It was certainly a major factor with my last car purchase.
Re "You don't think an increase in minimum wage is the first time a business has ever had to deal with a rising cost of business, do you?"
That would be an investment buying new equipment that grows profits, saves on wages.
New computers, new production line, more capacity, an investment that lower past costs.
So, raw materials costs never increase? Utility costs never increase? Real estate taxes never increase? Transportation costs never increase? Interest rates never increase? Insurance costs never increase?
Re "The employees have more money"
With everyone passing on mores costs in CA to cover the regulated wage costs.
More money goes to pay for the wage gap into savings or something productive, usefull.
Food costs, transport all reflect the mandated wage costs that further takes away from any wage rise for any one worker.
Everything a poor worker needs every month costs more and the new costs passed on are not covered by a wage rise.
I'm going to go ahead and assume that English is not your first language (in which case, kudos to you - truly - for trying to learn what is a bitch of a language), because what you have written here only bears a passing resemblance to it. But doing my best to parse, you're saying that because things get more expensive, there's no point in trying to pay employees enough to keep up? That makes no sense at all. The labor cost of most of these things is a small enough contributor that wage increases do in fact more than offset the increase in price required to cover the wage increase.
In any negotiation where you aren't just as willing to walk away as the other party you have no power.
More than that - you can't have a free market (in this case, the labor market) if participants aren't free and able to decline a given deal. While one can argue that workers are FREE to walk away, the necessity of paying for food, water, shelter, transportation, and medical care means they typically are not ABLE to do so.
Housing can only sell/rent for what people can afford.
If real estate were a consumable product like toilet paper, where there is no point in having more than you can use, that would apply. But real estate is not a consumable. It's call REAL estate specifically because it is immovable. That makes it a good store of value, thus giving very wealthy individuals a strong incentive to purchase more than they can use - even if it sits empty, it still holds value. And just like what happens whenever you have too many investment dollars chasing too few good investments, prices get divorced from what consumers can afford.
Would it, though? Businesses go where the markets are. Uber might want to move where labor is cheaper, but the vast majority of their customers are - and by extension, their drivers need to be - in expensive urban areas.
Companies also need to have employees with sufficient skill to do the job. For many (if not most) companies, those people don't exist in sufficient numbers in cheaper places, and their existing employees have no interest in moving.
Weird - someone who call himself a Christian actually acting like a Christian ought to. Bible verses on the bottom of a cup seem a whole lot less offensive to non-Christians than exploitative business practices *should* seem to Christians.
My first reaction was, "Downtown Liverpool has a grid? And it wasn't laid out until 1827?" That it is Australia and not England clears both questions right up.
Not hundreds of thousands - MILLIONS. There are 25 million in the Seoul urban area, 10 million in the city proper. If North Korea were to unleash their artillery, it would make Ypres look like a small town fireworks display.
You do realize that North Korea has enough artillery in position to flatten Seoul (home to ~50% of South Korea's population) before air squadrons could even be scrambled, right? Frankly, their artillery is much more of a deterrent to invasion than their nukes or their infantry.
the only country that can put pressure on China is the US...
Pressure from outside is certainly one thing that can get a nation to act. Another is rational self interest in reaction to changes in global economic trends. Something tells me that China cares a lot more about the latter than the former.
republicans and democrats haven't existed for 200 years.
Yeah, actually they have. The Democratic-Republican party goes back to the first decade of the republic, and it is the direct antecedent to both the Democratic Party and the Republican party. They've held the presidency for all but 20 years of the existence of the office, and the majorities in the House and Senate for all but 18 and 14 years, respectively.
Tesla is the most shorted stock in the US right now.
Interesting that you think that this is the cause of Tesla's bad press, without considering WHY it's the most shorted company. Tesla's stock price is wildly out of proportion with its fundamental financial picture, or its production capacity (even accounting for expected growth). It's really that simple. It's not a conspiracy - it's basic financial analysis.
Slashdot Mirror
I notice you're keen on paragraph breaks, reflecting a common preference in readers. Do you suppose that preference is because your brain has been conditioned to expect breaks between paragraphs? Or is it because the way the eye and brain work together means that interruptions in text are more easily read because it allows the brain to break down what is written into smaller, linked bits of information, rather than trying to parse it all together?
I personally think the preference for a visually distinct spacing led to two spaces, not the other way around, and that the switch to single spacing came a result of people wanting to cram in more information per inch, or to improve "aesthetics" without considering how the user interacts with it. The choice certainly wasn't made because of readability, as this study clearly demonstrates.
... it's literally a person jumping out from a shadow at the last possible moment on a large thoroughfare nowhere near a crosswalk.
If by "jumping out from a shadow" you mean "slowly crossing the street", and by "at the last possible moment" you mean "and had nearly crossed all three lanes", ignoring that there's plenty of evidence that the released video did not even vaguely show the actual level of light in the location.
Settlement out of court is for civil cases, not criminal cases. The equivalent is a plea bargain, which happens after arraignment.
The earth is a bit chubby around the waist.
Let's see how *you* look when you're 4.5 billion years old.
Which is it? Is it a lie that we're in the middle east because of oil, or are we there because we like stable oil prices?
So, you're saying the market is willing to pay more for quality and features. Why not fuel economy too? It was certainly a major factor with my last car purchase.
You know what is a better benefit than 401k or cheaper dental?
If you need dental care, and want to retire? Nothing.
Re "You don't think an increase in minimum wage is the first time a business has ever had to deal with a rising cost of business, do you?" That would be an investment buying new equipment that grows profits, saves on wages. New computers, new production line, more capacity, an investment that lower past costs.
So, raw materials costs never increase? Utility costs never increase? Real estate taxes never increase? Transportation costs never increase? Interest rates never increase? Insurance costs never increase?
Re "The employees have more money" With everyone passing on mores costs in CA to cover the regulated wage costs. More money goes to pay for the wage gap into savings or something productive, usefull. Food costs, transport all reflect the mandated wage costs that further takes away from any wage rise for any one worker. Everything a poor worker needs every month costs more and the new costs passed on are not covered by a wage rise.
I'm going to go ahead and assume that English is not your first language (in which case, kudos to you - truly - for trying to learn what is a bitch of a language), because what you have written here only bears a passing resemblance to it. But doing my best to parse, you're saying that because things get more expensive, there's no point in trying to pay employees enough to keep up? That makes no sense at all. The labor cost of most of these things is a small enough contributor that wage increases do in fact more than offset the increase in price required to cover the wage increase.
Costs are taken out of company growth.
Where is the money for stock buybacks taken from?
In any negotiation where you aren't just as willing to walk away as the other party you have no power.
More than that - you can't have a free market (in this case, the labor market) if participants aren't free and able to decline a given deal. While one can argue that workers are FREE to walk away, the necessity of paying for food, water, shelter, transportation, and medical care means they typically are not ABLE to do so.
Housing can only sell/rent for what people can afford.
If real estate were a consumable product like toilet paper, where there is no point in having more than you can use, that would apply. But real estate is not a consumable. It's call REAL estate specifically because it is immovable. That makes it a good store of value, thus giving very wealthy individuals a strong incentive to purchase more than they can use - even if it sits empty, it still holds value. And just like what happens whenever you have too many investment dollars chasing too few good investments, prices get divorced from what consumers can afford.
Would it, though? Businesses go where the markets are. Uber might want to move where labor is cheaper, but the vast majority of their customers are - and by extension, their drivers need to be - in expensive urban areas.
Companies also need to have employees with sufficient skill to do the job. For many (if not most) companies, those people don't exist in sufficient numbers in cheaper places, and their existing employees have no interest in moving.
Minimum wage is meant for part time workers, students and starter jobs.
Citation needed.
Weird - someone who call himself a Christian actually acting like a Christian ought to. Bible verses on the bottom of a cup seem a whole lot less offensive to non-Christians than exploitative business practices *should* seem to Christians.
My first reaction was, "Downtown Liverpool has a grid? And it wasn't laid out until 1827?" That it is Australia and not England clears both questions right up.
The US hasn't invaded any country with their military for the stated cause of imperialism.
Fixed that for you.
I thought communism failed because it was an inherently flawed economic system.
Not hundreds of thousands - MILLIONS. There are 25 million in the Seoul urban area, 10 million in the city proper. If North Korea were to unleash their artillery, it would make Ypres look like a small town fireworks display.
You do realize that North Korea has enough artillery in position to flatten Seoul (home to ~50% of South Korea's population) before air squadrons could even be scrambled, right? Frankly, their artillery is much more of a deterrent to invasion than their nukes or their infantry.
the only country that can put pressure on China is the US ...
Pressure from outside is certainly one thing that can get a nation to act. Another is rational self interest in reaction to changes in global economic trends. Something tells me that China cares a lot more about the latter than the former.
Kim is the only one of the "Axis of Evil" leaders still alive.
Ali Khamenei would disagree with that, as would Kim Jong Il.
republicans and democrats haven't existed for 200 years.
Yeah, actually they have. The Democratic-Republican party goes back to the first decade of the republic, and it is the direct antecedent to both the Democratic Party and the Republican party. They've held the presidency for all but 20 years of the existence of the office, and the majorities in the House and Senate for all but 18 and 14 years, respectively.
1001, though, you might get a different answer.
Tesla is the most shorted stock in the US right now.
Interesting that you think that this is the cause of Tesla's bad press, without considering WHY it's the most shorted company. Tesla's stock price is wildly out of proportion with its fundamental financial picture, or its production capacity (even accounting for expected growth). It's really that simple. It's not a conspiracy - it's basic financial analysis.
You do realize that pretty much every institution in history has been formed with the explicit purpose of "social engineering", as you put it, right?