The U.S isn't different. In fact several of those countries are more free economically than the US and have far less government interference.
The only thing different about the US is you spend a lot of your money invading other countries instead of providing health care for people. That's about it. And in fact your government spends more per capita on health care than other advanced countries, but your health care system is so screwed up that spending doesn't actually provide health care for most people.
The end state of socialism is communism. They are the same things. Communist dictatorships are how socialists force everyone else to go along with their bullshit.
Russia, Belarus, Romania, Poland, and the Ukraine. All straight to junk. Russia in particular is the source of probably 70% of the malware I see in the last year.
Really. After Cambridge Analytica. After the call log confessions. You still let Facebook on your phone... and you're concerned about IP tracking? Seriously people.
Only if you're running a Fortune 500 and need a multi-server r/w database cluster or a giant data warehouse. For the vast majority of sites PostgreSQL is easier to use and just works.
Wind might be "cheap" but hydro delivered to my door is $.14/kwh. Whereas natural gas is so cheap these days it's almost free. The carbon tax here is literally more than the price of the gas and the total cost is still cheaper than heating with electricity (by like 300%). So yeah we burn gas.
Winning would mean ending the insurgency. It was clear by the early 60s that that wasn't going to be possible. You could win in the same way you've won in Afghanistan - that is, you can park soldiers on everything important in the and bleed blood and treasure forever. You couldn't end the insurgency and go home.
No, not at all. I think everyone should try to take care of themselves. I'm just not sure you're making a good argument for that to have happened in this case.
So she should have saved all her money and then paid it to the nursing home instead of enjoying it? I don't think this example is an argument for saving more.
Your colleague from Germany should be aware that his government has no idea how to fund pensions past 2025. Their pay-as-you-go system could result in effective tax rates of over 80% for anyone still working by 2030. Good luck collecting that.
Social Security is fine, with maybe a few tweaks. Medicare is what you should be worried about. It'll be out of IOUs in 6 years and nothing can fix it.
Every current resident of Chicago, Illinois, is on the hook for $125,000 in unfunded pension liabilities between the city, county and state. If those pensions are actually going to get paid, every resident needs to cough up an extra $125,000 over the next 30 years. And that number goes up every year, because current commitments are still not being funded. Given the income and wealth distribution in Chicago, practically that means every complete household with decent earners will need to cough up an additional $400,000 or more towards public pensions. All while not saving for their own retirement.
Now, Chicago is by far the biggest basket case, but this is not unique.
New York City is only short about $11,000 per household for pensions. But they're also short $23,000 per household for retiree health care.
Look into your own city, county, and state, and do the math. You can practically subtract the underfunded amount from the value of your home, because that's where the leeches will be looking to extract all that money from when it comes down to it.
It's too much to let people retire after 25 years of work and live for 40 more after that, yep. Especially when they're contributing 10% or less of earnings.
If you want to retire at 55, you probably need to be saving 40% of more of earnings.
Slashdot Mirror
The U.S isn't different. In fact several of those countries are more free economically than the US and have far less government interference.
The only thing different about the US is you spend a lot of your money invading other countries instead of providing health care for people. That's about it. And in fact your government spends more per capita on health care than other advanced countries, but your health care system is so screwed up that spending doesn't actually provide health care for most people.
The end state of socialism is communism. They are the same things. Communist dictatorships are how socialists force everyone else to go along with their bullshit.
Russia, Belarus, Romania, Poland, and the Ukraine. All straight to junk. Russia in particular is the source of probably 70% of the malware I see in the last year.
Oh yeah. Anything from Eastern Europe is straight to junk. Much of the rest of the world gets a big score boost.
ugh.
Depends on the jurisdiction. Virtually all tech workers are exempt in BC, for instance (the EA law).
Calling Captain Obvious.
Really. After Cambridge Analytica. After the call log confessions. You still let Facebook on your phone ... and you're concerned about IP tracking? Seriously people.
Only if you're running a Fortune 500 and need a multi-server r/w database cluster or a giant data warehouse. For the vast majority of sites PostgreSQL is easier to use and just works.
Jury trial. Unless this is in California, he can't possibly get stuck with 10 people that fucking stupid.
Can you imagine? Why yes, I enjoyed Microsoft using this exact playbook throughout the 90s, thanks.
- former ECNE
You can have a prepaid cell in California for $12/month. No one needs subsidizing. End the subsidizing and you don't need a new tax. ffs.
Wind might be "cheap" but hydro delivered to my door is $.14/kwh. Whereas natural gas is so cheap these days it's almost free. The carbon tax here is literally more than the price of the gas and the total cost is still cheaper than heating with electricity (by like 300%). So yeah we burn gas.
Winning would mean ending the insurgency. It was clear by the early 60s that that wasn't going to be possible. You could win in the same way you've won in Afghanistan - that is, you can park soldiers on everything important in the and bleed blood and treasure forever. You couldn't end the insurgency and go home.
Because then we can convince US taxpayers to keep paying nearly a trillion dollars a year for "defense". Obviously.
No, not at all. I think everyone should try to take care of themselves. I'm just not sure you're making a good argument for that to have happened in this case.
So she should have saved all her money and then paid it to the nursing home instead of enjoying it? I don't think this example is an argument for saving more.
Your colleague from Germany should be aware that his government has no idea how to fund pensions past 2025. Their pay-as-you-go system could result in effective tax rates of over 80% for anyone still working by 2030. Good luck collecting that.
Social Security is fine, with maybe a few tweaks. Medicare is what you should be worried about. It'll be out of IOUs in 6 years and nothing can fix it.
To put this in perspective:
Every current resident of Chicago, Illinois, is on the hook for $125,000 in unfunded pension liabilities between the city, county and state. If those pensions are actually going to get paid, every resident needs to cough up an extra $125,000 over the next 30 years. And that number goes up every year, because current commitments are still not being funded. Given the income and wealth distribution in Chicago, practically that means every complete household with decent earners will need to cough up an additional $400,000 or more towards public pensions. All while not saving for their own retirement.
Now, Chicago is by far the biggest basket case, but this is not unique.
New York City is only short about $11,000 per household for pensions. But they're also short $23,000 per household for retiree health care.
Look into your own city, county, and state, and do the math. You can practically subtract the underfunded amount from the value of your home, because that's where the leeches will be looking to extract all that money from when it comes down to it.
It's too much to let people retire after 25 years of work and live for 40 more after that, yep. Especially when they're contributing 10% or less of earnings.
If you want to retire at 55, you probably need to be saving 40% of more of earnings.
Probably not "any" car. Pure electrics aren't made with manual transmissions. Sucks, too, cause I'm like you, I only drive manuals.
If they're in the car, they're guilty. Meh, who cares what happens to them.
Unless they want to run for Congress. It seems to be a requirement to be terrible with money to be in the US government nowadays.
Based on the attacks I see daily most exploited Linux machines seem to be at self-hosted VPS outfits like OVH and Linode.