Regulating pollution causing industry has nothing to do with socialism or capitalism. Government should regulate irrational behavior.
They should regulate behaviour that is perfectly rational too. Tragedy of the commons and externalities (where your operation causes negative effects somewhere else - e.g. if you dump something in the river and the effects of this is further down). Also, in some cases the consequences of a risk taken by the owner might not be acceptable: E.g. a nuclear plant owner might be willing to take a very different risk (particularly when shielded by incorporation) than the society around it.
Do you think people are not dying in Communist China for the same reasons?
China is not communist. They were earlier when Mao led the country, but these days it's more of a dictatorship (communist in name only) with state owned enterprises and private enterprise both operating in a capitalistic economy.
Venezuela was far less capitalist and a lot more socialist than the USA. You can easily see how the closer one gets to socialism, the worse the results.
Can you? If you look from the US at the Nordic countries instead of Venezuela, you'd be fooled into believing that the closer you get to socialism, the better the results.
Conversively - if you look at the US from the Nordic countries, you'd be fooled into believing that the closer you get to capitalism, the worse the results.
In my opinion, there isn't a straight continuum from capitalist (100% good) to socialist (100% bad). A free market creates the best result in most areas - health care looks like it might be a big exception - but to ensure a free market you need quite a bit of regulation.
"cost as part of GDP" is a silly way to compare, because the U.S. is wealthier than almost all other countries and as a result spends more on everything where you can spend more to get more, including books, restaurants, fast food, education, lawn care, cars, roads, bridges, electronics, and yes, health care. The U.S. also subsidizes a lot of medical device and drug research for other countries. All you're showing is that wealthier people tend to spend more on discretionary items (like extra doctors and a private room when you don't really "need" that) than less wealthy people.
Once Medicare/medicaid and VA health spending are comparable to OECD levels of health spending (hint, they're much higher), then you can start arguing public health care would cost similar to what the government already spends.
And for the people who contribute, unemployment pay is not an option nor would living on UBI be. Not seeing your point.
In the post I replied to, UBI was described as replacing many benefits given today. And while I haven't used it so far, it is of course possible that at some point I might need some of these - sick pay, paternity/maternity leave, unemployment benefits. That is, after all, why paying into the system - it behaves a lot like insurance. Today, the benefits replace the income for a certain time. UBI would't replace the income, it would be a low baseline and instead remove all benefits. Thus, e.g. instead of the one year paid maternity/paternity leave we have today you would have a huge loss of income instead. Same if you got sick - a large part of your income would just go away.
Health care works pretty well for the purpose of UBI, outside of the US. Of the developed countries, only the US lacks public health care. Given the results on a population basis, as well as the actual cost as part of GDP (the US is 50% higher than #2) the non-US approach seems to be dramatically better.
And, almost as importantly, it REPLACES most of the other parts.
It replaces benefit for unemployment, sickness (but not necessarily medical), old age, education, and many many more, thus removing the HUGE beuraucracy that is wrapped around operating and policing those.
This is the part many don't like. Today, many of these benefits are dependent on your income and thus how much you pay into the system. If I'm sick, my wife is on maternity leave etc, these benefits replace the paychecks so that you don't lose money. If these are replaced with UBI, suddenly getting a child will lose you a lot of money - all of your pay check . Getting sick? Same thing - no pay, but you have UBI at the bottom.
For people actively contributing, today's system works much better than UBI.
Statistics are nothing more than math tainted with politics, with predictable results.
Statistics are nothing to be scared of for someone who can think critically.
Statistics can often be pushed a little bit towards what you want: A British classic.
Statistics, like any other information needs to be looked at critically. Now more than ever - people seem to believe anything, especially regarding Trump. Pro and con, even though most of the weird stuff comes from the Pro-Trumps.
For example when is the IQ test conducted? Before they are conscripted into service of before that as an evaluation of their abilities? Because you need to keep in mind that while service is compulsory in theory, in practice they do not conscript even half of the people they test.
So if they do well on the test they get drafted into the military? Perhaps a better headline would be:
"Norwegian draft-age Males Are Getting Better at Faking Stupidity on Preinduction Intelligence Tests, Says Science."
Your result could impact where they put you. E.g. if you're bright, you stand a much better chance of getting accepted for e.g. officer training, pilot training, using complicated equipment etc. If you're stupid, they can put you in the infantry storming out of assault vehicles;).
Norway gives their young people the choice of doing community service as an alternative to national service in the Army. Only 10% of the population go to university. The majority of the population lives in small towns of 10,000 or less all along the fjords on the Eastern side of the country, with four larger cities (Trondheim = 120,000, Stavanger, Oslo = 500,000, Bergen = 265,000). There really isn't much air pollution apart from the cruise liners that use sulphur based coal. Main food in Norway is fish.
While it would be nice if the main food in Norway was fish, it isn't. Norwegians eat an average of 76 kg meateach year. Fish is less than half of that, and sinking.
The populations numbers are also way off... the cities are larger. E.g in the area around Oslo, the population is around 1.5 million
There was never an actual choice of doing community service rather than the military service. These days, it's voluntary. In the past, if you were accepted as a conscientious objector you would be set to do community service - but it wasn't a choice
Dell / hp / others all do specs bumps / price drops over time. But apple still has 5400RPM hdds in the imacs.
Apple looks for ways to make system thinner and thinner and takes ports away.
For the iMacs, Apple is pushing Fusion Drive if you don't want a pure SSD. Fusion Drive is merging an SSD and the slow 5400 RPM HDD into a large device with the goal that the frequently used files and areas are available at SSD speeds, while things you access seldom is available at the HDD price (the Apple version of that, anyway).
Also Descent Freespace was written in assembly so the levels are remarkably huge.
Descent: Freespace is a different game than the one discussed in this thread, and not part of the Descent games (weird naming). Descent: Freespace is a 3D space simulator in the mold of TIE Fighter. Space is huge.
Yaay, Apple caught up to squeezebox! Created by Slim Devices in 2000 and later purchased by Logitech. Of course, with squeezebox you can have squeeze player on Android/iOS/Windows/Linux/MacOS driving a $5000 amp and speaker or a $20 one. But.... enjoy your vendor lock-in Apple fans. I'm sure you will tell yourselves the sound is fabulous.
Squeezebox was a good idea, executed poorly, I had a Squeezebox radio and a Squeezebox Touch. The radio is one of the few items I've ever returned - even just a room away from the Wifi-router, it was unable to get a good enough signal to play music reliably. Having skimped on the wireless networking, it only had 802.11g. The Touch was a little better, but using it was a pain. All in all, Squeezebox was unable to succeed, and died many years before Homepods were even announced.
It's just frustrating. I don't want to go back to fossil, but I need more range. The Leaf 40 is a disaster, and who knows if the 60 will be any better.
So buy a Chevy Bolt or a Volt. Both have much better range than the Leaf and are decent cars in their own right. The Leaf is a car that is useful for short commutes and that's it. If you need more then buy something else.
In Europe, the Opel Ampera had a multi-year waiting list. GM just wasn't able to/didn't want to deliver the desired quantities. After GM sold Opel, it's uncertain if they'll ever deliver them.
This is something Tidal vigorously denies and says the DN report is part of a "smear campaign."
I can see why Tidal would argue this as one of their competitors on "HiRes" streaming and music is the Norwegian 2L. Maybe the streaming industry could work together on this and found an independent, non-profit measuring entity to avoid the inevitable investor law suits.
2L is a Norwegian record label focusing on high quality classical recordings - they have 32 Grammy nominations (0 wins). Tidal is a streaming label, similar to Apple Music, Spotify etc. They are not competitors - Tidal also stream music from 2L.
The reason Tidal is covered by DN (a Norwegian financial newspaper), is that Tidal originated in Norway - it started life as WiMP in 2010. Later, as it spread internationally, it rebranded as Tidal and was bought by Jay-Z in 2015.
GDPR isn't overriding all other laws. In the example you give, there are also laws for for keeping records. You would have to remove her from the customer database of requested, but the records on who did what for whom will love on in accounting.
Maybe the History Channel of 15 years ago. These days, I'd recommend CuriosityStream, or BBC programming on Netflix or Amazon Prime. The History Channel long ago realized it was more profitable to show trashy reality or pseudo-science shows.
Same with Discovery - 15-20 years ago, there were plenty of shows about actual science, ancient civilisations, history, space, dinosaurs etc etc. Now it's reality shows and crime.
People leave because companies don't pay them what they're worth. A person that knows all your systems is worth much more than a similarly skilled person that is starting fresh, yet they're often paid the system with a small margin of error (a couple of 2% raises each year).
So this person takes their new skills, applies somewhere else (but this time as a medior developer) and gets an instant 20-30% raise.
Explaining your reasoning to your manager / boss / HR drone results in *NOTHING*. But stuff often suddenly starts moving when you hand in your resignation. Of course, by then it's too late and even a generous offer will not be accepted as something else has been lined up already.
Exactly. So why not be the second company and avoid that risky, costly first phase? Also, that means you can spend less of the precious senior developer bandwidth you already have.
Taking on a fresh developer takes a lot of resources - not only do they need to learn company routines, all the tools, how to work with teams and how to actually do development in a non-school setting, but they also need to learn how to actually work: Show up, what's not acceptable for taking days off, how to interact with all sorts of internal and external stakeholders etc.
As the average time a developer spends before switching jobs decreases - apparently Job Hopping Is the 'New Normal' for Millennials - the commitment from companies will go down too. Why spend a lot of time and resources to groom someone if he's probably going to leave anyway? Why not just get someone who's past that in the first place?
HR works for management. They get the requirements for jobs from management.
Blaming HR is complete nonsense.
I know, I've heard managers blame HR but it's because they are too chicken shit to fess up to their incompetence.
And how does management know what to ask for? The ones I've worked with don't just pull that out of thin air, they either ask their team - often starting on what worked last time, just use what they asked for last time or gives the CV of some of the guys they've had good experience with to HR, with instructions to adjust it a little in a direction ("Like Ann, but a couple of years younger"). If I'm writing from scratch, I list up some skills I want, the background I want and meet the candidates.
Managers aren't opposition or chronically stupid, they are trying to work with their teams. If they can't, they will fail.
Slashdot Mirror
Claiming a sitcom isn't high brow is hardly a case of superiority complex.
What's a good example of a recent high brow sit com? Yes, minister is obvious (Example 1, example 2 and example 3, Jeeves & Wooster might be another ... but they're all old and British.
Not only has millions of tonnes of greenhouses gases been produced due to mining
Where did THAT come from?
There were a couple of articles about Bitcoin and emissions last year.
Regulating pollution causing industry has nothing to do with socialism or capitalism. Government should regulate irrational behavior.
They should regulate behaviour that is perfectly rational too. Tragedy of the commons and externalities (where your operation causes negative effects somewhere else - e.g. if you dump something in the river and the effects of this is further down). Also, in some cases the consequences of a risk taken by the owner might not be acceptable: E.g. a nuclear plant owner might be willing to take a very different risk (particularly when shielded by incorporation) than the society around it.
Do you think people are not dying in Communist China for the same reasons?
China is not communist. They were earlier when Mao led the country, but these days it's more of a dictatorship (communist in name only) with state owned enterprises and private enterprise both operating in a capitalistic economy.
Venezuela was far less capitalist and a lot more socialist than the USA. You can easily see how the closer one gets to socialism, the worse the results.
Can you? If you look from the US at the Nordic countries instead of Venezuela, you'd be fooled into believing that the closer you get to socialism, the better the results.
Conversively - if you look at the US from the Nordic countries, you'd be fooled into believing that the closer you get to capitalism, the worse the results.
In my opinion, there isn't a straight continuum from capitalist (100% good) to socialist (100% bad). A free market creates the best result in most areas - health care looks like it might be a big exception - but to ensure a free market you need quite a bit of regulation.
"cost as part of GDP" is a silly way to compare, because the U.S. is wealthier than almost all other countries and as a result spends more on everything where you can spend more to get more, including books, restaurants, fast food, education, lawn care, cars, roads, bridges, electronics, and yes, health care. The U.S. also subsidizes a lot of medical device and drug research for other countries. All you're showing is that wealthier people tend to spend more on discretionary items (like extra doctors and a private room when you don't really "need" that) than less wealthy people.
Once Medicare/medicaid and VA health spending are comparable to OECD levels of health spending (hint, they're much higher), then you can start arguing public health care would cost similar to what the government already spends.
"Cost as part of GDP" is a pretty good way to compare. It shows how much of a country's production goes towards healthcare, helps correct for different salary and cost levels etc. FWIW, Norway is a bit better off than the US in general. We spend more than the US in absolute terms, but less when seen as a part of the GDP
Administrative costs seem to be a huge part of why - 8% of GDP in the US, 3% in most other countries.
And for the people who contribute, unemployment pay is not an option nor would living on UBI be. Not seeing your point.
In the post I replied to, UBI was described as replacing many benefits given today. And while I haven't used it so far, it is of course possible that at some point I might need some of these - sick pay, paternity/maternity leave, unemployment benefits. That is, after all, why paying into the system - it behaves a lot like insurance. Today, the benefits replace the income for a certain time. UBI would't replace the income, it would be a low baseline and instead remove all benefits. Thus, e.g. instead of the one year paid maternity/paternity leave we have today you would have a huge loss of income instead. Same if you got sick - a large part of your income would just go away.
Health care works pretty well for the purpose of UBI, outside of the US. Of the developed countries, only the US lacks public health care. Given the results on a population basis, as well as the actual cost as part of GDP (the US is 50% higher than #2) the non-US approach seems to be dramatically better.
And, almost as importantly, it REPLACES most of the other parts. It replaces benefit for unemployment, sickness (but not necessarily medical), old age, education, and many many more, thus removing the HUGE beuraucracy that is wrapped around operating and policing those.
This is the part many don't like. Today, many of these benefits are dependent on your income and thus how much you pay into the system. If I'm sick, my wife is on maternity leave etc, these benefits replace the paychecks so that you don't lose money. If these are replaced with UBI, suddenly getting a child will lose you a lot of money - all of your pay check . Getting sick? Same thing - no pay, but you have UBI at the bottom.
For people actively contributing, today's system works much better than UBI.
Statistics are nothing more than math tainted with politics, with predictable results.
Statistics are nothing to be scared of for someone who can think critically.
Statistics can often be pushed a little bit towards what you want: A British classic.
Statistics, like any other information needs to be looked at critically. Now more than ever - people seem to believe anything, especially regarding Trump. Pro and con, even though most of the weird stuff comes from the Pro-Trumps.
For example when is the IQ test conducted? Before they are conscripted into service of before that as an evaluation of their abilities? Because you need to keep in mind that while service is compulsory in theory, in practice they do not conscript even half of the people they test.
So if they do well on the test they get drafted into the military? Perhaps a better headline would be:
"Norwegian draft-age Males Are Getting Better at Faking Stupidity on Preinduction Intelligence Tests, Says Science."
Your result could impact where they put you. E.g. if you're bright, you stand a much better chance of getting accepted for e.g. officer training, pilot training, using complicated equipment etc. If you're stupid, they can put you in the infantry storming out of assault vehicles ;).
Norway gives their young people the choice of doing community service as an alternative to national service in the Army. Only 10% of the population go to university. The majority of the population lives in small towns of 10,000 or less all along the fjords on the Eastern side of the country, with four larger cities (Trondheim = 120,000, Stavanger, Oslo = 500,000, Bergen = 265,000). There really isn't much air pollution apart from the cruise liners that use sulphur based coal. Main food in Norway is fish.
Some corrections here:
Dell / hp / others all do specs bumps / price drops over time. But apple still has 5400RPM hdds in the imacs.
Apple looks for ways to make system thinner and thinner and takes ports away.
For the iMacs, Apple is pushing Fusion Drive if you don't want a pure SSD. Fusion Drive is merging an SSD and the slow 5400 RPM HDD into a large device with the goal that the frequently used files and areas are available at SSD speeds, while things you access seldom is available at the HDD price (the Apple version of that, anyway).
YOu can play it on Home of the Underdogs.
Also Descent Freespace was written in assembly so the levels are remarkably huge.
Descent: Freespace is a different game than the one discussed in this thread, and not part of the Descent games (weird naming). Descent: Freespace is a 3D space simulator in the mold of TIE Fighter. Space is huge.
Yaay, Apple caught up to squeezebox! Created by Slim Devices in 2000 and later purchased by Logitech. Of course, with squeezebox you can have squeeze player on Android/iOS/Windows/Linux/MacOS driving a $5000 amp and speaker or a $20 one. But.... enjoy your vendor lock-in Apple fans. I'm sure you will tell yourselves the sound is fabulous.
Squeezebox was a good idea, executed poorly, I had a Squeezebox radio and a Squeezebox Touch. The radio is one of the few items I've ever returned - even just a room away from the Wifi-router, it was unable to get a good enough signal to play music reliably. Having skimped on the wireless networking, it only had 802.11g. The Touch was a little better, but using it was a pain. All in all, Squeezebox was unable to succeed, and died many years before Homepods were even announced.
Apple seems to be competing mostly with Sonos, and a little bit with Google Home and Amazon Echo.
$5.80 A GALLON??!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What socialist HELL HOLE do you live in?????
Just $5.80/gallon? Here in Norway the gas price is closer to 8 USD pr. gallon (or rather, 16.65 NOK/l)
Here, 37% of new cars sold in March 2018 were electric vehicles. In addition, about 27% were hybrids.
It's just frustrating. I don't want to go back to fossil, but I need more range. The Leaf 40 is a disaster, and who knows if the 60 will be any better.
So buy a Chevy Bolt or a Volt. Both have much better range than the Leaf and are decent cars in their own right. The Leaf is a car that is useful for short commutes and that's it. If you need more then buy something else.
In Europe, the Opel Ampera had a multi-year waiting list. GM just wasn't able to/didn't want to deliver the desired quantities. After GM sold Opel, it's uncertain if they'll ever deliver them.
This is something Tidal vigorously denies and says the DN report is part of a "smear campaign."
I can see why Tidal would argue this as one of their competitors on "HiRes" streaming and music is the Norwegian 2L. Maybe the streaming industry could work together on this and found an independent, non-profit measuring entity to avoid the inevitable investor law suits.
2L is a Norwegian record label focusing on high quality classical recordings - they have 32 Grammy nominations (0 wins). Tidal is a streaming label, similar to Apple Music, Spotify etc. They are not competitors - Tidal also stream music from 2L.
The reason Tidal is covered by DN (a Norwegian financial newspaper), is that Tidal originated in Norway - it started life as WiMP in 2010. Later, as it spread internationally, it rebranded as Tidal and was bought by Jay-Z in 2015.
GDPR isn't overriding all other laws. In the example you give, there are also laws for for keeping records. You would have to remove her from the customer database of requested, but the records on who did what for whom will love on in accounting.
This was true at some point, but Trump and his supporters have taken over the party. One interesting book on this is Trumpocracy.
Maybe the History Channel of 15 years ago. These days, I'd recommend CuriosityStream, or BBC programming on Netflix or Amazon Prime. The History Channel long ago realized it was more profitable to show trashy reality or pseudo-science shows.
Same with Discovery - 15-20 years ago, there were plenty of shows about actual science, ancient civilisations, history, space, dinosaurs etc etc. Now it's reality shows and crime.
People leave because companies don't pay them what they're worth. A person that knows all your systems is worth much more than a similarly skilled person that is starting fresh, yet they're often paid the system with a small margin of error (a couple of 2% raises each year).
So this person takes their new skills, applies somewhere else (but this time as a medior developer) and gets an instant 20-30% raise.
Explaining your reasoning to your manager / boss / HR drone results in *NOTHING*. But stuff often suddenly starts moving when you hand in your resignation. Of course, by then it's too late and even a generous offer will not be accepted as something else has been lined up already.
Exactly. So why not be the second company and avoid that risky, costly first phase? Also, that means you can spend less of the precious senior developer bandwidth you already have.
Taking on a fresh developer takes a lot of resources - not only do they need to learn company routines, all the tools, how to work with teams and how to actually do development in a non-school setting, but they also need to learn how to actually work: Show up, what's not acceptable for taking days off, how to interact with all sorts of internal and external stakeholders etc.
As the average time a developer spends before switching jobs decreases - apparently Job Hopping Is the 'New Normal' for Millennials - the commitment from companies will go down too. Why spend a lot of time and resources to groom someone if he's probably going to leave anyway? Why not just get someone who's past that in the first place?
HR works for management. They get the requirements for jobs from management. Blaming HR is complete nonsense.
I know, I've heard managers blame HR but it's because they are too chicken shit to fess up to their incompetence.
And how does management know what to ask for? The ones I've worked with don't just pull that out of thin air, they either ask their team - often starting on what worked last time, just use what they asked for last time or gives the CV of some of the guys they've had good experience with to HR, with instructions to adjust it a little in a direction ("Like Ann, but a couple of years younger"). If I'm writing from scratch, I list up some skills I want, the background I want and meet the candidates.
Managers aren't opposition or chronically stupid, they are trying to work with their teams. If they can't, they will fail.
It also works well on Sonos.