And, anyway, this would only argue for giving them an option, not for giving nobody the option of working full time. 25% is not a small number
264 karma · joined August 19, 2010
This is the most important question!
Is there a way, inside the brazilian legislation, to give them full workers rights but keeping the pricing per km rather than hour?
There really should be...
Also, mobs do go after you for your online speech, so the possibility of a platform that keeps your speech up does not preclude the possibility (and fact) of censorship
It just happens that they dont want to do that, because dealing with cash is cheaper
If there is no price differentiation, this just means everyone has to share the cost, rather than the people who choose to use it
In theory, tasers are good because they can substitute shooting.
In practice, you had 5 shootings, and now you have 4 shootings and 200 taser uses
Only one side is forbidding people to look at things for themselves. It seems better epistemological practice to suspect this side more
Yup. Lets trust the red terror system of justice
(do note: I have a quote from Russia, so, there is an important caveat there. Still...)
Martin Latsis, chief of the Ukrainian Cheka, stated in the newspaper Red Terror:
We are not fighting against single individuals. We are exterminating the bourgeoisie as a class. Do not look in the file of incriminating evidence to see whether or not the accused rose up against the Soviets with arms or words. Ask him instead to which class he belongs, what is his background, his education, his profession. These are the questions that will determine the fate of the accused. That is the meaning and essence of the Red Terror.The history of the state is also nasty. The history of engineering is also not that glorious, given that it was mostly for war. You can even go to the history of writing...
The question is: what each religion is doing, of harm and good, today. And what we expect they can do tomorrow. On those grounds, you might even be right. But the question is more complex.
(but I agree: the bible does not fit with our values today at all)
The only tip I have is from a bit of amateur sound editing I did: collect many samples, and beware of big phrases: Like, ask her to say the same thing many times. And ... sometimes ... to ... stop ... at ... each ... word. And ... so ... me ... ti ... mes at each syllable.
Otherwise, if you ever need to create a sample that contains a single word/syllable, you cant. It is weird how much sound that contains clearly distinguishable syllables for the human ears still is not separable when you go to edit it.
Also, you might want to check wordlists by frequency to get a menu of common words, and ipa notation, to ensure you cover a good range of sounds
I do not keep a bookmarks toolbar active, and also prefer to do things on the keyboard whenever possible.
(fyi, for others: you need not use ctrl-r, just type and press up and down)
This flour could be selling higher, and creating more incentive to produce.
But I agree, that publicity stunt bit is needlessly agressive
Fuzzies are good. They are useful. They connect me to people around me, and bring gratitude. Fuzzies are the reason I have a moral feeling at all. And utilions are just a virus, that infects my moral system, trying to highjack it, so that it becomes useless to me. So that I do charity without getting gratitude and potencial help in the future.
Purchase "moral usefulness" and "moral useless abstraction" separately, and try to purchase of the latter as little as possible :)
There are people that cannot afford insulin. THAT is a problem. But the fact that he took a risk, for fun, and suffered the consequences, rather than having everyone paying for it? That sounds a bit reasonable...
Note: important that the risk is voluntary, optional and recreational rather than professional. Why would the collective bear the costs, in those circumstances? Why is that fair?
If monthly, the answer is still no, but only because testing for covid is a significant public good.
Otherwise, yes, sure?
It is an unpredictable, low probability event, with not so big an impact (the payment, I mean, not covid)
What does that mean? Do people need to build homes with at least 2 parking spaces per home, inside the area of their property? Does it generalize to apartments?
The question is some people find the cost too much.
Maybe it is better to have a law that is explicitly dumb, in exchange for fast, cheap and predictable (kinda like computers, if you think about it)
Rather, I'd say the spirit of some of the laws and rules.
Most laws and rules are worthy, in that if everyone respects them, everyone is better off. They are positive sum. Those need to be followed.
But arbitrary, explicitly defined games might be gamed at the same time.
That is, when we see the local economy drying up again and again, and towns in permanent recession, disappearing, do we just keep doing what the theory says.
Besides, the theory does not say "open economy is good for everyone". It says, at most, with its caveats and conditions, "open economy is good to maximize global wealth", the sum of the wealth of all the participants.
Maybe that benefits smalltown (good), or maybe a chinese smalltown more than it hurts smalltown (still good, but a though time convincing smalltown to go along against their interests).
Maybe that benefit Jeff Besos more than it harms smalltown (in dollar terms, that are the issue the theory is about).
Saying that the economy produces good results is like saying evolution produces good results: true, as far as it goes, but your blind god optimize for things you care only incidentally, and often not at all (see also: covid-19 :P)