750 karma · joined August 6, 2012
waitstaff isnt paid that much hourly. Its generally on the order of 2-3$ per hour.
edit: since im being downvoted i assume someone disagrees - here is a source:
from nolo.com:
>Employers must pay tipped employees at least $3.23 an hour in 2016, $3.38 an hour in 2017, and $3.52 an hour in 2018.
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/michigan-laws-tipped-...
Born and raised and still live around Detroit. There is staggering unemployment.
I'm amazed that anyone believes otherwise...
ProTools? its pretty much the industry standard and it also supports your point that its unlikely to be the OS at fault - since most studios i've been in are running mac pros and protools without any issues.
Though protools requires some external hardware iirc
Would it be immune to accelerated climate change on Earth?
availability of land isnt the only factor here.
(i dont actually know the answer to these questions, and obviously it would likely depend on the details of this water habitat)
If they think thats worth it, then let them. Why is this such a horrible outcome?
Their FAQs page literally has filler text, and one of the four most frequently asked questions is 'how do we know this is not a money grab?'
>I have personally donated $xxx to our Booster.com fundraiser.
really? you donated xxx dollars? Who is the "I" in that sentence?
2. they have significantly lower cost of living
3. fta:
>in both China and the U.S., the average family’s assets were about eight times its average income.
4. seems this was a study of 2000 urban chinese, not all chinese. a sample of 2000 urbanites probably doesnt scale to over a billion people....
5. china has undergone several decades of large economic growth. if you compared china today with theUS in the late 1950s theyd probably seem pretty similar...
6. only 12% of chinese (from the 2000 person sample) owned a car
Well, in michigan we had a petition to allow voting on legalization recreational marijuana. It received far in excess of the required signatures, and then weeks later a very old rule was applied to the petition by discretion of the government to invalidate the entire petition and leaving not enough time to have it redone before the election deadline. (as in the rule did not legally have to be applied, but government officials decided to apply it anyways)
So this is an example of the government acting opposite of the interests of the people it claims to represent.
> Because from where I'm standing, it sure looks like my third-grade teacher is responsible.
And what gave your third grade teacher that idea? did she watch a movie called reefer madness?
The problem is this back and forth can go all day.
You say that people elected those politicians, and passed those policies, and i would say the reason they held those beliefs is a result of someone else influencing them through half truths, propaganda, etc.
You could say, well people choose the media they consume, but i would say the conglomeration of media companies, and the methods through which information has historically been distributed have always been controlled by moneyed interests. (reefer madness being a perfect example of a propaganda movie that influenced nearly an entire generation)
There are quotes from the nixon era from aides saying that the war on drugs was designing explicitly to fight racial minorities and 'hippies'[1]
Obviously the nature of all of these things is so interconnected, thats its impossible to unravel and reach an objective conclusion. In my opinion its pessimistic to believe that people are so inherently against other people - there is usually some more learned reason that someone would believe things like 'black people are dangerous' or 'all mind altering substances are bad (wait, except caffeine alcohol prescription medications etc.)'
I'm not wearing a tinfoil hat and saying george soros or whoever is controlling the world, just that people's relationship to the truth and their perceptions of things outside of their lived experiences are heavily influenced by the information they consume, which has been controlled by companies since the printing press
[1]http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richa...
>police are abusive because ordinary people want it that way
What?? How am i getting a benefit from unarmed black people getting shot anymore than a senator?
No if anything it comes down to misguided incentives (broken window policing, drug policies, police and attorneys wanting to forward their political aspirations, etc) This is all controlled by the government (which is of course controlled by moneyed interests.
Also, with the growing trend of 'cord-cutting' i think more and more people are hooking their laptops up to their TVs and watching netflix and youtube that way. Though the trend in that space seems to be pointing more toward curated ecosystems like roku, apple tv, etc.
But i think eventually for pretty much anything else the hardware and software will reach a point where you can dock your phone into some cradle and that will be your desktop environment also - this has been tried and failed many times, but its usually because the performance just isnt there to be competitive with real computers.
The conference will be doing a livestream here: http://livestream.com/accounts/4426843/events/6315496/player...
Next, why would a business failing to make a profit be immoral? What exactly is immoral about a business failing? If it is so obvious, maybe you can explain how it is immoral and exactly who is being immoral.
Next, it seems like you didn't understand what I meant when I said they failed to meet expectations. I meant the investors expectations.
It seemed to me that a moral argument was being made, that twitter took too much money and that that is bad because they aren't profiting (i.e. earning the investors money)
Of course a business wants to make profits, but i dont see how its immoral for twitter to have taken so much investment.
Would it be fine if they weren't making profits, but had only taken 10 million in investment? if so, why?
Unless the argument is that twitter somehow purposefully deceived investors in order to get money, i dont see how the amount of money they've taken makes a difference.
i wasnt trying to speak so specifically to this exact case, but more generally the idea that its a company's fault that they took so much investment and arent seeing the expected success. (i see this about uber and tesla a lot as well)
I see this type of thing all the time about various companies, i really dont understand the thinking behind it.
Why is it Twitter's fault that people handed them 2.8 billion dollars?
The investors were the ones who created the terms of the agreement, they wrote the check - how could it possibly be anyone but their fault that their investment didn't work out?
If i bet on 33 black and lose a hundred bucks - is it because 33 black did something wrong?
A fresh college graduate could spend 60 hours trying to spin up a new web server, where an experienced professional could do the same in an hour. Should the fresh graduate get a promotion for this?
You're right that higher paying jobs require more of you, thats why the barrier to entry is higher. You need to have more experience and know how to do more things. You're not getting paid more because you're expected to work more hours, but because you are expected to be capable of doing more complex work.
iphone 7 plus 128GB - 41.58$
Verizon 4GB data plan - 50$
insurance - 10$
app services? - 20$
Total - 121.58$
From Honda's website, they're advertising a civic lease for $179 a month. that's with 2000$ due at signing. Oh wait! you'll also need mandatory driver's insurance on that vehicle, that'll be at least another 50$ (im told, i live in michigan which has the highest car insurance prices in the nation, my 2012 sonata costs 178 a month to insure, that's well above my monthly payment on the car itself - i have never been in an accident and i have no tickets in the last 5 years) anyways, so we are at least at $229 total with a 2000$ initial down payment. That's quite considerably more expensive...
oh wait! theres also the various fees for getting a license, getting a license plate, registering the vehicle with the state, and of course the mental cost of maintaining the various paperwork.
Total - 229$ + 2500ish$
Other than, 'some other group of humans told me this' what evidence do you have that the earth should be the birthright of humans more than that of any other thing on earth?
Right, literally claiming to know the meaning of existence - totally an interpretable statement.
My qualm was never that someone would put humans needs before animals, but that that should be the only consideration made is extreme - that its the very nature of existence to do so is beyond extreme.
Have a good one!
How do you know the planet isnt a gift to them, instead of us?
> Why wouldn't humans flourishing and having happiness be a goal to hit?
you are /immediately/ softening the language - how do you not see yourself doing this?
now its gone from 'the whole point of existence' to 'should be a goal to hit' I'm not even going to read the rest, because youre flat out being dishonest here.
besides that gp didnt say 'i prefer humans above other animals' dont change what they said to suit your needs; they said:
>the whole point of existence is human flourishing and happiness.
Thats a significantly stronger statement than you allude to
USB-c is an open standard. you can buy laptops and desktops with it right now - even macbooks! There are numerous phones with this connector, so an investment in usb-c headphones is something you can be sure will be compatible with most things going forward.
Where am i gunna plug in my lightning cabled headphones? Theres no lightning port on my mac, no other company does or will ever make a device with a lightning port. Oh and god forbid apple change their connector again - how much would you stake on the lightning port being around half as long as the 3.5mm connector?
How many millions of Beats headphones have they sold through their own apple stores? How many people did they fleece into paying 300$ for a pair of headphones they wont be able to use with new ios devices? How many have they sold since they knew they were removing the headphone jack?
This isnt just about people being upset their current headphones are basically useless, but knowing that any new headphones they buy have a limited lifetime. This is a major cultural shift in external audio components, which have been standard for decades - to proprietary connectors with known limited lifespans.
I find it a rather disgustingly self centered ideology. To presume that one (or ones species) is the most important thing in the world (or universe) is basically the definition of narcissism
Given their extreme poverty, i would think their stockpile of ammo is rather skimpy (surely better invested in than other things in the country, but 2 million shells in 30 minutes sounds like it would be quite an economic outlay for them)
I think theres also regional hop variations, so maybe theyre just less piney here.