Meh, I’m guessing it just comes across like someone calling New York “NeYo” or Los Angeles “Losang” - like you could see why someone would abbreviate that way - but not done by anyone actually familiar with the city.

yep, usually i just avoid this by taking more trips to the buffet and just getting complementary flavors at a time - though that requires more walking?

Ah ok thanks for the clarification.

That makes sense to me at a buffet or potluck. Like if you’re getting BBQ ribs, steamed white fish, and blue cheese stuffed steak all on one plate, why would you want them mixed together and have the flavors mash up into each other?

Yep, and I think the whole trend of hopping IPAs way beyond good taste markets to that sensibility.

This is showing up as a new post again for some reason.

Actually, MIT is wrong - they admitted a math error after it was pointed out, and they revised their figures.

Yep, that’s going to be an issue with any generation. It’s probably best to take the midpoint of each generation to think about. 1982-1996, midpoint is around 1988.

I kind of think that this kind of scale makes sense though.

Just want to point out for example, the walkman was released in the US in the 1980s. While for example you might have thought there’s a massive difference between someone born in 1982 having to use a “walkman” or a “discman” - and someone in 1995 growing up with an iPod - it’s not really. It’s just a further…

Yep, I’m saying on the macro level as a society - pushing for benefits, and to stop “looking down” on welfare is better than trying to push for artificial price floors - since on the “simplistic individual level” they may work - but not on the macro level.

If you read my answer, I’m not saying there should be no social responsibility. I’m saying, there are jobs that provide value, but not enough value to support a person with a living wage.

You could change the cost of the ride depending on the time?

It’s not $4 an hour btw, the publishes of that report have since retracted that after it was pointed out out to them they made some basic math errors (basically divided earnings by a half by mistake).

One idea for articles like this is to distinguish between jobs that *require* attendance between the hours of 9-5, i.e. jobs that if you take, they preclude you from most other normal jobs - in which case there’s an argument they should be paid like a primary job.

Yep, that leasing program is wrong and should be called out.

Wowww... I really hope that you grow your own wheat, grind your own flour, and knead your own bread to bake as your mode of food, because you obviously have NO respect for the kitchen, and none for restaurant workers- I don’t care how little a restaurant worker works, whether it’s the only meal they’ll ever make in…

Are you referring to the previous incorrect article? There was a major math error (basically the study authors divided earnings by 2 at some point incorrectly).

Uber may well have morphed to being primarily designed as a full-time gig now, but I’m just pointing out the whole “living wage’ argument runs counter to the concept of being able to have “supplemental gigs” or even “entry-level gigs”.

I actually had a situation like that with my last car purchase. Only one dealers had the exact combination I wanted.