Bubble? I thought I was being conservative in choosing 2% as a number. Yearly inflation in the past averaged over 2%. I'll admit that the past two years has seen record low interest rates, but 2% raises are hardly a recent phenomenon.
566 karma · joined November 10, 2015
People often think that this phenomenon occurs because employers decide afterwards to fire the employee who has recently gotten that significant raise. From what I've seen anecdotally in /r/personalfinance, what really happens is that employees realize that they've been undervalued for an extended period of time. If a well-performing employee has been getting paltry 2% raises for months or years and their employer quickly matches an offer of double their salary, it leaves a bad taste in a lot of employees' mouths.
It makes me wonder if loyalty was ever really valued in past generations or if loyalty was really just some fanciful meme perpetrated by employers to keep costs down. I often hear that short periods of time spent at jobs is a negative signal to hiring managers but I seldom hear anyone actually point to it as the reason they weren't hired for a job.
Unless you're making an independent film or something, I would think that a high end webcam does a great job for professional streamers and online meetings. Even the cameras in modern laptops and smartphones do a good enough job.
People who say "It's a class issue" seem to miss that it's much easier to recognize race than class.
People discriminated through redlining (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining) would disagree that "It's a class issue":
>For example, in Atlanta in the 1980s, a Pulitzer Prize-winning series of articles by investigative-reporter Bill Dedman showed that banks would often lend to lower-income whites but not to middle- or upper-income blacks.
People who read the stats showing the differences in sentencing between black males and white males, even when controlled for income, would hardly say "It's a class issue."
Say what now? I don't know if you remember but Vista had really high hardware requirements. When Vista came out, it was fundamentally unusable for me. Hardware requirements is literally the first section of criticism in Vista's Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista#Hardware_require...):
>For example, Mike Nash (Corporate Vice President, Windows Product Management) commented, "I now have a $2,100 e-mail machine" because his laptop's lack of an appropriate graphics chip so hobbled Vista.
Windows 7 made substantial performance improvements in comparison to the widespread hardware incompatibilities that Vista had.
I'm trying to avoid spoiling things for those who haven't seen it, but almost every character became more multi-dimensional and the story progressed in unexpected ways. It took the worn-out tropes and flipped them over. Even your singular use of the word "genre" confuses me. Was there only one genre? It started out as a horror movie and then evolved into some sci-fi secret experiment narrative.
I'm going to assume that this is sarcasm. (If it's not sarcasm, keep in mind all the nonsensical loans that were being given out pre-2008.)
A friend argued that it's still the same language, so you can understand what others are saying even with a different dialect. Please. The average person can't understand all of Scouse, AAVE, Southern American, Geordie, cockney, Hiberno‐English, etc. I still find myself rewinding dialogue in shows like Peaky Blinders.
The only reason people have a problem with AAVE is some sort of racial pretentiousness. Even the use of the phrase "Standard English" in this article is pretentious. Standard to whom? Brits certainly have a different perspective of what "Standard English" is from Americans.
This tax strategy aggressively pursued during the Reagan administration, supported during the Clinton administration, and maintained during the Bush and Obama administrations relies on the assumption that growth among the asset-holders translates into more jobs and better pay for everyone ("trickle-down economics"). This assumption seems asinine now because of course the wealthy are going to save whatever profit they make. That's how the wealthy get wealthy in the first place! The Great Recession has only exposed this more. Employers realized "Actually, I didn't need those positions anyway." Other employers realized "There's enough demand for jobs here, so I don't actually have to increase salary that much." Property values may have collapsed during the Great Recession but a lot of long-term property owners realized "People still need a roof over their heads. Demand for rent is at an all-time high. I have no incentive to lower rent."
Consequently, wealth inequality grows. Wages stagnate. Homeownership stagnates. Rent rises with inflation. The percentage of 25- to 34-year-olds living at home with their parents is the highest it's been in nearly a century. The young and educated see the situation, realize that they have no power over an establishment bending to the whims of the upper-class and corporations, and grow more and more apathetic. The old and uneducated are fed populist nonsense and anti-immigration scapegoating, thinking that driving out the brown people will get them the jobs and pay that employers have no interest in giving them. Trust is an emotion. A belief. What makes you less likely to trust others? Insecurity. And why wouldn't people be insecure in this economic environment?
(I realize that this is a very U.S.-centric comment and I apologize to any other nationalities for whom this does not describe the political environment.)
Isn't this exactly the type of attitude that lead to Brexit? I can't believe I'm defending Murdoch, but who are you to determine one's "cultural identity"? What a bizarre comment.
I share a similar peeve as you with the use of "women" as an adjective. All through grade school and high school, the use of "women" as a noun was pummeled into my head. Now, I routinely see presumably college-educated journalists use it as an adjective ("women scientists", "women engineers", etc.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clearance_rate
I want to expand on your point about privacy by pointing out that arrests are often entirely up to police discretion. A suspended license could result in a warning, a ticket, or an arrest; ultimately, it comes down to whether an officer is in a good mood when he stops me or whether he likes my face. Allowing surveillance dragnets just makes it easier for law enforcement to have something to charge you with if they don't like you.
I feel the same way about washing dishes. I care about having clean dishes but I really don't like washing dishes. Even now with a dishwasher, I get annoyed having to hand-wash the dishes that aren't dishwasher-safe.
Second of all, here is a comprehensive list of peer-reviewed studies defending the existence of ADHD and the efficacy of amphetamines for ADHD (much better than some random anecdote of an improperly diagnosed taxi passenger):
https://www.reddit.com/r/ADHD/comments/3at2u2/psa_the_existe...
Admittedly, psychologists seem to have a problem properly diagnosing it, but let's not diminish a disorder suffered by millions every day.
Known by who? Did you just respond to a peer-reviewed study with made-up pseudo-science? Also, I should point out that the psychiatric term is ADHD, not ADD.
No one denies that Facebook was built through hard work and perseverance, but how many people have doctor parents, a software engineer for a private tutor in middle school, admittance to the richest private boarding school in the country, a (former) best friend whose father is a wealthy industrialist, and a number of other untold privileges?
Using Zuckerberg as an example of a self-made person really hurts your argument.