503 karma · joined March 10, 2017
And looking past the top one person, there are power laws too. The number 2 person in a company gets paid twice what the number 3 person gets, and so on.
And it's not just money. There's power - politicians. And fame - actors, and others. They all follow the same pattern.
Given that this is the world we live in, there's a huge incentive to move up one rung on the ladder relative to the people around you.
Part of this drive to move ahead of other people is rational because of the geometrically increasing rewards.
It all depends on how many years you plan to draw money out.
But I don't think you have to be an aggressive type-A man to make $100K in the US.
At any income level in the US, there are more men than women making that income. Most likely the same is true across the world.
Other statistics show things that favor men. For every 100 women... There are this many men...
Fortune 500 CEOs - 1,900 (There are only 25 women, vs. 475 men)
Billionaires in the world - 854
Millionaires in the world - 900
Income over $100K in US - 240
Income over $250K in US - 290
Leader of a nation - 873 (There are only 15 women vs 131 men)
A lot of work to set up, but it might be worth it in your case.
Put almost all of her money in a main account that requires approval from you or your brother.
Give your mom a checking account with regular monthly deposits from the main account.
We did this for my mom, and she was relieved to have the burden off her shoulders.
Following a recession, all new investors will panic and withdraw all their money and keep it out for years. They didn't know the market could be down two years in a row. Boomers reach a phase in their lives where they are only taking money out of the stock market, and spending it on Chinese goods. Inflation picks up, and smart money moves from stocks to gold and then bonds. This combination will lead to one of the worst decades for stocks since the great depression. 2028 and 2029 sees money starting to go back into the market. But the decade as a whole sees low gains.
But even in a recession, people still treat themselves by eating out at McDonalds and their new $5 Keto menu.
A pre-tax yearly salary living wage to cover the minimum in the US would be $45K - $68K depending on location. Let's look at a low end, low cost of living state. $45K pre-tax translates to about $3K per month take home pay. Which means that if you had $3K per month take home, you would just be covering the basics for a family. If you are trying to get by on $2K per month, you're already making some difficult trade-offs to survive.
So, I don't think it's realistic to say someone with $2K per month take home pay can save $1K per month.
The two reinforce each other.
I see it as a matrix with two axes.
Salary: High/Low
Skills and Training: High specific skills/Low skills and require training after being hired
This creates four different quadrants.
1) When companies say they are having difficultly hiring, what they really mean is they are having difficulty hiring someone with specific high skills at a relatively low salary.
2) If the company is willing to pay a much higher salary, then the company will not have a problem finding someone.
3) If the company is willing to hire someone with less skill, and train them on the job, then the company will not have a problem finding someone.
4) If the company does both, pays a relatively high wage, and is willing to take someone with less skill, and train them on the job, then the company will not have a problem finding someone.
Yes. Up to a point. It's true that in general, the government currently pays less than private insurers.
What's not clear is what happens if/when the government is the only one paying hospitals to keep their doors open. At the reduced rate, hospitals will have hard choices to make. Only about 20% of hospitals are for-profit. For the other 80%, less money coming in the door will result in changes of some kind. I can't imagine how hospitals can do that, and make things better for patients at the same time. Something's got to give.
Arts world - generous patron
I'm not sure if that's enough to say trade with China is a good thing.
But it should turn your idea of a very simple answer into a much more complicated picture.
Are you saying that after Amazon verifies your credit card once, a scammer can keep making purchases on your card after you report it stolen to your credit card company?
This is news to me.
How long can Amazon do that? The end of the day? The end of the month? What eventually stops Amazon from accepting a card which has been reported stolen, and how long does the process take?
But blocking one specific company such as Amazon works faster? Why is that?
I guess at the end of the month, you can dispute the purchases.
I guess the local health officials will choose to look the other way, as they do when a kid sets up a lemonade stand, at least until someone files a complaint.
But if you add an eggplant emoji... that's it! You crossed the line. Facebook cannot tolerate that. Oh no. Not that.
Oops. The email from Passbox ends up in my junk email folder by mistake. I never see it.
After the waiting period, my trusted friend gets the information from Passbox and proceeds to wreak havoc with all my online accounts.
No thanks.
But in a mathematical probability problem, you can't do that. For example, if there's a slightly smaller object and a slightly larger object concealed in two different sized boxes, common sense says that a person would put the larger object in the larger box. But if it's a abstract mathematical probability problem, and you have no information on the algorithm used, then you have to assume the concealer flipped a coin when they decided which box to use.
If I'm the one setting up the big-small game, and I use the random algorithm, the smaller object is going to be in the bigger box about half the time. If my mom is the one setting up the game, the smaller object is going to be in the smaller box every time.
In abstract mathematical probability problems, if you don't know what algorithm was used, you aren't allowed to bring human behavior in, unless it's stated in the problem.
So, yes, even a person with the world's highest IQ can make a mistake.
If the problem does not state what the host's algorithm is, and you have no knowledge of the host's algorithm (example: you have never seen the TV show before), then the logical action is to assume the host chooses a door to reveal randomly.
One liberal arts college decided to admit more diverse, poor students and fewer white rich students. Then to make things worse, they decided to give the rich white students additional financial aid. Then, surprise! They ran out of money.
This article does not touch on the real problem. A new Massachusetts regulation says that colleges must have enough money to guarantee that they can operate for four years. https://www.mass.edu/bhe/documents/THESIS%20Working%20Group%...
"The resulting Teachout Viability Metric (TVM), ... focuses on an NPIHE’s ability to meet its teaching obligations to currently enrolled undergraduate students through to their expected graduation dates."
An NPIHE is a college.
In other words, if a college doesn't have the money to guarantee it can stay open for four year, it has to start taking drastic steps which will probably scare away next fall's students.
Hampshire never had enough money to make a guaratee like that. Hampshire has always operated paycheck to paycheck, with almost no money in the bank. But it wasn't a life or death problem. They managed to slide by decade after decade. But now, with this new regulation, Hampshire is required to take drastic actions including admitting a tiny freshman class. Hampshire finances were on the shaky side and heading down. But this new regulation turned a manageable problem into an existential crisis.
But you are correct. I was only thinking in 2D euclidean space. Khaaaaaan!
Your other ideas are very creative, and as far as I understand them, correct (except for the idea of four DISTINCT points), but probably outside the problem. How many solutions would there be on a hyperbolic plane? No idea.