taysic

So how many years of experience are required for these types of salaries? What job title?

Wouldn't that money be funded by the citizens and potentially be a waste of resources, duplicating viable products?

I think the issue with GDPR is that you can't deny service if they don't want to pay and don't want to be tracked. Iow, you can't ask them to pay if they don't want to be tracked. That's where the complaint about demanding a free service comes from.

Probably most content people read does not easily translate to a product as in your fishing example. Generally, ads with no targeting are not very profitable.

Does your company employ any US citizens in Croatia? I understand that the taxes would not be able to be deducted from one's US taxes - so basically one would pay double taxes.

Sometimes people are motivated are pay a premium if they feel the cause is good (it can be marketed on the product). In this case, how much would the difference be?

I see your point - I think a lot of things today boil down to: a substantial number of people, and in this case science too, has agreed that one action is "good" for the planet. However, not everyone agrees - some people feel that all actions should be seen equally.

What I'm trying to say is that many would agree We Work are trying to do something good for the planet here. Another group of people don't see it that way.

Me personally - I would say in this instance the company should have liberty to exercise their own preference (incl Mexican restaurants). If it is ridiculous to their employees, they will quit. I believe in this case they have a substantial number of employees who don't mind or understand their reasoning.

Either way, I don't find it a human rights violation or anything.

Okay, but that didn't convince me much personally. I think its absolutely in the company's liberty to cover the costs of the things they want to cover - as is the case with all benefits (other than gov mandated ones). They are just perks after all.

They're not really banning eating such meals - they simply don't want to cover their costs. I don't really see the issue personally. There are many things companies don't want to cover which they get to decide on.

This is an important question - how much personalization is ok within a workplace? I am grateful I've worked in really professional environments - nothing overtly political or anything. It might have been a bit bland, but honestly it helped us stay focused on the work.

Countries you could outright permanently move to? Which ones?

You can't outright move to Thailand at least. You'd need to do visa runs in neighboring countries but couldn't live there 365 days a year.

When the gov is in charge of things, there are too many vested personal interests that would argue certain unprofitable programs need more funding anyway etc... The only way these things can be assessed with certainty is when a private company is giving out the loans and they have real skin in the game.

To be a nurse or secretary in those days were almost equivalent to a female executive today - simply because there were almost no female executives then.

Stripping of dignity? Don't agree with that. I think means testing has its issues but its far more fair than lottery type support such as rent control or fixed property taxes which can help the top 1% for no real reason. The big question mark over UBI - is can society afford it?

True, my parents are I were the only in our family to move to the US but we still had pictures of ourselves on the wall. Hehe.

I can certainly relate to some of this stuff coming being a child of immigrants from the Balkan countries (not born in the US) but having grown up here most of my life. My father grew up on a farm with no electricity and a well for water. And my mother grew up in a tiny apartment in the city.

Oddly, I see a ton of advantages from my background. The focus and hard work ethic of my parents was easy to replicate and I didn't take anything for granted which I think makes successes sweeter. I found seeing their perspective helped me complain less and feel more confident in myself. Sure my parents weren't perfect but I super appreciate them.

Take a break. Your health is worth it!

Meditation, vegan diet (particularly I've found a diet high in fruits and veggies makes me feel very happy), hiking, sunshine, being kind and generous to others, fulfilling work...

Being remote is one of the few things startups can compete on for really talented employees who for whatever reason don't want to live in a tech hub.

I don't think your argument is very strong. Calling something 'free range' when it isn't would be akin to calling something purple when its orange. It has a particular meaning. However, 'milk', 'meat', etc already have expanded meanings as shown by how people use them colloquially. They are often used in adjective form to describe something with a particular quality (milky, meaty) because they are such broad words.

I completely agree 'Real meat' was confusing. We don't disagree there. Seems like a deceptive advertising compliant is more appropriate there.

> I have never heard anyone refer to a patty of soy and pea protein (or beets or heme or what have you) as 'beef' or 'meat.' In my experience they call it a 'veggie burger.'

You just disproved yourself - they call it a veggie burger if it looks like a burger, veggie sausage if it looks like sausage, almond milk if it looks like milk, nut cheese if it looks like cheese etc. Also you just need to hang around vegetarians more to hear 'veggie beef'. In fact, vegetarians just call it 'meat', 'beef' etc to their friends as long as they all know what they're talking about.

If you ask a vegan of what types of 'meat' you can get in a grocery store they will have a more nuanced answer though.

I wonder though it the effect of the hormones they give to cows to produce more milk has a healthy affect on children.

Interesting - what do they call it there? I was in the EU a long while ago and I found only natural food stores usually contained soy/almond/etc milks but I don't remember what they were called or how they were marketed.

Compare that to where I live in the Bay area and it seems to me that vegan products are actually crowding out other products in supermarkets. Esp when it comes to cookies/baked goods.

I think there's an argument made that some packaging can be confusing. They might think the term 'beyond meat' is clear enough but not everyone will. Perhaps stores need to stock them in different locations - in fact, that's how I nearly always see it done. I think supermarkets have ample incentive to not deceive their customers.

At the same time, disallowing vegetarian companies from using the words 'milk' or 'meat' seems like complete overreach. Vegetarians / vegans think of these products in terms of what they are an imitation of, and they want to understand what the product is going for. It's incredibly useful to be able to use these terms. Not to mention they are already the way people colloquially refer to them. I don't think the 'real' versions should have a monopoly on those words at all.

1. The higher the capital gains tax rate, the less money will be invested.

Wouldn't that also be true if they don't have alternatives to invest? What are those alternatives?

2. Higher rates make for less efficient economics, because people will hold on to poorly performing investments longer.

Why does it matter to the government/citizens if some investments are held onto for too long? What hit would the gov take?

3. A big chunk of capital gains are actually inflation.

So?

I thought the comment made great points.

I thought lawmakers were upset Uber drivers weren't making enough? This is contradictory.

Most federal spending is not for welfare but for social security - and retirees tend to congregate in certain places. CA has less retirees than the national average. Many retirees have moved from other places, as they seek to escape high tax states. The issue seems very nuanced, not so location dependent.

Seems to me its doesn't make sense to have a gov sell bonds in a currency that it doesn't have control of. This includes countries outside of the EU that use the Euro. When buying bonds of a country, there should mean the investor believes in the direction of the country / the governance there / believes it is low risk that the bonds would lose value or the strength of the economy would collapse. That's the risk that gets taken by the investor. It doesn't make sense to peg it to an external countries' performance. Of course it sweetens the deal but makes things confusing too.