That’s not sarcastic, though. Police are cowards. See: waiting outside a school building for hours while elementary children are being shot.

It’s a big reason why Malcom X is vilified in history class and we’re all told his protests were ineffective background noise, even though the civil rights movements would likely have failed without him. They prefer peaceful non-threatening protests that they can either ignore or decimate at will.

Yeah, Thanos has principles and his actions are backed by altruism. Musk is a spineless self-serving parasite with actions backed my ketamine.

Eh, with that logic you could argue that all music streaming services are the same product with different front ends. Which, in a way, is kinda true…

Go existed for a few years before Now was released, and they were separate websites/apps. I’d say they qualify as different products. I would be interested to know if they shared any backend tech though. Would probably save a pretty penny if they shared a CDN.

HBO Go required a cable subscription and Now didn’t. I think both of them only had shows produced by HBO, so it was a much smaller collection.

Go was around for a few years as the only HBO streaming platform, but it came with your cable subscription, so you had to pay for a super expensive cable package to access it. That’s partly why Game of Thrones was the top pirated TV show ever, at least at the time.

They eventually released Now, which to my understanding was just Go but you could pay for it directly without a cable package. Both Go and Now existed simultaneously for a few years.

Eventually HBO Max was released, which is the platform we know today with a lot more than just HBO content. That one was renamed to just Max and is now being renamed again back to HBO Max because Max is a stupid name.

HBO Go and HBO Now were different products though

There is nothing in the algorithm tied to BTC price. Sure, you’ll likely tend to get less miners as the price decreases, but that doesn’t guarantee that it’s profitable. Plenty of people, organizations, governments, etc do things that aren’t immediately profitable and may never be.

deleted by creator

“Works for me and my sister.”

Lol, agreed. Though, I’ll point out that many, many buildings (and people) easily predate the internet.

You can easily do a same-day wire transfer of this amount. Technically there’s no limit on the size of wire transfers. There’s probably a point where the bank will start asking questions, but car / mortgage down-payment sized transfers aren’t an issue.

But, yeah, I bet cash withdrawals are another ballgame. Not least because the bank probably doesn’t actually keep that much cash in typical customer-facing locations.

Key word is “watching”. They’re more than happy to have an audience as long as they get what they want. And they do and they are.

Ha, ok that makes more sense. I was like “this guy is saying reasonable stuff in other comments and now they’re subtly pro-kkk?” Didn’t add up 😂

Lol, I’m genuinely confused by this. I have conflicting feelings on H1Bs and agree with the OP that it’s the oligarchs’ faults, but that doesn’t automatically make them good or bad. The oligarchs like H1Bs because it lets them exploit the working class more effectively.

Also, and this is the most confusing part, are you implying that hating the KKK is a bad thing? Or is that supposed to be more nuanced, like “killing the KKK on sight is bad, they deserve a fair trial and punishment”? Either way, kinda bad taste tbh. There are plenty of other non-universally-agreed-upon evil things you could have used instead. It’s just bad rhetoric.

No, not any circles. I said the circles I frequent, which tend to be more progressive towards immigration. I’m sure someone blames the immigrants themselves, but it’s not a widespread/both-aisles belief like the post insinuates.

I’ve seen understanding and sympathy for the immigrants trying to better their lives and being given the ugly end of capitalism. Working for less pay than your peers and being under constant thread of deportation is no way to live. And if, as a country, we’re so desperate for workers that we’re bringing in people from overseas, we better be giving them a path to permanent residence since they’re obviously beneficial to have around and they should have some skin in the game and the chance to be treated as equals rather than expendable cost-savers.

Labor is already significantly cheaper overseas than via H1B visas. There are many influences on business location besides employment costs. For example, Disney is a high-profile abuser of the H1B system, and I hopefully don’t need to explain why Disney might want to remain in the US, even if it means paying workers a little more.

I personally haven’t seen people blaming the H1B workers in any circles I frequent. It’s mostly that H1Bs are generally bad for both the American and Immigrat workers, but great for corporations that get the screw both of them over.

It’s hard to see how adding 600k workers to the job pool doesn’t make it less competitive, with higher American unemployment and lower wages being the inevitable result. Companies like to make jobs less appealing to American workers (or just fire them en mass) so that they can claim they can’t fill positions and higher H1Bs, which they can pay far less and take advantage of the extreme leverage they have since it is much much harder for H1Bs to change jobs and if they lose their job they are forced to uproot everything and leave the country.

What’s really interesting is that H1Bs fail on both sides of the immigration issue. They fit the anti-immigration “took our jobs” almost by definition, and they are a temporary visa that does not lead to permanent residency, so they don’t even create full citizens with an investment in the country! It’s complicated and I personally have a lot of conflicting feelings about them, but they really do appear to encourage replacing American workers with cheaper and easily abusable foreign workers in the name of corporate “progress” and profits.

Congratulations you kicked out all the H1Bs now it takes you 14 months instead of 16 months to find a new job.

If this were true, it’d be a strong argument against H1Bs. It would show a direct correlation between H1Bs and unemployment and mean that H1Bs are being abused to fill positions with cheap labor that can be easily filled with domestic labor, and Americans are facing higher unemployment as a result.

As you said, there is a confluence of things contributing to the issue of people getting jobs in the tech industry right now. That means that real solutions and progress do not look like 16 -> 0 months. They look like 16 -> 15.5 months. No one action is going to completely solve unemployment and wealth inequality. A 12.5% reduction on job lapse duration from a single change would be absolutely massive.

If we only did things that completely fix issues in one fell swoop, we’d never do anything.

Kinda. Though, it’s more optimistic than that. The beauty of broad market funds is that the entire stock market doesn’t go to zero or crash forever like an individual company/industry might. Short of the country ceasing to exist, the market is virtually guaranteed to recover eventually. That’s why if you regularly invest no matter what and don’t try to time the ups and downs, you always come out on top in the long run. Just look at 2008 or covid. You may be down 50% this year, but 5 or 10 years later, odds are you’ll be up a good amount. Long-term investing is easy that way. Gets more difficult if the market crashes right before you were planning to retire and now you have to work 5 extra years because your portfolio wasn’t hedged. Hence the bonds and other low-risk investments.

You can’t put all of your money into the market, becuase if the market crashes and you lose your job (because the market crashed), the last thing you want to do is sell your stocks when they’re at their lowest point. So the general rule is to keep 3 to 6 months of expenses in a savings account. Then other large purchases like a house or car can be accounted for in savings/other less risky investments too.

Real estate is generally a bad investment for your average joe. Primary residence is good tho, if your living there for about 5+ years, but that’s because it’s an investment AND a thing you get use out of.

Idk, there are some pretty cool sticks out there

No.

Bonds are safe and good for reducing risk if your time horizon (aka the amount of time until you expect to use the money) is short. They aren’t good for long-term or chasing even moderate returns. For example, if you want to retire next year and don’t want to delay things if the stock market happens to crash before then, bonds are an option. That’s why retirement funds tend to shift more into bonds the closer they get to the target date, but it’s a tradeoff of growth for a more reliable retirement date.

Precious metals are just plain bad. https://www.macrotrends.net/2608/gold-price-vs-stock-market-100-year-chart

The stock market even outperforms real estate in the long term. Afaik, generally speaking, there isn’t an option out there that beats broad market ETFs. Optimal investing, statistically, is basically as simple as regularly dumping money into the same fund every year, no matter what. The earlier you start the better, since compounding returns can mean that 5 - 10 years makes a big difference once you hit retirement age.

It’s imperfect, but this helps get the point across. It’s an investing game based on real market data. https://buildyourstax.com/