Mr. Tact wrote on Mar 2, 2021, 07:46:
Now, I'll grant I have more space than I strictly "need", but I enjoy having some "space"... (for the record, I'm living alone in a 3bd, 2.5ba, 2050 sq ft ranch, with a two car garage, only ever had one car at a time)

I assume you're not living in a crowded area, so outside space doesn't really apply here.

Mr. Tact wrote on Mar 1, 2021, 20:45:
*meh*... I have a small amount of sympathy for people trying to live in Manhattan, San Francisco, or other extreme housing areas. With that in mind, 500k might be a little low and something in the 60-70% range would be fine.

Unless I'm mistaken, we weren't talking about the US, we were talking about Canada. And even in Vancouver/Toronto/Montreal, 500k/year is pure overkill.

And no one needs "extreme housing" as in "way too much space per person". 1 or 2 bathrooms, 1 bedroom per occupant, a dining/kitchen combo, a living room, maybe a spare bedroom as a home office and/or for visitors. Anything more than that is hoarding space better used by other people who really need it.

I'd bet my life there is way more empty shelter space than there are homeless people in Canada. Heck in the US there are more empty HOUSES than there are homeless people, something like almost 10 to 1. This is just pure insanity.

jdreyer wrote on Mar 1, 2021, 17:04:
Bell CEO: "I have no idea how I got broadband internet when no one else in a 20 mile radius has it! What a strange coincidence!"

Clearly it has nothing to do with the housing value in the area... *fake pinkyswear + fingers crossed behind back*

jdreyer wrote on Mar 1, 2021, 17:04:
This is justification for a 90% income tax on any income over $5M USD.

More like 500k.

If you can't live comfortably with 500k/year, more money won't fix it. What you need is therapy.

FTFY:

LArac wrote on Feb 28, 2021, 12:35:
So I feel like I have lowered the damages mining can causes.

jdreyer wrote on Feb 28, 2021, 16:52:
How did they remaster? I thought the original source material had been lost.

No idea, all I know is that I'm watching it in 1080p, it looks 1080p ( not perfect, but good enough ) and it's from an official source, not fanmade.

https://www.space.com/babylon-5-remastered-streaming-amazon-itunes-hbo-max

Babylon 5 Official Remaster Comparison (UPDATE with JMS's comment)

Picard was the usual Jar Jar Abrams garbage, completely disconnected after E04 and now pretending it doesn't exist, same as the STD infection.

Mando was pretty good. Looking forward to next season.

WaVi is just a facepalm for me, couldn't get beyond episode 2. I really have no idea what people find interesting.

**************

Want a blast from the past? Babylon 5 recently got the official 1080p treatment, look it up, I've been rewatching it, it's a pretty good remaster overall.

Cheers!

HorrorScope wrote on Feb 28, 2021, 12:09:
But doubling it like this most likely will be measurable, that's what waiting so long to move that needle will do. The markets will adjust knowing there is more income. I'm not saying I'm against it. That is an issue with basic income, for example I'll sell my house for more, because the market will know there is greater buying power out there.

House pricing is not correlated to minimum wage, it's correlated to GDP and productivity, no worries for that particular sector. And that's one more reason to recouple minimum wage to productivity increase after its 1968 decoupling.

In other sectors and this is pure speculation on my part, yes, it's not impossible that there might be a slight correction, lower than the increase, resulting in a net gain for min wage earners in their buying power, altho I have never known such corrections to be confirmed by any observations nor studies. One might want to dig the Seattle observations deeper for info on this. Or the aforementioned study of studies on inflation VS minimum wage.

wtf_man wrote on Feb 28, 2021, 10:57:
1. Minimum wage was NEVER meant to be a "living wage"... people need to get that through their thick skulls. It's an "entry to the work force" wage.

Source needed, that's a mantra I keep hearing and no ever backed it up with any evidence.

wtf_man wrote on Feb 28, 2021, 10:57:
2. I do agree that it needs to go up somewhat with inflation. That said... it's not $15. It's more like $9 if you compare 1980's (when I made $3.35 an hour minimum wage as a teenager flipping burgers) dollars buying power to today's. (1982 Dollar to 2021 = 2.71 - 2.71 x 3.35 = 9.0785)

Minimum wage had already disconnected from productivity and inflation for more than a decade in the 80's. If you want to accurately calculate this from somewhere, you have to do so at the divergence point, which is 1968 ( see bottom reply for details ).

wtf_man wrote on Feb 28, 2021, 10:57:
3. I don't expect my grand kids to have less buying power than I did when I entered the work force. I also don't expect them to make more.

They will and you have less than your father. As GDP and productivity booms while real wages remain relatively stagnant you lose buying power because assets follow GDP and productivity trends, not real wages trends. This is why it's getting harder and harder to buy a house and other assets, harder to pay rent, etc. And it will remain true as long as those trends continue.

wtf_man wrote on Feb 28, 2021, 10:57:
Edit: Since you mentions 50 years... 1971 minimum wage was $1.60 per hour... and equates to $10.47 in today's dollars
So a bit more than $9 but still way less than $15. And don't forget the forced benefit packages.

That's calculated from the new calculation of inflation which includes luxury items which by their virtue of going down every year continue to skew the inflation metric much lower than if it were had we continued to use the old method of only including basic survival necessities like shelter, food and transportation.

If you use those real inflation numbers relevant to the poorest and lower middle class who are the ones living on minimum wages, so most relevant to them, the minimum wage factoring this non skewed inflation calculation would be even higher than 15$ ( that's basically where they take their number, correctly calling bullshit on the "newflation" calcs doctored to make them look better than they really are ) and if you factor productivity decoupling in 1968, it would be almost 30$.

This comment was edited on Feb 28, 2021, 12:21.

HorrorScope wrote on Feb 27, 2021, 22:42:
It's a f'd up sitch because the costs will go up, rent will charge more.

ColoradoHoudini wrote on Feb 28, 2021, 10:50:
15/hr in my city means every cost of living goes up to meet that bottom wage.

A study of studies about minimum wage increase VS inflation has concluded that there is no cause and effect between raising the minimum wage and inflation.

The studies collated in that study were from as far back as WW2 upto now.

And as someone else already pointed out, all the minimum wage increases experiments didn't see unemployment go up, it went down instead.

You 2 seem to be laboring out of faulty information.

NKD wrote on Feb 27, 2021, 08:04:
The rules and enforcement of the stonk market are so fucking arbitrary as to be meaningless.

One set of rules for the rich. Another set of rules for the plebs.

Laws/rules for sale, people for sale, ethics for sale, morals for sale.

Anything and everything is for sale... for the right price as supply and demand dictates.

It really is a free market.

Ain't it gRand? ( not a typo, pun intended )

RedEye9 wrote on Feb 26, 2021, 21:08:
That reads like the 37B will be for automotive chips mostly in the form of tax rebates.

All US car companies combined would've lost less than 37 billions from that shortage. GM would've reportedly lost 2B.

Seems like a waste of money to me. Billions for big corps, crickets for the average people and minimum wage workers.

If corps were people they'd get screwed over like everyone else.

X for doubt.

natx wrote on Feb 25, 2021, 21:19:
sell your 1080TI on ebay for $700, enter newegg shuffle for a 3060.

Why sell a faster card for a slower one?

Just tried the demo for 20 minutes... definitely feels System Shock'y.

Looking forward to the whole game.

TLDR/W: On avg slower than 2060S and 1080ti. Only 1% better price perf than 2060 ( if at 329$ ).

Looks DOA to me.

Gamers Nexus's review tells it all.

Cutter wrote on Feb 23, 2021, 20:29:
Shortage + crypto = pain in the ass. We could mitigate a great deal of this - and do wonders for the environment - by outlawing crypto.

For once we agree on this. Crypto is just a parasite on resources and electricity.

Bill Borre wrote on Feb 17, 2021, 20:47:
I wonder if it'll take 30% like the superchat does.

It will, it's in the article.

Blue wrote on Feb 11, 2021, 15:28:

Simon Says wrote on Feb 11, 2021, 14:50:
Blue,

For everyone's sake here, can you please tell us what is the make and model of your current stove? Just so nobody here makes the mistake of buying the same crap in the future.

Sure, here it is:

http://www.pelletstovefires.com/st-croix-hastings.html

As for the cost question, it looks like two or three grand for a stove, and the first quote we got for installation was another 1800 bucks. I guess the good news is that this is a lot less than it would have been if we had to replace the aging furnace in our old house.

Many thanks.

Blue,

For everyone's sake here, can you please tell us what is the make and model of your current stove? Just so nobody here makes the mistake of buying the same crap in the future.

Thanks mate!

Power hungry cryptos are fucking retarded.

1 transaction requiring the equivalent of the usage of 1 average US house for almost a month.

Imagine if everyone used it everyday everywhere for all their transactions considering it's already growing at a very fast exponential rate ( a few years ago it was almost 20 times less than it is now ) with only very few people using it for a very small percentage of their transactions... Pure species wide suicidal madness.