2020 is the pandemic year, so it’s a bit of an exception. Let’s start from 2019
2019 nominal was $68,703 which is $86,516 in 2025 dollars which is lower than $87,460, the median income in 2025
And if you say that’s a tiny difference, you’d be right. The same way 62% water price increase is not meaningfully more than the 56% increase in household income
Where you live and the national median have almost nothing to do with each other
Household income increased from $56,025 in 2015 to $87,460 in 2025, a 56% increase
People that do actual geolocations for the war in Ukraine are basically the primary sources. They figure out where and when videos were taken and do the actual work. Following the topic gets you to some big account that aggregates them
But you’re just adding to another big player. WebKit going from 14% to 15% doesn’t actually do anything. Getting 1% market share with a completely different engine would definitely turn some heads
WebKit doesn’t help diversify the ecosystem, Blink still shares some code with it.
Firefox is incredibly complicated. It has a ton of bugs and security problems. Instead of building from scratch, I would start with Servo.
When people think of Trump, I want people to think of rape
Why would anyone want to manufacture in the US? Tariffs on components would rape your margins
More of a danger to people than people who haven’t killed anyone. I’m not talking in absolutes, just every time countries have released violent criminals, those people went on to do More crime statistically than the average person. That means not everyone can be rehabilitated.
Mental disease and history of abuse only makes it more likely this person commits more crimes, not less. People without history of those things commit fewer crimes
There are two solutions: either we put her into prison for her life or execute her
She’s a public danger
It’s such a sad state of affairs the obesity rate in America is down for the first time in decades. It’s due to semaglutide
Yes, the government does this for the good of humanity. Are you saying they should demand money from Novo Nordisk?
We don’t print money and give it to the government directly. How do you reduce the monetary supply when the money isn’t free to begin with? The government pays the money back eventually!
So we’re back to quantitative tightening and raising interest rates. Which reduces spending!
Yes, but the investors that invested their money to pay those salaries expect a return on their investments. If they couldn’t make the profits, people wouldn’t buy the stock. Other pharmas wouldn’t be able to IPO or be acquired since there would be no money in pharma
You don’t want to credit the people who did the work and you’re running out of not just insults, but arguments
What do you mean you don’t know that? It would eventually be found sometime in the future, but the obesity rate falling this year is because of Novo Nordisk funding the research when they did. Millions of people got their diabetes and weight under control because a for profit firm did this research.
Yes, the research in the 1970s was public. Still took decades to bring a real substance to market. We live in a society. You didn’t build that and everything
Yes, weakening the economy is the point. That’s how you get the inflation down. A rich person might put $1000 into a bond fund. A poor person would spend it on necessities they have been putting off for a while. Which causes more inflation?
Of course it would reduce demand, poor people would just skip meals. Just because it’s not discretionary doesn’t mean they would still spend the money they don’t have
This has been found multiple times, giving money to poor people boosts spending more than giving it to rich people. So if you want to cut spending, doesn’t it follow you take it away from poor people? You can’t have it both ways
If it went up by 56% instead, tracking incomes, it would instead cost $511 instead of $531, a $20 difference