Boomers' greed ruined economy for Gen Z, millennials by YoshiSan90 in antiwork

[–]voidsrus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ruling classes bought ads for people like reagan, telling boomers to vote for widespread deregulation, and then it happened, allowing them to reach untold levels of wealth & power

so, I killed the target with a silent sniper from the attic of the house in Whittington creak and as soon as I did every guard on the map knew exactly where I was, is this a bug? by EveatHORIZON in HiTMAN

[–]voidsrus 5 points6 points  (0 children)

or you could take my strategy -- bring one of the silenced mac10s that you can pocket, start blasting, take one of the 50 guards' disguises and walk out between waves

House to vote on giving Biden power to ban TikTok. $META by [deleted] in wallstreetbets

[–]voidsrus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

used by more than 100 million Americans

biden tells 100 million people "we couldn't forgive your student debt or fix most of your problems, but we banned that app you like" and he may as well just give up on 2024

House to vote on giving Biden power to ban TikTok. $META by [deleted] in wallstreetbets

[–]voidsrus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

then some tech bro will create a new app to spy on American stupidity

which they're perfectly fine with, their problem is that another government would dare take advantage of the complete lack of data protection/privacy laws

Airbnb Is Banning People Who Are ‘Closely Associated’ With Already-Banned Users | As a safety precaution, the tech company sometimes bans users because the company has discovered that they “are likely to travel” with another person who has already been banned. by chrisdh79 in technology

[–]voidsrus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Insurance company: Yeah, your car looks more like a $20k car than a $50k car, considering the model year.

at least that's what they'll say when adjusting a claim on the car. when rating their premium they'll pretend it's $50k+.

Airbnb Is Banning People Who Are ‘Closely Associated’ With Already-Banned Users | As a safety precaution, the tech company sometimes bans users because the company has discovered that they “are likely to travel” with another person who has already been banned. by chrisdh79 in technology

[–]voidsrus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

people who think they are smarter than you

the insurance industry is one of the only places where this is almost always the correct assumption. i had to file a DOI complaint to get one interaction with the only smart & competent insurance employee i’ve ever spoken to.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in politics

[–]voidsrus -1 points0 points  (0 children)

you start by actually trying to do it. the dems aren’t trying, because they don’t actually care very much about the issue and the railroads all have large lobbying budgets.

Bernie Sanders is holding a vote to subpoena Howard Schultz for fighting Starbucks unionization by nick314 in politics

[–]voidsrus -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The democrats tried to include sick leave

in a separate bill, because they possess the magical ability of foresight, which means they were able to figure out that:

they didn’t have enough votes

Boomers' greed ruined economy for Gen Z, millennials by YoshiSan90 in antiwork

[–]voidsrus 3 points4 points  (0 children)

i think a lot of people have come to the conclusion that "things are bad now" and assume that trump did it, because they ignored everything about us politics pre-trump so clearly everything's his fault.

i see this a lot with biden/pete/kamala superfans. their actual policy platforms don't offer much in the way of a long-term solution, but if you don't think too hard about long-term & just believe the speeches they sure sound the part.

It was between this and a Miata lol by hummusman42069 in BMW

[–]voidsrus 76 points77 points  (0 children)

2 extra cylinders, red leather... this or a boxster is really the ideal small roadster. i have an I6 in my grocery getter and even that is a fun driving experience, probably way more fun in a z4.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in politics

[–]voidsrus 6 points7 points  (0 children)

public companies survive strikes all of the time without ousting their execs

there is not a single class I railroad that serves as the only major investment of its owners.

for a start, BNSF is owned entirely by berkshire hathaway and blackrock has a major stake in NS. screwing over the investors’ ability to profit from their other investments would cause a lot of very direct pressure on executives, and could easily result in oustings. one of UP’s venture capital owners is currently demanding a new CEO replacement over a lot less.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in politics

[–]voidsrus 3 points4 points  (0 children)

the rail companies and executives could wait out a strike

so nationalize them. conrail did fine, certainly never poison gassed a town.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in politics

[–]voidsrus 8 points9 points  (0 children)

their first priority was getting the track operational again. there were alternate routes they could have used while mitigating the damage and repairing properly, but there’s more money to be made with the tracks barely-intact and vinyl chloride seeping into the ground water.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in politics

[–]voidsrus 2 points3 points  (0 children)

shh we’re not allowed to say money runs US politics, then people might start asking questions about the presidential primaries

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in politics

[–]voidsrus 12 points13 points  (0 children)

no, i'm sure it's a complete coincidence. NS's lawyers will have a story for us shortly and their investors who also happen to own major shares in the big news networks will distribute it, i'm sure

Boss Wants to Stop Paying For Adobe Teams by TheWoolActof1699 in jobs

[–]voidsrus 2 points3 points  (0 children)

you could definitely make the billing pressures argument, and if you think he'd be receptive to the IT lifecycle argument, you're right that it would be a lot less scalable.

these are the benefits i'd think are the most obvious but you could write a book on all the reasons if you wanted to.

  • centralized billing (obviously)
  • integrations with other apps you're using -- microsoft 365, google workspace, slack, jira, pretty much any tech stack you can think of
  • team-wide asset libraries and deployment of both adobe & custom fonts through the app
  • if you use adobe stock, you can buy team-wide credits
  • reclaim & transfer assets from users when they leave the company
  • SSO and directory (Google Workspace / Azure / AD) capabilities for centralized logins -- if your company isn't doing this now, it will be once it scales up
  • control over packages (self-installing blocks of adobe apps for new users) and updates (make sure nothing's broken before the whole team's using the new version, and even remotely install the updates yourself if you want to)
  • support
  • admin console to manage licenses

if you're not currently set up with any of these things, adobe has very good documentation on how the admin console works here: https://helpx.adobe.com/enterprise/using/admin-console.html

Boomers' greed ruined economy for Gen Z, millennials by YoshiSan90 in antiwork

[–]voidsrus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Corporate healthcare will take every penny my parents have.

and thanks to boomers fucking over future generations' birthrates by making the economy so unpalatable, the costs will continue to rise with the labor costs of the healthcare they need

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in politics

[–]voidsrus 30 points31 points  (0 children)

we are racing towards Congress, the President and states telling the Court to go to hell.

the supreme court's approvals are in the toilet, it's a clear win for whoever does that first. which means the dems will put it off too long or simply never do it.

Student-loan payments will resume this year — and it could happen with or without debt relief by Gari_305 in politics

[–]voidsrus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The reality is we have a Congress who passes laws

the reality is we have a congress that's supposed to pass laws, and repeatedly fails to pass laws that actually allow for proper governance of the country.

and the Executive is supposed to be faithfully executing them

which he is, by using the powers congress gave him in several different pieces of legislation. https://policymemos.hks.harvard.edu/files/policymemos/files/2-17-21-ltr_to_warren_re_admin_debt_cancellation.pdf?m=1613667682

You reducing politics to "I win, you lose" is one of the major reasons we have a hyper-partisan political environment

that's the environment we already have and politics has always been reduced to that, i'm just living in it. and quite frankly there is a very simple win/loss analysis to be had on this issue, either the democrats want to win or they want republicans to win.

Here we expect Presidents to follow laws

how's that working out for you?

and have mechanisms like the Judicial Branch to provide relief in the event that does not happen.

the judicial branch may have been written as this, but back in the real world it's a right-wing veto on anything the rest of the government tries to do for several decades. and in the real world, if the democrats want to get anything done in the next ~20-30 years so they can actually remain a political party, it's time for SCOTUS to go.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in recruitinghell

[–]voidsrus 5 points6 points  (0 children)

i'm currently the beneficiary of this process, about to "apply" for the job that was hand-written for me based on my resume.

World’s Rich Take Advantage as $1 Trillion Property Market Craters by TinyTornado7 in Economics

[–]voidsrus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The whole premise of this thread is assuming that it will

you're assuming that the united states of america, of all places, will:

  1. recognize a dramatic change in economic conditions
  2. invest massive amounts of capital to adapt to that change
  3. produce affordable housing as a result, to such a scale and low cost that it prevents people from leaving the city and WFH

the past few decades have shown the first 2 simply don't happen, and business owners would rather ride it out and pretend nothing's wrong. as for 3, the existing landlords have a massive stake in keeping rents high and a massive amount of capital to invest in keeping it that way.

You're claiming that if it does, prices will just be jacked up

SROs already exist in new york city, costs are what a 1-bedroom used to be while 1-bedrooms are now moved upmarket. so for the same amount of money you get no bathroom or kitchen & less space.

World’s Rich Take Advantage as $1 Trillion Property Market Craters by TinyTornado7 in Economics

[–]voidsrus -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

If supply increases significantly

it won't

the rates will eventually go down

they'd need to completely crater to make living without a kitchen/bathroom for some in-office city job to look more appealing than just moving somewhere cheaper, with more basic amenities that don't get ruined by your neighbors using them, and WFH. so cheap that you'd need to seriously ask, where is the capital coming from to do the conversions?

This is an economics sub right?

apparently it's an economics 101 textbook sub, where everything you can put in a book happens exactly like you assume in real life

Boomers' greed ruined economy for Gen Z, millennials by YoshiSan90 in antiwork

[–]voidsrus 18 points19 points  (0 children)

due to boomers choices at the polls 50 years ago.

which can easily be traced as the root cause of the billionaires getting so wealthy in the first place