Most farming is subsidized, the debate then is which one is subsidized more. A bit of a specious argument at the end of the day.
Knightfox
joined 1 year ago
I think that makes a weird sort of sense. I mean, if you're gonna pay 1 person 3x what you pay the others you kinda expect them to shoulder more of the burden. Same goes for Doctors in general and Air Traffic Controllers, the barrier to entry is exceptionally high, the pay is high to match, but the expectations are even higher
I can't speak to the union bit, but I would say most aren't in a Union in the US since most of the US doesn't have Unions. If you're in an area that has them then maybe they get a better deal.
I can't speak to your numbers, but using the same salary comparison searches I used for the Pharmacy Tech position it looks like 3D Animator pay is somewhere between $50-105k national average with LA being $98-150k and NYC being $45-110k. Maybe game industry specific is the cause for your lower numbers?
I think that's the thing, it's not that amazingly well paid. Considering it only requires a high school diploma and a certificate it pays well, but overall you're probably only making around $38-55k per year. I did find some exceptions such as the upper end of NYC techs making $65k, but even LA had a high end of $55k. Maybe the salary data I saw was wrong, but that's not particularly well paying.
The high paying job is the Pharmacist who is probably pulling in $120-160k, but the tech is doing all the real work.
This guy probably looks at it like they aren't conventionally attractive (which isn't true) and they aren't making stupid high salaries.
It's certainly a respectable job, but it's not an overly well paid job which is probably that guys quibble. As with many jobs it depends on the specifics, but it seems like the job pays around $38-55k depending on where you live. It looks like some areas can get a bit higher (NYC had some data indicating $65k/year).
For a job that only requires a high school diploma and a certification that's not bad, it's just not particularly good either. If you have two people making roughly that amount it's probably good enough to live comfortably, but not live very well.
It's the Andrew Tate mentality where the only acceptable partner is either an "Alpha" making $10 million a year and is conventionally attractive or doesn't work at all and is even more conventionally attractive.
Eh, a quick Google search said that Tesla wasn't profitable for 17 years and survived due to government subsidies and investor funding. After that they've been making ~$15 billion per year and sold around 1.3 million cars worldwide per year.
In contrast Toyota sold 10.3 million vehicles and made $61 billion in profit.
As with their 17 years of unprofitable business they are currently more proportionally profitable, but a big portion of that is Musk fanboys and limited supply. If they actually started selling more cars they probably wouldn't be as proportionally profitable.
Additionally, Tesla is supposedly becoming less profitable due to several factors including not making a new model in 10 years, reports that they fraudulently marketed features (being sneaky with how range is calculated so that the true range is way less than advertised), and Elon's antics hurting sales. Elon's antics are a big deal, some people who wanted Teslas before don't want them anymore because they don't want to be associated with him (like flying a Gadsden Flag in the mid 2000s vs now).
Elon's antics don't stop there, he's also hurt the investor's opinion as well. A big reason Tesla's stock was so high is because people were buying them and not selling them. This caused their price to stay super high, but when Elon bought Twitter he sold a ton of stock. The price was at an all time high over $400 per share, his selling cratered it to ~$115, and is currently around $165. Investors don't like it when the owner of a company single handedly tanks their investment so the owner can make a bad investment, even more so when the writing on the wall says he'll sell even more of the stock to fund the bad investment.
Absolutely agree
I agree with the sentiment that we shouldn't be praising people's deaths, but I want to point out the cold part
Texas Hill Country loosely covers an area around Fredricksburg Texas with San Antonio and Austin being just on the outskirts. Looking back at the weather reports, and not knowing the exact location, the temperature on 2/10 was a low of 45-65 degrees F. Considering the lows typically come in in the late hours of the night the more realistic temperature was somewhere between 50-75 degrees F.
Also, you can see the picture of the ranch in the article which also says it's a 900 acre ranch. 900 acres is only 1.4 sq miles. It's one thing to say a 4 min drive at 35 mph vs walking, but realistically it's a lot slower speed and thus a lot shorter walk.
So what if they didn't use a proper ERV setup?
Yeah, being able to open the window just slightly from a different angle doesn't seem like that useful of a feature. Also in the US we mostly have a different style of window (see below).
It's rare that I want to open a window, but only slightly open it. Normally it's all the way open and I probably put box fan in the window to pull air through.
You're correct that many houses these days are built too air tight, but for older houses that were built before AC the house was often designed so that you could open windows on different sides of the house to create a cross breeze. So for example, you could open up windows on the East and West side in the morning and the temperature difference should create a convection breeze through the house.
There are only ~30 million people living in Texas, do they think gun owners from other States are going to come support Texas?
Why do you think a business should be compelled to sell something at any given price? I mean sure, you can burn them in the court of public opinion, but it's another thing when you say that government regulation should dictate the cost of a coffee beverage. I think that's where most people are landing in this, they agree it's stupid for Starbucks to do such a petty thing, but when it comes to lawsuits involving ADA regulations it crosses a line for reasonable response.
It's almost like the lawsuit for hot coffee where the person argued they didn't know the coffee was hot
(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants#:~:text=McDonald's%20Restaurants%2C%20also%20known%20as,against%20the%20McDonald's%20restaurant%20chain.&text=Stella%20Liebeck%20v.,McDonald's%20Restaurants%2C%20P.T.S.%2C%20Inc.)