This had the opposite effect for me. I basically never experienced boredom until I had a kid. The things you have to do to entertain them are so mind-numbingly boring.
That makes sense. I've certainly been guilty of excessively DRYing my code. On one hand, it's a fun little puzzle to work on. On the other hand, it's been making it very hard to quickly iterate, and that's especially bad for research code.
I can even begin to imagine how I'd explain with only code how various hacks are necessary because of a bug in something it's interfacing with, or how various mathematical expressions were derived.
This is my first time hearing that anyone thinks comments are code smells. What's the logic behind that supposed to be?
It's not that warm flat sodas appeal to me, but rather that carbonated drinks are painful to drink too quickly. If I have a paper straw, it's also going to be accompanied by a meal, which takes time to eat. Also, if I'm getting a more interesting drink like a smoothie, slush, boba, etc, then I usually get something fairly large to enjoy over a long period of time.
I wonder if the people who don't like them let their drinks sit for hours
Yes
and chew on the straw till they're soggy
No
I told you earlier that I don't have numbers. My assessment is that the numbers you provided aren't valid and I explained why in the last two comments. You can respond to those if you like. Repeating what you've said word for word does not add any new information. If you don't want to continue the discussion, that's fine, but if you have insight on why my reasoning might be wrong, I'd like to hear it.
Not even the slightest interest in figuring out the truth?
My calculations don’t assume anything. I literally used age statistics, the Ontario framework for the payout, and net revenue of the Federal Government to demonstrate the cost of UBI. Find me more data, I will give you better calculations.
I don’t think you understand what it means to make an assumption. Unless you have true population data (as opposed to sample data), you’re making assumptions. True population data does not exist because we don't have UBI in Canada.
You’re using the numbers from the study along with stats from past years to justify how things will look when you implement UBI. You can either assume that implementing UBI does not affect the distribution of these stats in any way, or you can assume that they change following a certain model. You do not adjust these stats in any way, therefore you assume that these stats will remain unchanged.
There is more than enough food from waste alone to feed every single person on the planet [...]
If there's more than enough for every single person, how does it make sense to say that that the cost UBI is excessive? If we take enough food to feed everyone in the country and just distribute them to each person to ensure that everyone is fed, would that work? The food is there, so we can do it. What if instead of distributing the food, we give everyone vouchers to get their daily food? Is that any different? How about we instead give them a fungible voucher (i.e. money) that they can choose to use on food or anything else? Ditto with every other need.
I don't think the example you give is a good one. Consent is always important. You don't slap a dude's ass without knowing ahead of time that they're okay with it.
But that aside, there are differences for sure, and I think the most important one is in starting and ending interactions. If you're a man interacting a woman, you need to be aware of the safety concerns from the woman's perspective. In almost all interactions, a man can easily leave with no concern for their safety, but it's not so simple for women, so you'd want to pay closer attention to any signs of discomfort they're giving off and end the interaction when appropriate, or not starting one if they're giving "don't approach me" vibes.
I haven't seen any numbers either for or against it, so I can't say anything about viability. If anyone knows enough to run the numbers, I'd like to see it. The problem with the calculations you show above is that you assume the value of money doesn’t change when the world around it changes, but it does. Especially so if you make a large change like implementing UBI. We need to think about this in terms of resources. The question you should be asking is whether there's enough food / housing / labour within the country to fulfill everyone's basic needs.
It seems fairly on brand for AOC. Why should Israeli deaths be any more acceptable than Palestinian deaths?