Fedditor385 @ Fedditor385 @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

121

Joined

1 yr. ago

Quite a lot of kids and teenagers have the same reaction to taking away their phone, as addicts have when taking away their drugs. I don't think education can solve problems that are already affecting peoples mental and physical state. Not giving kids TikTok is same as not giving kids to much sugar. In small doses and controlled yes, but nothing you would give them free unlimited access to.

The government is not wrong tbh. Young people are addicted to social media and scroll endlessly all the time, and I have myself came across, mildly put, disturbing content. I deleted most of my social media and use the bare minimum to only keep up with some remote friends.

I also don't buy the argument that it's censoring because it's just one of many many channels people can freely communicate. TikTok alone does not mean democracy. Also, the same way it can support democracy, so can it be used to demolish it by repeating false claims to make them appear truthful. And if you add AI on top which can generate convincing images and videos of whatever...

Well, there are people who encourage others to add alt text, and there are those who want to force everyone to add alt text. I saw both...

Why can't people abandon cars and use bicycles and public transportation to go around? Compared to cars pollution, flights are a drop in the ocean. I fly multiple times a year, but I don't own a car.

There is also a seemingly toxic side to this, as people call out the ones who do not add alt text to their pictures. While it is helpful and inclusive, it is not a requirement and people who don't do it (be it unknowingly or otherwise) should not be treated badly or called out for it.

Setup fail2ban

It reminded me of orchestral dubstep, which I like. Maybe something of that genre? https://youtu.be/k3ecg2mahps?t=78

I don't think that is right. You can't say it's illegal for parents to provide for the children.

Staying wealthy is hard because you need to be able to manage money you have. As we can see in the world, quite a small percentage of people can do that. And there are plenty people who earn above average but still can afford under average. Yes, staying wealthy is easy when you know how, but seems that very few do. Also, you need to constantly being on the verge of survival not to be able to save/invest some money and let it compound and get to a decent amount at some point in the future.

Inheritance in wrong hands is just pocket money that will be spent in short time.

I am not from the country that is based on hardcore individualism. People want to build up something they can pass onto their children to have it better in life than their parents.

It's not illegal. Your money is your money. If you go, you take it with you. If you don't spend money, there is nothing to tax.

Mark my words, people who will have any social skills in the future will be the next millionaires....

Many issues with that also. First - wealthy people just move their wealth overseas, as most wealth is actually not in physical goods but freely movable virtual papers and money.

Second, if the rule applies to all, it would leave a lot of children without the base which their parents worked their whole life for, as they would probably not afford to pay tax on a house they would inherit.

And third, inheritance doesn't mean anything really, but how someone can manage it. Being wealthy is easy. Becoming wealthy and staying wealthy is hard. Plenty of kids who destroyed empires their parents built. If the kids can manage the wealth and build upon it, why punish them for having good parents?

Because it's immoral and it would be dual standards unless you take away from all who "didn't earn it", like disabled people or people temporary without jobs. Those also get money for basically existing.

There's also the problem of incentives, if you encourage taking from those who have, you prevent new people from possibly starting businesses because why should they, if it will basically be taken away from them? Better to be jobless or do some minimal non-useful work and get money for nothing from the wealthy. You just move the problem from A to B but you didn't solve it.

Sorry, the post was a bit just following OPs thoughts and it was a bit hard to collect all the points. It seemed to me as if they focused on property wealth.

Wealth inequality can be only tackled by moving away from capitalism to some other system. Capital = wealth. It's the same thing. You simply live in a system whose goal is to use wealth to aquire more wealth. And it's compounding.

Most wealth lies in stocks, and you can't tax people for holding stocks as this would break the system. You need to pay real money tax on potential money that you could have if you sell stocks. And you need to also calculate that stock prices can fall at any moment and what then? You paid taxes on money that you lost?

What COULD be the solution - why are people who have tons of money, able to go to the bank and lend tons of money basically for free, compared to poor people who don't have enough, and then also need to pay back more?

I think this would be the key, you have on one hand double up, and on the other side double down. But, if people who don't know how to manage money can easily get it and fail to pay it back... what then...?

The system rewards those who invest their rewards, and punishes those who consume their rewards.

And how would you takle that problem that isn't plain "take from them and give to me"? Everyone of them had someone in the past do the hard work, and still today, you have people who succeed through hard work. Why not be the first of his line to build up wealth?

Interfering with the housing market in that way will make companies build and sell less houses, because the business becomes more risky, so by keeping the supply low and demand high, they can make sure they will always be able to both sell the home in the required time frame, and with the profits they want. Or in the end, higher prices for consumers. Good luck with that.

As for rich people in general, most of them, AFAIK, actually built their wealth from ground up. Ofc their kids will inherit it without absolutely doing nothing, but that is nobodys fault, the parents want the best for their kids, and the kids would be stupid to go work some shitty job if they can afford a jump-start by for ex. buying and renting properties with parent's money. In the end, someone did work hard to make it happen, over multiple generations sometimes.

Also, most people are simply financially not literate. They have no idea how the financial system works. If I buy a stock today, and its value increases by $10 in a day, and I sell it, I made $10 out of thin air. Try to explain to people how money gets created "seemingly out of thin air". Most people will simply ignore it even though stocks are the one and only thing that rich people have that makes them rich. Everything else they own, like houses, yachts, cars etc... they are running costs that actually make you poorer. People who understand money make money. People who can pay people who understand money to manage their money make money.

You can read a list of news article titles and not go deep.

Yes, Settings > Preferences > Other and there under Public Timelines you can filter which languages you wish to see.

Mastodon, as I can filter any content with specific words, and tbh it's the best thing ever.

You would need to do some research yourself, I am no expert in this.. ogg/vorbis was an option for me, and it checks my requirements (high quality, acceptable size, supported on android).

I would just say "fuck", because I don't think there is any AI that can do that.