European restaurants work this way and don’t seem to be suffering.
I was in London a couple months ago for my first trip to Europe. I'm still trying to figure out the economics of the pubs.
How are the servers at pubs being paid in a manner that they're able to live in or close to London? Aren't they paying significantly more in taxes than US workers? They all seemed very pleasant and gracious, presumably with the promise of a known paycheck. They really didn't have much to do other than pull a tap handle. The beers were all very reasonably priced (often 10-25% less than at American bars). I wonder if these pubs are subsidized in some way to keep the prices low and the wages reasonable. How are businesses taxed in London / Europe compared to the US? Perhaps higher wage taxes and lower business taxes means employers can pay their staff more?
The experience is still living in my head as if I had visited a land in a fairytale (or could just be because London).
My point really is that local economics would likely change drastically simply by making this one change. I know a lot of bartenders and servers - they make far more on tips than if they were paid a living wage. I don't know one person who would prefer an hourly wage. There's so many pieces to the puzzle that I'm not able to jot down right now but I wonder if the US could maintain the number of restaurants and bars it has if it were to shift servers to a salary.
It's evident that your mind is made up. You've chosen to reject reality in favor of your hopes and your feelings. Something must be true because you want it to be true. While I also want it to be true, I prioritize reality to inform my observations.
It's painful to observe our comprehension of reality melting away for the benefit of the media and corporations and fascist-wannabes. They know people just see and feel what they want as long as it generates something other than nothing. I genuinely hope you'll find a way to disconnect yourself from the twisted reality you subscribe to.
Actually, I had considered editing my comment to reflect the fact that he did not make plans to leave. It's a hypothetical situation based on something that hasn't happened. How you're unable to discern that is too much for my mind to handle right now.
Your quote was taken out of context. If you listen to the segment I'm commenting on here, it's very apparent he's not speaking about "leaving the country" but about crime rates. And as I said in the other thread, I'm only commenting on the short clip that I'm hearing. There may in fact be more context that pushes his words one way or another.
... and again I told you their crime rates all over the world are going way down which makes sense. Cause actually, and next time what we'll do, if something happens with this election, which would be a horror show, we'll meet the next time in Venezuela cause it'll be a far safer place to meet than our country. Ok so we'll go, you and I will go and we'll have a meeting and dinner in Venezuela, because that's what's happening...
So yes, I'll concede he is making plans to leave the country to have a meeting and dinner date in another country. If's that's the semantics you want to focus on, I'll concede. The reason for him leaving the country, in the context of this conversation and the larger point he's trying to make, is about safety and crime.
What I would infer from this is he's pushing a false narrative about the "radical left's agenda" to allow crime rates to go uncontrolled. I also wouldn't take it as fact that he intends to go to Venezuela nor that he truly believes Venezuela is safer than the US. He's being hyperbolic using a hypothetical. Which is totally on brand for him.
I don't know how you've twisted your brain in a fashion that makes apples look like pencils.
You and the media are misquoting him as saying he is going to flee the country, possibly to avoid criminal prosecution.
He is literally saying it would be safer to have a meeting in another country due to decreased criminal activity and the threat of a Harris presidency.
There's a valid conversation to have around his statement. We could be discussing the crime rates in the US compared to Venezuela and the rest of the world. We could be looking at Harris' record as a prosecutor and her political agenda to this point. We could easily be debunking what he's saying to pile on more evidence that he's a liar. Instead, the public wants to go on and on about something he actually never said or even hinted at.
Moreover, what my concern here is, the public's ability to read comprehensively is deteriorating at a rapid pace. People are disinterested in taking the time to read an article and obtain true facts in preference of engaging with others over their feelings.
Having genuine dialog with others is more about listening than it is interrupting them and spewing your ideas. Everyone's reading a headline and reacting without taking the time to listen to the story, digest its meaning, consider other factors and context, then responding in a meaningful, relevant manner.
I'm personally observing a world that's becoming less interested in having real relationships. People are struggling to interact with others in real life. Ragebait is just one value in a larger more complex experience that's changing our relationships and our reality.
There's a lot of noise in our lives today. Most of it serves as a distraction. It's the constant churning of the "news" and the endless instant streaming of "content" and the pings and buzzing of our devices. If it hasn't already, this noise is becoming an addiction. Without noise, we'd be faced with calmness and focused attention.
Trump is noise. It's noise crated by him and his brand and the media organizations and influencers pining for your attention and engagement. This story is a fabrication. The story about him slurring during the interview is a misleading observation. It's a money maker for content creators because we need noise. Musk saying there was a DDOS attack is a lie and a distraction. It's the noises he's injecting into the zeitgeist to pull our attention away from something else.
We all need to be better at reading comprehension and listening. Take a moment to understand what it is you're commenting on before you just become more noise and a cookie jar for advertisers.
As I explained earlier today, he was commenting about crime decreasing around the world and, if Kamala were elected, it would be safer to meet the person he was speaking with in Venezuela than in the United States.
As much as I would love for this to happen, this writer is fabricating what Trump said.
Most of the context is left out but the clips starts with how crime rates around the world are dropping. He's saying it would be far safer to meet in Venezuela because the US would be a horror show if Kamala wins the election.
In this short clip, he's commenting about crime in the US compared to Venezuela.
Nothing about him "fleeing the country" because he loses the election.
Edit:
We have a former president verifiably lying practically every time he opens his mouth while his followers continue to trust him over all else. Meanwhile, we have the vast majority of the public accepting misleading click/rage-bait headlines as facts because it makes them feel a certain way. In both accounts, false or misleading information is spread within the group to enforce an idea not based in reality.
It's the pot calling the kettle black.
Trump is a brand. He profits by keeping people engaged - exactly as today's media does.
Please, dear world, read more than a headline before you promote content. Always question the validity of a story even when, especially when, it seems too good to be true.
I genuinely can not find a single thing to like about it. It feels like development was stopped shortly after they finished the wire framing. Plex and QuMagie are significantly better (and they suck).
Thanks again! I just moved a publicly shared photo album from Google Drive to Ente and it's great. Just the fact that you can sort images properly is a relief. I can't believe how horrible photos sites are in the 2020s. Ente certainly has a lot of missing features but I'll be using it for stuff like sharing (less than 5GB) photo albums with friends and family.
This seems plausible so I tried other browsers and computers on my network.
Edge, Firefox, Brave, Arc, and DuckDuckGo all showed the same page on Ebay with "Trending in Sneakers" and "Trending in Watches". I was searching for sneakers recently but not watches.
Orion is the only one that showed "Your Recently Viewed Items" with specific items I was looking at in Safari. I went ahead and chose "Reset Orion" from the menu and see it's now operating the same as the other browsers.
Thank you. I'm going to take this moment to reflect on the nature of people on the internet who lack basic reading comprehension and how my interest in helping to clarify things is wasted. I shouldn't bother giving a shit about anything because no one else actually cares to even grasp the meaning of a short headline let alone care to read an article.
There were two other candidates challenging Biden: Dean Phillips and Jason Palmer. Americans were given the choice to select a different candidate and chose Biden.
Bear in mind the US is a constitutional republic. It is not a majority-rules democracy. We do not vote directly for our leaders but partake in a democratic process to elect representatives. So, yeah - if you want to complain about democracy, you'll have to take it up with the Constitution.
I'm sorry. I'm not able to cut out a portion of my brain to understand how you're missing this.
There was a TON of media geared towards kids in the 1980s that educated us about global warming, environmentalism, the health of the air, sea, and land, pollution, toxicity, nuclear radiation, deforestation, threats of animal extinction, etc. Off the top of my head, GI Joe and Super Friends and Captain Planet in particular were overwhelming with this sort of education (pretty sure Transformers and M.a.s.k. were too).
I don't know how anyone growing up between 1970 and 2000 could have missed this. If you don't recall, that's totally fine. But you can't argue that it didn't exist when I'm showing you evidence to the contrary.
oxjox @ oxjox @lemmy.ml Posts 31Comments 1,265Joined 2 yr. ago
I was in London a couple months ago for my first trip to Europe. I'm still trying to figure out the economics of the pubs.
How are the servers at pubs being paid in a manner that they're able to live in or close to London? Aren't they paying significantly more in taxes than US workers? They all seemed very pleasant and gracious, presumably with the promise of a known paycheck. They really didn't have much to do other than pull a tap handle. The beers were all very reasonably priced (often 10-25% less than at American bars). I wonder if these pubs are subsidized in some way to keep the prices low and the wages reasonable. How are businesses taxed in London / Europe compared to the US? Perhaps higher wage taxes and lower business taxes means employers can pay their staff more?
The experience is still living in my head as if I had visited a land in a fairytale (or could just be because London).
My point really is that local economics would likely change drastically simply by making this one change. I know a lot of bartenders and servers - they make far more on tips than if they were paid a living wage. I don't know one person who would prefer an hourly wage. There's so many pieces to the puzzle that I'm not able to jot down right now but I wonder if the US could maintain the number of restaurants and bars it has if it were to shift servers to a salary.