161–170 of 185 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't matter. Hospitals are being overloaded and people are dying in hallways for lack of care. Ever seen that at this scale in influenza epidemics before? Maybe not since 1918.
> Maybe not since 1918 1957/58 H2N2 Asian flu 2 million global deaths atrributed 1968 H3N2 Hong Kong flu 1 million global deaths atrributed
Risk vs. Reward. It's truly sad for those who can't work remotely and have to soon choose between risking their lives (or family members for that matter) vs. getting paid. Now that the stimulus is to be passed soon, I also wonder how many people would voluntarily quit and just file for unemployment. So many uncertainties ahead...
I don't understand why this is flagged. I've been thinking about this conflict since Trump said Easter.
I'm disappointed in this flagging - there are very vocal calls from some politicians and business folk to "get folks back to work". If we could flag and mute those politicians for spreading dangerous misinformation using unsupported claims that'd be great, but their words are out there and could drastically effect all of our well being.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Conventional slavery was damn near ubiquitous, accessible to many. [citation needed]
For starters, in the early 1700s over 40% of NYC households enslaved people, not even in the south. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_United_States#C...
My biggest question is how a "household" is defined. Does it only count landowners? Landowners are significantly wealthier than the average citizen, so of course they would be able to afford more than most.
Also, are you aware that the population of NYC was under 10,000 until 1710? So even according to that stat, 4,000 people in one of the wealthiest cities in the country owned slaves. It doesn't seem like evidence that conclusively proves your point.
Got any other sources?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For starters, in the early 1700s over 40% of NYC households enslaved people, not even in the south. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_United_States#C...
I don't know how true that is, considering the link used as a citation for the claim is dead: https://www.thenation.com/doc/20051107/slavery_in_new_york My biggest question is how a "household" is defined. Does it only count landowners? Landowners are significantly wealthier than the average citizen, so of course they would be able to afford more than most. Also, are you aware that the population of NYC was under 10,…
I'm sure you're perfectly capable of google searches and reading about the history of slavery on your own if you're so interested.
We were taught this in school, that it was a very common practice with little to no barrier to entry in the early days, and wasn't even racially discriminated until rebellions started. There are even well-documented records of freed slaves becoming slave owners themselves, it was that trivially accessible and generally accepted.
My point was that slavery was accessible to many, contextually in contrast to prisons today, context your quote omitted. Slaves you'd acquire in units as small as an indentured servant, prisons are far more complex with substantial barriers to entry. In an environment of legalized slavery any household could easily get in on it, I can't even begin to imagine how I'd go about starting a prison yet it's presumably legal for me to try.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's funny, I've been working remotely for the past 4 years and now more than ever, I miss going to an office and being around more people. Working remote has some amazing benefits, and I've certainly taken advantage of them, but eventually I've realized that decreased social interaction is something to consider. That said, I'll probably keep working remote.
Startup idea: The Virtual Water Cooler
What if, at the tail end of all this, a bunch of people find that they've tried remote work and decided: "Hey - this fucking rules! " In part because they've realized that they can complete their core work duties in less time, with less distractions, and zero commuting. Maybe - just maybe - this could be the unplug that helps people prioritize the things that they enjoy over their work. I recognize that's a viewpoint…
Alternatively - what if we come out of this with a positive view of Medicare for All and labour unions to empower workers to reclaim their lives. I hope this time at home "spoils" workers as to what they're missing out on in life due to working themselves to the bone so that they can reject calls to return to our prior broken society.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's likely the exact opposite will happen. People are being thrown into seriously sub-optimal remote working experiences, and their productivity is likely to suffer for it. This will result in companies being less likely to consider remote working a viable path.
You can't overstate quite how sub-optimal. I work almost completely remotely; my colleagues are as a result of this situation, and many of them having to try to work a daycare job at the same time with nurseries/schools closed. I'm sure they don't think their experience is representative of normal remote working, but it certainly won't make anyone in a similar position think 'hey this is great'.
What if, at the tail end of all this, a bunch of people find that they've tried remote work and decided: "Hey - this fucking rules! " In part because they've realized that they can complete their core work duties in less time, with less distractions, and zero commuting. Maybe - just maybe - this could be the unplug that helps people prioritize the things that they enjoy over their work. I recognize that's a viewpoint…