Steve81

Given an absence of evidence of some type of deity (though I could go along with Spinoza’s god), and an inability to actually prove the null hypothesis, the only correct conclusion, is simply that we don’t know, i.e., agnosticism.

On point 1, the capacity to feel shame is built into our hardware. It’s how our society / family / close friends / church / etc. program the software that determines what will be shameful to us. As to reasoning with them…clearly some methods are better than others. Re: Athiesm, it is its own little religion in a way, inasmuch as they have a belief in no God(s). Agnostics may be more willing to listen to arguments in either direction.

Agreed.

IMHO, we will never leave the solar system, but that doesn't mean we can't set up space stations in a ring around the sun to collect solar energy, mine asteroids for resources, etc. With respect to asteroid shielding, it would be more asteroid deflection by altering its trajectory early enough to cause a miss.

When has that stopped anyone 😛

Exactly. I didn’t know that much about black holes for example compared to guys like @Genady. I learned something new by asking him, and he’s been generous enough to share with me. I can explain it better now (though I still need to read more to fully grasp the full concept). My therapist (a Ph.D., not a hack), actually largely agreed with my self-assessment that I posted elsewhere. The only note that he had was that my mania is exhibited by my passion, and not related to my ADHD symptoms. He’s not overly concerned, since I haven’t decided to go out and get another tattoo or buy a house. My thoughts on wealth inequality haven’t drawn any criticism yet, so it seems to be passing iNow’s famed peer review process thus far. I don’t expect everyone here to be an economist/accountant, but it’s gotten 108 views without a single comment one way or the other. That’s not too shabby for a guy who doesn’t claim to have a bachelor’s degree, never mind a Ph.D. in anything (at least IMHO). My only real talent is that once I have a decent idea of how a system works, I’m pretty good at diagnosing and engineering a solution to the issue. I just happen to have an idea of how several systems work due to circumstance, and a passion to learn new things. If you don’t ever get any pleasure at all from helping others, you might. This isn’t to say I’d enjoy cleaning toilets for a living, but there’s no reason for that person not to be proud of their labors. Society at large just doesn’t seem to value that contribution, but I bet they would if the maintenance workers of the world all went on strike.

Higher percentage cacao dark chocolate products are richer in the natural flavor, but much less sweet as a result (less percentage sugar). It’s more appropriate for diabetics like myself as an occasional treat, or someone with similar concerns. I did use 90% (IIRC) as a topper with melted PB and a non-sugar sweetener mixed in (monk fruit sweetener, which later turned out to have its own issues) and cooled in the freezer to make a nice diabetic friendly treat.

It rather depends on whether their issues are genetic, or environmental. If genetic, and they neither get no neurochemical releases when performing acts of kindness nor experience shame due to a genetic defect, then my guidelines can't help. These individuals will need medication or institutionalization to mitigate their issues. Of course, our treatment of the mentally ill (at least in the US), is a whole other ball of wax.

Apparently I was mistaken in any case, misread the Wikipedia article; his son died of suicide. What exactly does that tell you about their self-worth?

So long as a person thinks he's serving society in a useful way, he may consider himself reasonably noble. I don't know what insurance salesmen think of their jobs, but insurance does serve a purpose. OTOH, if you do dishonest/fraudulent things like Bernie Madoff or Jordan Belfort, your opinion of yourself may lower. One may note that the former committed suicide, and the latter was a known drug abuser. Re: The physician, as I stated before, I passionate about what he does, i.e. helping people get healthier, repairing injuries, etc. May not apply to male gynecologists who just like to stare at lady parts all day long 😛

Your examples are noble professions.

Thanks for explaining the powergen application, never read up on that before! I’m just a hobbyist/modeler who read up on the history of maritime propulsion, from the triple expansion engines of yore to what we have today. 😅

Like I said, just an observation and resulting explanation, not a justification for Trump’s behavior. If he fits behind bars for the rest of his life, so much the better.

See this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_tower

Pretty much. It’s easier to justify from the accounting side too. A monthly invoice for your technical support company is easy to explain as the cost of doing business; an IT staff of a dozen, with salaries, FICA, FUTA, SUTA, insurance premiums, etc. is a lot more complicated.

It depends on the company’s needs. I work providing technical support to dental practices. There’s just not enough to do for a practice to need a full time IT guy, so they contract out, and we’re there when they need us. Same deal with accounting. A small business may not have enough daily GL, AR, and AP entries to justify a full time gig, and prepping financial statements is a scheduled thing. Not big enough? Outsource. Trust is another factor. A company that specializes in their trade looks a lot better to some than hoping you can trust the accountant you just hired not to embezzle funds behind your back.

I wrote this little tidbit up for a side project... Enjoy. Any feedback / comments welcome. My related background: 15 years of accounting drudgery preparing monthly financial statements for the CEO, and studying Business Administration (and thus economics) at CSU East Bay. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ As most people are probably aware, wealth inequality is a big problem around the globe. On the one hand, we have centi-billionaires who can fly off to space at a whim; on the other, we have masses of financially disadvantaged people with few opportunities to improve their living conditions, who can barely afford to put food on the table. The reason for this disparity is simple: a company like Amazon has a market capitalization (i.e. market value) of nearly 1.4 trillion dollars, and Jeff Bezos owns 12.3% of the company. This makes Jeff Bezos, at least on paper, worth well over 100 billion dollars. In this article, I aim to explore the how this came to be. First, we need a primer on how a stock market functions. When a company makes the decision to transition from a privately owned entity to a publicly owned one, they have an IPO, or Initial Public Offering. This process allows the company’s owners to issue shares of the company in order to raise capital for paying off loans associated with company startup, expand the business, and other assorted uses. An IPO requires a great deal of due diligence in order to accurately price the offered shares, and a company must follow SEC rules regarding registration and future public financial reporting requirements. Once these shares are sold, they are in public hands, and can be traded accordingly on the stock market. Obviously, potential stock buyers would be wise to do due diligence of their own; this is how Warren Buffet became the Oracle of Omaha; he doesn’t have a crystal ball, he just does extensive research before purchasing stock in a company. Continuing to use Amazon as an example, let's look at few of its key metrics. 1. Market Capitalization : $1.367 Trillion. As noted above, this is the market valuation of Amazon, as determined by the number of shares multiplied by the (variable) market rate per share. 2. Shareholders Equity: $146.04 Billion for Year End 2022. This is the company’s assets less its liabilities. In other words, if Jeff Bezos decided to liquidate Amazon at the end of 2022, this is the amount that would be split among shareholders. 3. Net Income Over Time: Maximum of $33.364 Billion in 2021. Minimum a loss of 2.722 Billion in 2022. Net income is revenue less direct (cost of goods/services sold) and indirect expenses / overhead (everything else it takes to actually run the company). In other words, net income = profit that can be reinvested into the company, or distributed to shareholders as dividends. A quick observation: market capitalization is nearly ten times the shareholder's equity. While it's not abnormal for a company to have a market value higher than its shareholder's equity, the profitability (actual or expected) has to match. Suppose you are looking at a house to purchase, and it is appraised for $146,040. The seller's asking price is $1,367,000, and tells you it comes with a tenant. After maintenance and other expenses, the current owner notes he made as much as $33,364 in one year, though he admits he lost money the very next year. Would you buy this house? Now, as it relates to 401k's: these instruments are tax-sheltered investment accounts that people can use to save for retirement. Taxes are only applicable after withdrawal, allowing compound interest to work its magic. In and of itself, that’s not a horrible thing. Today, the system is almost entirely automated, making it easy for anyone to save for their retirement. Sure, most people may not know an actively managed fund from an index fund, but we seem to get decent returns over time. So what's the issue here? The problem appears to be this: conventional wisdom states that to achieve an adequate rate of return to beat inflation, you need a high percentage of stocks in your portfolio. This drives tens of millions of people to invest the bulk of their retirement savings into the stock market. There are only so many outstanding shares to go around, so stock prices will naturally go up over time, creating a bubble and likely increasing the magnitude and effects of market volatility. We're also making people like Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, Bill Gates, et al. ludicrously wealthy at the same time, as an added bonus. To fix this mess, we need new retirement strategies that don’t attempt to use the stock market as an oversized piggy bank. We also don’t want to rock the boat so much that the system crashes like a buggy app on your phone. One potential solution would involve the Federal Reserve gradually tightening monetary policy to encourage investments in bonds; if relatively less volatile bonds provide adequate returns, there is less need to invest in stocks in the first place. Combined with shoring up Social Security via elimination of the taxable maximum amount (currently $160,200), we can better ensure a comfortable retirement. If we want to fight wealth inequality, and at the same time reduce our risk of having to subsist on cat food when we’re elderly, the system needs to change. While I bear no ill will towards the wealthiest members of our society, they shouldn’t be enriched as an unintended consequence of people merely trying to save for their golden years.

Agree 100%.

You, by suggesting they work more. Try it, see for yourself. Otherwise, you speak from ignorance.

I didn’t ask the question, and insult UPS drivers by suggesting they don’t work enough. It’s back breaking labor. Like I said, try it for a year, then get back to me.

Try being a UPS driver for a year, and then tell me what you think it should be worth.

From a practical perspective, it belongs to the people actually living there, and who have lived there for generations.

I’m making the comparison only as a worst case scenario of what massively traumatic abuse can do to a human. Wealth has nothing to do with it. My parents were reasonably wealthy; that didn’t make my mom a good person at all. I think understanding suffering that a person has been through helps understand why they make the decisions they do. It doesn’t justify their actions, but I still have compassion, mostly because I’ve made horrendous decisions in my own life. Can the GOP win with Trump, I have no idea. That depends on a great many factors, some of which can’t be readily controlled.

No worries! All I can say about that is I can somewhat understand how the Uvalde shooter came to be. I lived under similar circumstances to what has been reported. One can only imagine what wasn’t stated to drive him to do what he did.

I’m talking about the private aspects of his life that he hasn’t shared. Most aren’t born psychopaths (though he may have been); they’re usually a product of their environment.