Slop curators and tech support shoulders to cry on. Could be lucrative.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/03/big-pharma-m...

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/23/politics/us-army-audit-account...

https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2017-06-2...

You're kidding, right? It passed 300 million monthly users almost a year ago.

We're all tech fuddy-duddies here, still stuck on linkedin and email FWDs, we don't know nuttin' bout dat snap.

You realize the median household income is 50000, right? So, in a small city you have to make 4x the national median to just survive?

Wow, I know the West Coastians live in a well-protected self-imagined bubble, but this comment really brings it to light.

Yet, you can't arrest an obese person for possession of Big Macs. You can't bust them eating a rasher of bacon mid-bite and throw them in a cage.

So, addiction to drugs _is_ a criminal issue. They are not treated in the same way. That needs to change.

Many are hunters, or serve(d) or have family in the armed forces, or just grew up around guns. They remember, before the big-box stores came along, when the town hardware and general stores sold shotguns, rifles, and ammo. They see the liberals in SF Chicago and NYC wanting to stop their multi-generationally deep and rich tradition in hunting and defending and baring arms. If there is one rail that should never be touched, one single-issue that will move that type of voter, it is preserving the 2nd amendment. I mean, sure, you don't have to worship it and Hillary won't have to sit there holding an AKM-74 with 100-round drum mag to pander for votes, but just don't go after it with such vigor and I can bet dollars to donuts that you can win over at least 40% of the voters 1 hour outside the Triangle.

They vote republican not for their non-existent tax breaks or wait in bated breath for their drip of the trickle-down. They're savvy enough that that junk has been tried all over the country and has mostly failed (in the case of Kansas, utterly and miserably with negative job growth). They just don't want you to mess with their traditions.

I mean, these folks don't even care to fight over marriage equality, either. You don't see much gay-bashing in these areas. They simply don't care. Ditto abortion. Sure, there are ardent bible-thumpers, but on the whole, they are nuanced enough to know that we don't want a nation filled with unwanted children.

So, really, don't mess with THEIR rights (guns), and they won't vote against their own interests. I can't get why a lot of democrats (both politicians and voters) can't see that. I _know_ that democrats and liberals are about as far from single-issue voters as you can get, so they'll be kinda-sorta bummed that guns aren't the big focus for legislation, but it would certainly NOT be the end of the world.

Government subsidies, grants and scholarships were absolutely available in massive supply even 20 years ago, when annual college tuition for in-state public schools averaged about 10k (including room & board and books). The student loans didn't make it more expensive; the influx of students did. It's not the kids fault they were sold a bill of goods by their boomer parents, the media, and even employers about college being the only way to avoid fast food or ditch digging as a career.

>I truly believe that America's economic situation would be improved by those two things: increased transparency, and more freedom in the market.

Then, why is life-saving medicine that USED to be relatively cheap so needlessly expensive? That wasn't government regulation. Turing pharma with Daraprim, KV pharma with Makena, then doxycycline, etc., the list goes on. I think this is one place the government should have (and could have, actually) stepped in but didn't. The invisible hand is so darn arbitrary. Makes computers and flat-screens so dern cheap, but something that can save our life? Nah. Go figure!

Another example. I don't recall diamonds being anything but compressed coal. I don't think it's regulated much if at all (I don't recall the GIA being a government agency). There is no regulated market for it like there is gold and other precious metals. Yet, I'll be damned if it isn't expensive as hell. Why?

And, this was like 5 years ago before I joined Steam. It was a convoluted mess.

Those same free marketers also agreed with the destruction of unions and protections like minimum wage. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, look at the comments. "H1-Bs are depressing prices" have replaced "why should I pay for music and movies" and "any industry that relies on ads should die".

Well, now with the tables turned, why should working class Americans and artists and content creators give one shit that the technology industry is suffering from "depressed salaries". Suffer with the rest of America.

There is a very large contingent that wants the status quo and either hires astroturfers outright to spread FUD, or influences opposition via media/ad buys. The rest opposed to electric are just old-school fuddy-duddies and the kids they've managed to influence. And, I've seen these arguments play out on everywhere from car specialist forums, YouTube comment sections on Teslas racing ICE cars, to right here on Hacker News when talking about electric cars.

That, or perhaps, instituting a 3% transaction tax for every damn unit of debt or equity sold. Whether its a broker or bot, tax it.

But, of course, most of the ruling class wants to talk about "skin in the game" and advocating regressive sales or property tax.

1. http://i.imgur.com/UGWP4vi.jpg

Haha, got me. Nice one. Trolololol.

So, yes, it's more important than the industrial complex or "autism" (what the hell does that even mean? What about "autism"?)

>and are homeless because of their vices and inability or distaste for adapting to society

I knew when you said that you were just a troll. Most homeless have mental problems and many are veterans with shellshock.