throw8383833jj

Also, these ultra processed foods set up unrealistic expectations of what "good" food should taste like. years of eating UFP ruins the taste buds. So, once you start eating real foods like whole grains, beans, fruits and vegetables (especially if its cooked without truckloads of oil), you think it doesn't taste good when actually the problem is your ruined taste buds.

and let's not forget the increase in crime that SF has experienced. Even department/CVS/etc stores have had to close due to the increase in crime.

Suburbs on average have less crime. i wouldn't say that south bay is ideal but it's better than SF.

this is really sad. as I will ONLY be buying an EV in future (it's EV or nothing). i certainly don't want another ICE, that's for sure. I guess i'm in a tiny minority, yet again.

but judging how awful the targetting is, I don't think anyone watching your screen as you browse should be able to make any kind of conclusions of you. if anything, the ads we receive are a reflection of human beings at large or at least what advertisers think of them.

you wouldn't believe how irrelevant to me, the ads i get are.

i get the having control of your data part (at least for address, name, social sec #, phone number and email - those are really important). but i could care less if an algorithm knows i like elvis presely or what my taste in food is, etc.

but i don't understand how personalized ads are harmful. if you don't like the product, just don't buy it? what am i missing?

personally, i only buy products that I really want or really need, so if an ad pops up that convinces me to buy, then it's done me a huge favor. but this almost never ever happens. usually, the ads are terribly targetted and don't show any clue of understanding who I am as a person. to me, it seems the problem is they're not targetted enough, rather than too targetted.

yeah, i really don't get why people are so against personalized ads. As a user of these platforms, I feel the ads are already nowhere near targetted enough and now looks like we'll be getting ads that are even more irrelevant. at this point, I think they're just trying to find more way of fining fangs as a means of selective taxation and punishment.

why not just allow the price of water to accurately be reflected in the prices that farmers pay for water? if they paid more for water, they'd use it more wisely and more varieties would get planted that use less water, more efficient irrgation would become financially viable. you can't expect farmers to take financial losses by saving water. however, if you make it in their financial intereset to save water, it'll automatically get done.

where is this whole below minimum wage thing coming from?

Everytime, I take an Uber or Lyft and calculate the hourly earnings of the uber driver minus vehicle miles, uber's take, and x2 the time needed (for the return trip), I come up with 15$-20$ an hour or so.

there are legitimate technical reasons as to why a roll out would happen for one place rather than everywhere at once.

I just think it's remarkable how people can take any piece of good news and find the most negative interpretation of it.

It is a salary cut because the dollar is worth less every year. It's already lost well over 99% of it's value in the last 200 years (a time when the average house cost 800$). So, if inflation goes up by 10%, your salary is being cut by almost 10%.

i thought the answer was Jack welch philosophy of management: always overhire and then prune 10% of your workforce every year. the theorey goes that way, you keep the best and loose the rest. But, that assumes that employees are interchangable like cogs which isn't true. plus, most companies aren't necessarily able to determine who's best and worst and may even end up laying off those who are better.

plus you know it's organic, whereas the grocery store's "organic" label sometimes has some give to it. Some wheats for example, aren't entirely organic.

whether or not you save money and how much you save depends on how much your regular job pays. Sure, a google software engineer will be better off just buying all their food. but someone working a minimum wage job, will be much better off growing their own fruit trees. Here are some quick calculations/back of the napkin. with an average harvest labor of 3 apples per minute, that would produce 180 organic apples per hour or 40 lbs/hour or about 80$ worth of fruit per hour, not including time spend watering, pruning, irrigation and mulching (if done). Organic Berries on the other hand are 4-10 times more expensive, thus even giving some engineers a run for their money!

there are many things that absolutely are scalable to the entire human race, at least outside of the city. Permaculture asks nothing of you but your effort. The "massive amount of labor put in is what's needed to produce that amount of food. It's only in rich countries where people can produce food for much less labor (by working a high paying job and buying the food at the market). there are many countries where people are much better off growing their own food, rather than working at a minimum wage job and buying the same food.

You should watch John Jai on Youtube. He's in thailand a country where the GDP per capita is a fraction of the US and yet he has more land, 3 small paid off huts and enough food to raise 4 kids all with plenty of time left over to read books. "Life is easy" he says, not bragging about his riches but rather to let people know about an alternative way of living.

that sounds like a fantastic way to grow up. I wish I could raise my kid in this kind of community. permaculture has so much to offer people.