- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Surprised it’s only 7 tbh.
Luigi Mangione was trying his best to close that gap.
For fuck’s sake please stop robbing this man of his presumption of innocence.
I’m not on the jury.
We can adjust those statistics 😏
Just ask The Adjuster
Fuck words. If newsmax thinks otherwise this is worthless…
7 years as of right now. It’s trending downward.
We need Dr. Luigi to help close the gap.
Coward. Do it yourself if you think it’s such a great idea.
That’s the issue isn’t it. Most in the U.S. don’t have the same gumption to get out there and get it done. It’s easier to have someone else do all the work. I am certainly not confident enough in myself to join any protests or riots. I’m too afraid of the consequences if or when it all goes wrong.
That can be corrected pretty quick.
Yes but they keep voting to have their lifespans cut.
Not me… ffs, they should speak for themselves
Well obviously, once we retire our lives no longer have value.
The closer retirement age and death are the better it is for the economy; at its most efficient we’d work until the day we die at 60.
I mean, no. Entire industries are founded on retirement money being spent. They want people to save 401ks, no pensions. And then die as soon as they run out of money or start costing the state anything
But wouldn’t it be better for them if we die and our children cash out their parents’ retirement savings to put it into the economy immediately? Think of how much economic activity is generated when a 30 year old inherits two $500,000 accounta from their dead parents!
There are remedies to close that gap…
I know what you mean, but the bulk of the actual problem is that working class Americans can’t stop fucking killing themselves with stupid behavior. The leading causes of death are preventable. The thing you mean that you dare not simply come out and say because you value your liberty is living in a fantasy so that you don’t have to do the hard work of fixing reality.
Keep licking them boots.
You can’t truly believe rich people are just inherently better at not dying of heart disease or cancer.
Education (and learning) affects deaths of heart diseases and cancer. Say, my stupid, stupid dad during covid got ill (not with covid likely) and died from heart attack, because he was afraid to get infected by doctors (yes). Education also affects whether you become “poorer” or “richer”.
Heart diseases and cancer are affected by bad food habits, which are sometimes affected by executive dysfunction and addictive behavior, which also impede people from becoming “rich” directly.
And the longer you survive, the likelier you are to have successes yielding financial results.
So - maybe he doesn’t believe that, but I eagerly do, it just makes sense. Correlation is not causation.
It’s a lot better than the premise that murdering CEOs is going to improve the life expectancy of the working class. You just breeze by that, and then you stumble on my take?? People are looking for easy answers that don’t require they make any changes whatsoever. They’re begging for the intervention of some kind of savior, when the real answer is, “just stop killing yourself.”
Hey. I saw you throating the boots of the exploitative owning class in a bunch of your comments. Do you have any good takes about anything? Like, even on a totally different topic?
https://nypost.com/2018/02/01/lotto-winner-went-for-back-checkup-found-out-he-had-deadly-cancer/
tldr. Man couldn’t afford to go to the doctor until he won the lottery.
Good job, Rich.
Wow. It’s rare to see someone incorrectly use fewer instead of less.
Isn’t fewer the better choice in formal English because years is a countable plural noun?
It’s not. You can count years, but years are a unit of time and you can’t count time. Same thing with kilos or meters or liters or a bunch of other things.
It’s not a super strict rule that you can apply blindly anyway. Money is very much countable but it’s “less”.
it’s not
it is
years are a unit of time and you can’t count time
wtf lmfao
I have less money, because I have fewer dollars. I have less time to live than them, because I have fewer years left.
JFC this thread is bizarre. Just look this shit up, it’s not that hard. In fact here: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=less+vs+fewer&t=ffab&ia=web
You will see that all of those results will agree that less is almost always correct when talking about time, despite the unit. And the very rare cases where fewer is correct do not cover OP’s title.
You will also see that less is practically always correct for money. It is the single most notable exception to the countable vs uncountable rule that is mentioned very often.
edit: I’m also gonna preempt any possible “it’s not incorrect it’s just unusual” response. “Just unusual” or “just awkward” is very often as close to incorrect as certain things get in a language.
From Grammerly:
It is also customary to use less with regard to time, even though we can count time in seconds, minutes, hours, and so on.
Example:
Ethan has been at his job for less than five years.
I wish I could spend less time on household chores.
Yet, depending on how general or specific your reference to time is, it may require the use of fewer.
Example:
I wish I could spend fewer hours on household chores and more on watching television.
Both less and fewer are perfectly acceptable in this context.
This is a logical trick - the longer you live, the likely you get richer.
I understand everyone’s bias, but not why such pleasant to find moments are left ignored.
Those with investments and other preparations in place to retire comfortably and still make money somehow are only a fraction of the population. Not everyone’s a business owner, invested in the stock market in time, has a savings account, got an inheritance, owns their own house, or lives debt free, etc. There’s a chasm between the haves and the have-nots that is only getting wider and accelerating in the USA.
I was trying to say causality goes both ways between “being rich” and “living longer”.
Of course there is a chasm. There are also mass murders of towns and villages on the Syrian coast right now, with the EU having reacted swiftly by condemning the victims, and the US having reacted only in words and proceeding to bomb Yemeni houthis with means more than enough to stop those mass murders.
There are storms, and there are still times, and there are times of abundance and of hunger.
I see. I wasn’t commenting anything else, though. 😅
thats not how it works. with the super rich the shorter your parents life the sooner you become rich.
both can be true
sorta but someone who works for a living who can no longer work do to age is not going to get richer by living longer.
Not 1% rich, as the article says.
Years of being unable to afford preventative care, and insurance coverage denial for helpful procedures, mean the average person will die sooner. The lifespan of Americans is much lower, despite higher costs of healthcare, when compared against peer countries.
I bet there’s more plastic in poorer people as well.
both can be true
Can you elaborate? Most people will not end up as 1% rich, as implied by the name. The average working person is in risk of destitution. We are all much much closer to homelessness than we are to immense wealth.
