SymbolicLink

Yeah they are all super obvious, but I repeat them all even if I think most people would already know them by now.

Leave no opportunity for intentional deception (ex. Doug Ford) or innocent misunderstanding (people who just don't follow this stuff).

Yeah, the essential and irreplaceable nature of healthcare is one reason for it to be a public service.

Another reason that public healthcare is much better than private is that most healthcare services are "Credence Goods" where the person receiving the care cannot determine the value/quality of the service received.

Example: If someone gets hit by a car and needs surgery, how would they determine the surgery was the best possible surgery? If it was unsuccessful was it due to the lack of skill of the doctor, or was it because the accident was too severe and could not be solved by any living doctor on the planet?

If the value of goods cannot be determined, it is hard to fit it into economic models for competitive markets.

This is on top of the other obvious benefits:

• single payer systems driving down total costs for everyone
• maintaining standards across clinics
• a healthy population is more productive, pays more taxes, drives innovation, etc.
• a healthy person is more likely to contribute money into the economy vs. take money out of the economy (through welfare, disability, etc.) -- this is definitely not to say that welfare and disability benefits should be reduced in favour of healthcare, they are both needed. Most people would prefer to actually get treatment and get back on their feet than not get treated and be on EI or welfare until they die young.

Here is an Unlearning Economics video that goes into this more.

So the general population doesn't want privatization, healthcare workers don't want privatization, who wants privatization? 🤔..

OH YEAH, the already rich people who see it as an investment opportunity.

Wait what do you mean?

Its only all the qualified experts and scientists (AKA nerds) who think that climate change will end us all.

My uncle and some oil/gas execs say otherwise 🤔

I think we are on the same page, my comment was meant to agree with you.

All of the most common essentials (groceries, pharmacy, etc.) along with some shops/restaurants have enough patronage to justify high density / be within walking distance of most people in an urban environment. While things that are farther away (both less common essentials and non-essential) should be accessible through transit.

I can agree with that overall.

But in this specific case (the link in OP), the discussion is centred around employee/employer relations. In that context it’s employee compensation that seems more relevant to the discussion.

Employers have control over how much they pay people, so if they are complaining about “lazy people”, it feels fair to point out lowered compensation and benefits year over year if you factor in inflation.

Lemmy truly is like to old internet sometimes, obvious troll.

Early Canada saw, by and large, equal contribution across the entire population... you need me as much as I need you.

This is SO true, everyone TOTALLY contributed equally to industry and got fair compensation for their efforts: British colonists, native Canadians, Black slaves, and the Chinese immigrants who worked on our railroads. It was just so efficient for the rich to also massacre entire populations of people, force people to work, and pay either nothing or next to nothing. I totally agree with you here, you are such a scholar with a clear understanding of Canadian history 🙇. I also hear that after a hard days work the rich colonists and workers (the ones who didn't happen to die that day when building infrastructure) would all go out for a cold beer and have a jolly old time!

...

The HEAVIEST of sarcasm, jesus fucking christ. I won't even continue with the rest of the post, but let's just say I might slightly disagree with you 😉

Yeah there is no possible way that everywhere a person needs to go can be within reasonable walking distance.

Wealth gap gets bigger and bigger, workers feel less and less secure in their jobs and lives, and companies try to blame the people who are making them rich.

Even worse, they inspire infighting between the working and "middle" class. A person making $100K a year is a lot closer to someone making $45K a year than the executives making many millions a year.

Yeah, the total direct monetary cost of maintaining low-density car-dependant cities is extremely high: road construction & maintenance, plumbing and electrical, parking lots taking valuable space that could be used for housing or workplaces, insurance for personal and commercial vehicles, maintenance and upkeep, gas, and probably many more I've missed.

And on top of all of that, the externalized monetary costs are also high: medical costs from all the deaths or injuries due to collisions (the stats are honestly depressing), medical costs due to less physical activity across the population, environmental damage, time wasted due to traffic, slower delivery times for long-haul trucks, and probably many more I've missed.

And on top of all of THAT the intangible costs are also high: isolation from the people and communities directly around you, less customers for small businesses that rely on foot traffic and have no parking space, increasing polarization between urban/suburban/rural populations, and probably many more I've missed.

Side note for the people that still really need cars in their lives (workers in rural areas, people living in suburbs, etc.), pushing for better transit and city planning will directly benefit you. If less people have cars: gas prices will be lower (supply and demand), road construction and upkeep will be cheaper, traffic will be better for you directly, and more. I always fear that pro-transit, pro-urban planning folks (me included) come off as dismissive. There are definitely people who will still need cars in their lives. The goal is to catch the many millions of people who could probably replace their car usage if transit systems and cities were built better.

People will always do what is easiest/best for them, we need to keep pushing towards systems that make sense.

Restic and borg are the best I’ve tried for remote, encrypted backups.

I personally use Restic for my remote backups and rsync for my local.

Restic beats out borg for me because there are a lot more compatible storage options.

Yeah, the article really doesn’t give context so everything is pure speculation on my end.

I hope this is positive for both the family and the guy who was found.