>Presenter doesn't speak Japanese/guessed at context/relied entirely on internet hearsay
this happens perhaps too much
>Presenter doesn't speak Japanese/guessed at context/relied entirely on internet hearsay
this happens perhaps too much
But for posterity, the claim being responded to here is that American minimum wage workers are actually dramatically poorer than Bob Cratchit from A Christmas Carol.)
But for posterity, the claim being responded to here is that American minimum wage workers are actually dramatically poorer than Bob Cratchit from A Christmas Carol.)
I understand you may specialize in ideas, or politics, or something else but PLEASE equip yourself with a basic grasp of how material conditions change over time.
I had to learn Pindar and Aristotle and Hobbes and Rousseau, you can learn how prices work.
I understand you may specialize in ideas, or politics, or something else but PLEASE equip yourself with a basic grasp of how material conditions change over time.
I had to learn Pindar and Aristotle and Hobbes and Rousseau, you can learn how prices work.
Quite the opposite of the intended implication!
Quite the opposite of the intended implication!
They are not working/lower class.
They are not working/lower class.
In calories, a modern minimum wage worker has something like 17 times Cratchit's buying power.
Basic foods (bread/grain) probably devours a third of Cratchet's income, but not the modern worker's.
In calories, a modern minimum wage worker has something like 17 times Cratchit's buying power.
It assumes Cratchit is working a 40 hour work week (he isn't) and that straight line inflation extrapolations over centuries are valid (they're not) and fails to understand both Victorian class and household finance.
It assumes Cratchit is working a 40 hour work week (he isn't) and that straight line inflation extrapolations over centuries are valid (they're not) and fails to understand both Victorian class and household finance.
It's a nothing statement, Aardman isn't switching to ai. The kind of "ai" here is the same automation stuff we've had for years, but renamed ai to attract investors.
www.radiotimes.com/movies/walla...
It's a nothing statement, Aardman isn't switching to ai. The kind of "ai" here is the same automation stuff we've had for years, but renamed ai to attract investors.
www.radiotimes.com/movies/walla...
PRIEST: No, the GPS says we have to keep going—
SKULL: I KNOW A SHORTCUT
PRIEST: Do you remember the last ti—
SKULL: FOR THOSE WITH FAITH, NO EVIDENCE IS NECESSARY; FOR THOSE WITHOUT IT, NO EVIDENCE WILL SUFFICE
Photograph by Daniel Ibanez
PRIEST: No, the GPS says we have to keep going—
SKULL: I KNOW A SHORTCUT
PRIEST: Do you remember the last ti—
SKULL: FOR THOSE WITH FAITH, NO EVIDENCE IS NECESSARY; FOR THOSE WITHOUT IT, NO EVIDENCE WILL SUFFICE
which is a pretty reasonable assumption. but I think it might be wrong as fuck?