replying in individual comments is stupid and more confusing.

For clarity, would you mind explicitly stating why you believe that atomic comments are intrinsically more confusing?

Ha, I didn’t notice that in the thumbnail. Very interesting indeed, if it is a 22 degree halo!

Would you mind elaborating?

Regarding that, I found this:

The school district also has its own police force with four officers and partners with local law enforcement, according to the document. Secondary campuses have staff who patrol door entrances, parking lots and perimeters of campuses. [source]

If that’s what you are referring to, it isn’t exactly what I meant. I was more referring to a dedicated static armed security force that watches entrances to the school.

What if the security guard is competent?

Even if the police were functioning well enough to act to stop a school shooter, there is still the issue of time — it takes time to arrive to the scene to respond to the threat. A competent on-site security presence would be a good first line of defense. Think of a time sensitive scenario like a home invasion — would you rather have the means to immediately protect your home, or would you rather wait for the police to arrive? What if someone attacks you on the street? Would you rather have the means to immediately protect yourself, or would you rather wait for police to arrive? In some cases, no matter how competent the law enforcement is, it’s simply impossible for them to respond fast enough.

Oh. I completely missed that. Thanks for clarifying! I’m still at a loss for what it means, though.

OP’s wildly misunderstanding.

I’d say it’s more just an overabundance of caution — rainwater collection laws aren’t without precedent. Admittedly, given the context of OP’s post, my comment doesn’t warrant much concern.

Large collections of rainwater could disrupt water ecosystems. Admittedly, my comment doesn’t warrant much concern given the context OP’s post. Here is an article talking about Colorado’s water collection laws. Here’s a Reddit thread that offers some more information.

So your suggestion is that in order to keep the business afloat, Uber should be allowed to pay their workers less than minimum wage?

Ideally, imo, I would advocate for the abolishment of minimum wage in its entirety (this is, in practice, of course, heavily dependent on many other conflicting factors). I believe that the damages caused by a minimum wage outweigh its benefits.

other places have done this with no increase in cost

Do you have any sources for this? It is, of course, important to note that minimum wage increases don’t necessitate that businesses raise their prices, but it puts an upward pressure on them, as, if they don’t, their profits will decrease, and, generally, a business seeks to increase their profits, and they will do so so long as people are willing to pay. Increasing the supply of money available in the market through a minimum wage will induce demand-pull inflation — people have more money so they are more able to buy things, which puts an upward pressure on prices. In addition to that, the increased overhead for employers would induce cost-push inflation.

EDIT (2024-06-23T06:20Z): I was reading this Investopedia page, and the interaction between raising the minimum wage and inflation is more complex than I was initially aware. A specific quote of interest is the following:

in 2016, researchers from the W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research examined the effect of prices on minimum wage increases in various states in the U.S. from 1978 through 2015. They found that “wage-price elasticities are notably lower than reported in previous work: we find prices grow by 0.36 percent for every 10 percent increase in the minimum wage.”

These empirical results are quite interesting. I will have to look into this much more. Thank you for bringing it to my attention!

I do wonder, though, if the interactions that the article cites are dependent on the minimum wage already being present — I’d be curious to know what the outcome would be if one started without a minimum wage and implemented one.

Allowing Uber to underpay their workers

Hm, I take issue with this specific language. It’s not necessarily underpayment — it’s payment that the market has deemed appropriate for the employment given the current supply of it and demand for it. Underpaying implies an official baseline which would only apply in a market with a minimum wage.

Allowing Uber to underpay their workers means we have to subsidize the company by providing welfare for workers who don’t earn enough.

Things start to get complicated when one starts introducing other factors like welfare (ie social security income). If there is welfare, depending on how its structured exactly, a minimum wage typically must accompany it, as far as I currently understand things. There are indeed scenarios where welfare could end up subsidizing a company, eg if there is welfare imposed to meet a living wage, but I’m not confident in my knowledge of the specifics.___

Dunning Kruger peak capture large swath of Lemmy.

Low quality discourse isn’t unique to Lemmy.

I find myself often just leave my point and ignore the replies

Personally, I don’t believe in this. The only way to improve discourse is to engage with it. One should be the change that they wish to see.

it is apparent that you trust the rich too much

Why?

they want to keep you down to add millions more in their pockets and then they move to take away more human rights.

I do think that it should be assumed that a business only seeks to increase profit, but I have no issue with a business making profit given a fair and competitive market, as a fair and competitive market (ie capitalist) is not zero sum. As for regulating businesses to prevent them from exploiting things to the detriment of society, I would advocate for a Georgist approach.

Goodbye.

I was trying to say that the hardware cost to host it may not be expensive, but the management cost could be quite costly.

N

you should look at a website called Kialo. I haven’t used it in years and I don’t know if it’s active but it’s an interesting concept based very much on that idea

Ah yeah, I’ve heard of that site. It definitely seems interesting, but I’m not too keen on getting invested in another centralized/non-fediverse service.

New comments have to be approved

Hrm, this feels like it has immense potential for administrative abuse.

I can definitely see the service’s potential, but I would like to see something like it that can connect with the Fediverse.

I dont know if they can see my content but I dont think they do.

From what I understand, they should still be able to see your content — you are still posting to the network.

You can always ask the folks on .ml for they make the software.

Ha, well, @dessalines@lemmy.ml is a moderator of this community.

They are each beneficiaries of the capitalist system

How do police and the military specifically benefit from a capitalist system?

with the military / police serving duel roles as employed and enforcers / protectors of the system.

Are you saying that only a capitalist system benefits from the police and military?

All that being said, I’m not entirely sure what your point has to do with the thesis of the poster.

So, IIUC, you’re saying that if a user on A browses a community on C, they will never see a user from B?

What do you mean by “it’s standard”? As in that is the intended functionality? It shouldn’t be — the whole point of blocking instances is for the user to be able to, well, block an instance, ie content originating from it no longer shows up.