NuXCOM_90Percent

@[email protected]

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. View on remote instance

NuXCOM_90Percent , (edited )

Genuine question:

Is minimum wage being rent for a 2br/1ba actually the goal? Why?

I assume the idea is to be able to support a family and the sad logic that it often comes out “cheaper” to have one parent work and one stay at home rather than try to afford daycare.

But rent is just a drop in the bucket when you are raising a kid. Which gets back into the mess of how you can afford to have a family on minimum wage.

If the idea is just cost of living then the answer is actually a one bedroom (which would also, theoretically, help with housing shortages). If the idea is to be able to have a family then it needs to be a whole lot higher than a two bedroom (unless you work in NY and commute from one of the last remaining cheap parts of Jersey, I guess?).

NuXCOM_90Percent ,

I am a lot more skeptical of how high a “minimum wage” could even be considering the further automation of even “skilled” fields at this point. Which is why I am a strong advocate for Universal Basic Income to decouple survival from labor.

But if you are fighting the minimum wage fight: At least fight for something that would actually cover cost of living.

NuXCOM_90Percent ,

Depends on the charger but either effectively zero or considerably less.

People get pissy about it, but think of electricity like water. Having a longer pipe is a negligible amount of water if the faucet is still off. And the faucet can only turn on if your device completes the circuit by being plugged in (and doing the appropriate handshakes)

That said, some chargers will consume a negligible amount of electricity to actively listen for a device. Think of it like the water in your toilet. Every so often enough evaporates or leaks that you hear it run a bit to refill. But mostly it is nothing until you flush.

NuXCOM_90Percent ,

“Zero safe limits” has a lot to do with the scale. While it can’t be good for those in attendance, between the relative infrequency of races, limited number of cars on the field, and general use of batteries even in the ICE leagues (let alone caring about emissions for efficiency purposes), it is probably perfectly fine. Or, more pointedly, all the OTHER emissions are likely a much bigger concern.

Also, the number of safety and societal dangers of F1 go WELL beyond just dangerous fuel. Like, I enjoy watching the occasional race. But holy shit does F1 make pro wrestling look “not THAT bad…”

NuXCOM_90Percent , (edited )

The waste from the cars, the maintenance, transportation, and the event itself go above and beyond. Yes, everyone totally keeps the fancy kitty litter around to get every single leak and so forth. Sure…

Not to mention the increased exhaust.

As for scale: Yes, it really does matter.

Rough numbers time.

  • According to chatgpt, an F1 car has a max fuel capacity of 110 kg per race. Obviously they try to avoid using all of that for a range of reasons, but sure. Not gonna bother to write the math, but that is about 39.29 gallons.
  • Roughly 20 cars on the starting grid, and let’s assume for the sake of easy math that every car used a full tank for practice, both rounds of qualifiers, and the race itself. So 4*39.29*20=3143 gallons per race for the cars alone.
  • Still chatgpt because the window is open, but the average sedan has 12-18 gallons tanks.
  • 3143 / 12 = 261 cars. 261 cars use the amount of fuel used in a single F1 race in between trips to the gas station.
  • Still using chatgpt: average attendance numbers range from 10k to 100k spectators.

So yeah. The amount of fuel used in a given F1 race is a drop in the bucket relative to just how much is used by the cars that bring people to watch them. And I have intentionally not included the trucks used to transport the f1 cars or even the trains and boats.

And that is why, while it isn’t good and I am opposed to it, the lead that may or may not still be used in F1 fuel (chat gpt says no, random ass quora page says 5 mg/L. Whereas, if there were even trace amounts of lead in the gas that gets everyone else to the F1 race…

The environmental impact of an F1 race, let alone a season, is horrendous. Even if we are talking formula E or whatever the current pure electric league is. And fixating on older fuel composition in the light of that is, quite frankly, asinine and self defeating.

Hell, the dirt and dust around the more rural tracks probably has MUCH more lead than the fuel.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • All magazines