Yet another terrible thing about prisons - they target policing in urban areas where the population is high and tends to vote Democrat. Once arrested, tried, and convicted, that person is sent to a prison in the middle of nowhere - and now counts toward the population of that area, but cannot vote themselves.
Population is used to determine how congressional districts get allocated, and they haven't increased the number of congressional seats in decades. So as the prison population rises, they are gaining seats at the expense of urban areas losing the same number.
It's literally an updated version of the 3/5 compromise.
Employers are limited in paying into 401ks for highly compensated employees, and are required to have a certain percentage of their normal employees putting money in if they want to go hog for their execs. That's why many give matches, to incentivize folks to contribute so that they can then funnel more to the C-suite.
Your coworker is right that the lack of match makes the 401k less appealing. That said, it's still the stock market, but you may have severely limited options.
You'll want to do what you're required to do, but then you should look into a ROTH IRA, which will give you a lot more control over that extra 5%.
Because they are immersed in an ecosystem that pretends that respect for human dignity and unearned respect for authority are identical because they use the same word.
They believe that others should respect the innate authority they feel they should hold as men. Simultaneously, since they don't get that, they don't feel like they need to respect other people's right to exist.
And then a group promises them everything they've ever wanted, if they are willing to do fascist shit. Of course they're into it.
This is an older article and I don't think it talks about the new pages that were found with the dirty jokes. But it talks and quotes the "explicit" parts.
It's been released with several edits over the years. The recently released version added back several passages that were scrubbed from the ones most of us read growing up.
Anne Frank wrote a diary. It's a personal diary. It wasn't written to be published.
On one hand, the "sanitized" versions give the historical context without the personal, sometimes very personal, items that Anne Frank intended to be private. On the other hand, including all of her real thoughts makes it clear that she was a normal, young, very human girl.
I think the full version should be available to anyone and everyone, but I also understand if the school curriculum needs to focus on the historical aspects and thus uses one of the older releases editions. But to be honest, it seems like the people who would have a problem with this have a problem with all sexuality, and they hate anything that destroys the narrative that people can shut off that part of themselves.
Since so much of our social safety net is run by states, and since so much is based on poverty numbers, it's interesting to learn how that poverty threshold was originally calculated
Spoiler alert, it was just made up by some bureaucrat's personal beliefs about "expected costs" for a "normal family."
It hasn't been adjusted for the insanity of today's expenses, not even counting inflation. In the 60s, they didn't have the same medical, educational, or transportation costs we do, let alone other stuff like rent and daycare.
It's literally a meaningless figure that is kept artificially low to limit who is eligible for assistance.
The vast majority of the US's housing stock has been paid off. Every time a residential property changes hands, the bank gets to re-collect all of their fees for...what, exactly? Making money available? They only do that because they're underwritten by the federal government, subsidized by taxes.
So why don't we just give direct loans to people, and subsidize those who need it directly instead of funneling the money through dozens of greedy hands taking percentages off the top?
The construction workers got paid within a short time of the house being built. The developer got most of the money, and the bank continues to collect on the property for decades. The value of most of the US's housing stock was paid for years ago, and now we are all just paying for financial shell games to enrich the already rich.
Landlords would still probably factor it in, so I think assuming a base vacancy rate of 1-2 months months per year would be wise. That way, there is time for normal maintenance between tenants, and if it adds up over a few years they'd have time for major repair after a long time tenant leaves, but it would still incentize not leaving the house vacant unless absolutely necessary.
This is a minor wave I've seen of "oopsies" posts about work from home.
And if history is any teacher, and considering that they spent the last few months pushing the "workers actually want to come back!" fantasy narrative, I expect in a few weeks the pieces will start being about blaming workers for the return to work pushes.