You probably still won't get it, but replace "dog" with "kid" or "friend" and say that sentence again. That might give you a sense of how attached a lot of people are to their dogs.
I guess because they're complaining to the professor about it? Nice attempt to turn the table though, with social skills that subtle I bet you'd fit right with the bozos in this class.
"You don't get me Amanda, I'm stalking you because I just have so much respect for you. I'm one of the nice ones!"
"Well detective, I felt like we got off on the wrong foot because I kept a journal of her movements and social circle in a purely respectful manner, but she thought it was creepy. So then I thought, how much more respect can you show a woman than by carefully planning her murder and meticulously cleaning the scene and disposing of her body?"
Somewhat tangential to the main point of the article, but wasn't there some big news somewhat recently about sodium-ion batteries reaching "close-enough" parity with lithium-ion batteries for EVs? Did I get hopeful based on false pretenses?
I can't tell if you're trolling or not. What's so confusing about rational actors reacting rationally to a change in incentives? Do you think there's only one way for a policy to "fail miserably" or something? Once someone knows that they'll likely have to fire some number of their team whether they want to or not, of course they'll hire sacrificial lambs. It's not like the upper management that has that stupid of a policy is going to give two shits if some middle manager claims they missed their own performance expectations because of instability in their team.
And think about the corollary: how much additional effort would have to go into monitoring managers to make sure they weren't circumventing the "spirit" of the given bullshit metric? A company like that would resemble a dystopian regime.
I think focusing on birth rates puts attention on the wrong thing when it comes to talking about Japan or other post-industrialized countries. Even the replacement birth rate (i.e. keeping the current population) is at best just-barely sustainable from an environmental and quality of life perspective. Having too many retirees is indeed an issue, so I think the solution is to have fewer retirees. Realistically, a good amount of people could work well past the typical pension age without much of a sweat. They may not want to, but the cold fiscal reality is what it is.
You're probably not wrong, I was waiting in line at a Costco in New Jersey one time, and some beefcake and his girlfriend tried cutting in line. There was an altercation almost immediately, verbal at first, then the beefcake shoved someone and ended up getting dragged outside and having the living shit kicked out of him by four bland looking suburban dads while his girlfriend was screaming and trying to use her phone (she had kind of insane fake nails). It was one of weirdest things I've ever witnessed.
As long as we're talking about fair, is it fair that your son, who was given every possible advantage by his well-educated and affluent parents, is graded on the same blind rubric as a kid whose father is a felon for possessing a couple ounces of marijuana and whose mother has to work 3 shitty retail jobs? Wouldn't it be reasonable to argue that the second kid getting, say, a nearly (but not quite) perfect SAT score and a 3.9 GPA is at least as impressive, or arguably more impressive, than your little darling keeping his train on the tracks that you and your wife have laid out for him?
Read it over again Magoo: the subject is a specific kind of degree and how it opens doors for a specific industry in the Bay Area. A specific industry known for being insanely competitive and requiring almost comical qualifications to get in. Put the pieces together.
I'm glad someone pointed that out. Most Indians I've known have been completely oblivious both to how the caste system favored them, as well as how ludicrously archaic and objectively absurd it is to outside observers.