Where I live, once you rent a flat, the landlord is legally allowed to rise the fee only by a small amount every year (related to the CPI). Also, most of the rentings are long term and the landlord is not allowed to kick you out (except for some exceptional events).
So, when you choose a place to live, you know that you can plan your life there. Also, you don't need to be scared for the landlord blackmailing you.
I guess that both systems work. It's just different models of society.
That would allow a really dangerous behavior: the landlords would put flats under the market price, in order to get new tenants, and after one year living there (furniture bought, new friends, school for the children, etc.) the landlords would be able to rise the fee as much as they want.
The situations where there's an asymmetrical negotiation like landlords-tenants or employer-employee must be regulated by law in order to make them fair.
I really don't think so. Fermentation is something that happens at room temperature and warming a stew (even as much as 40°C) would kill all the yeasts.
Also, fermentation would render the stew sour, which I don't think is a good quality for a stew.
I think that the idea of the perpetual stew is the contrary: to keep the stew always boiling on the fire in order to prevent the microorganisms from growing and spoiling it.
Malthusian catastrophe. Population tends to grow exponentially, but not the resources. Historically, the excess of population have been controlled through wars and famines. The CP wanted to control with laws instead...
The thing is that in developed countries this kind of laws are not necessary because people just don't have children because they are too expensive.
What apparently a lot of people fails to understand is that the IARC list reflects is how sure we are that a substance is carcinogenic, but not how much it raises the risk of cancer.
So we can equally be sure that plutonium and bacon are a risk for health. But we also know that eating plutonium is more dangerous than bacon.
Buying a house in the Bay Area is an investment that you should only do if you absolutely believe that there's not a technological bubble and that tech companies in the area will continue to pay the highest salaries in the world for the next 30 years.
> Someone who uses a condom perfectly, each time, every time, still has a 50% lifetime (35 year) chance of having a child.
That statement makes no sense. If the condom is not broken or slips off, there's no chance that a woman is inseminated. Unless the man has magic sperms that can teletransport themselves into a woman's womb.
Don't come to Japan then. Not only they are lazy and not worth the money, but also the tenant has to pay them an extra month of fee every two years, when the contract is renewed.
And if that's not enough, in Japan there's no law that regulates the rental contracts so, every time that someone wants to rent a flat, he has sign a bunch of abusive clauses.
In any case, being a broker must be a good business because Tokyo is full of them.
I am in the same situation as you but what keeps me from going back to Barcelona are not the salaries, but the kind of uninteresting jobs that are offered.
I would go back home for the quality of life, not for the salary. But only if I could join a company that is actually creating something, instead of just using products created by others.
I have 2Gbps in Tokyo. Connected by gigabit Ethernet to the router I consistently get over 500Mbps symmetric, but with the wifi i never get over 50/20Mbps. Probably because every single 2.4 channel is occupied by several networks.
In this context, I thought it was obvious that I was talking about this red pill.