Development agencies actually hire lots of local people. for USAID/State Department, they're called FSNs, and its pretty easy to find stories about them and the work that they do. According to one Document I found around 55k/75k state department employees were Foreign Nationals (aka local hires). [1] Foreign nationals don't run these agencies because these agencies are responsible to their respective governments and have missions and goals that extend beyond simple development. This post seems incredibly uninformed given that the extent of their research seems to be looking at the citation of the photographs/videos.
Even if we set aside any potential spiritual, or child-rearing value. Marriage is a very important institution in helping people achieve economic mobility, it increases your household income significantly, as well as seriously reducing your cost of living. Anecdotally, my cost of living was drastically reduced when my girlfriend and I moved in together (thereby splitting a 1BR), however given that we aren't married we individually have to save a good amount of money in cash accounts in case of a breakup. If we were married, we could reduce our cash savings by 50% and instead invest that money into the open market. Moreover, we would be far more likely to take care of the other financially if one went to school if we were married. Marriage, and the commitment it entails changes the attitudes of individuals towards each other by ensuring that we can plan for a combined future. all that exists outside of societally constructed benefits like joint taxation and healthcare.
digging into this, it doesn't seem to adjust for CoL but competitiveness of the market. Seattle and NYC have the same salary bracket, but NYC is by far more expensive. Nerd Wallet claims the city is between 37% to -6% more expensive depending on where you live (Manhattan vs Queens)
If this is a lander what will they use to deliver the lander to lunar orbit? I'll admit I don't follow this sort of news very closely, but it seems quite exciting.
its the 4 most recent decades covered by census data. Although you're right to point out that suburbia had its primacy in this time period, the researcher can't be faulted for looking for the highest quality, most recent data.
Socialized Medicine and Education are often discussed in this context. However, if we look at Europe where student debt is minimal, and medicine is provided by the state fertility rates are even lower.
I'm not quite sure how to parse that particular piece of data. It seems as though it may be nominal if we consider that the Household Debt-to GDP ratio is substantially decreased from 2008. Further, household debt service ratios have also decreased substantially (by roughly 30%).
not that its not smart enough, just that it has to listen to alternative groups. Nuclear power would be one way current technology could drastically reduce C02 Emissions, yet well intentioned, intelligent actors oppose the proliferation of such plants. While China could simply ignore those groups, the US is required to give them a voice in the political process.
Even in the least developed countries on earth life expectancy is nearly double the 26 years quoted in the article. This article feels less like serious analysis, and instead the product of over-problematizing
I don't find this particularly compelling as given the author's fundamental assumptions regarding inequity and sexism as natural outcroppings of agrarian society. For example the mongols were a largely non-agrarian society that was highly stratified, and deeply sexist that committed human rights violations on the global scale.
I would argue against the informal power dynamics as they tend to be far less transparent. Informal systems can be coopted by individuals far more easily, and with far less limitations on their power. Moreover, individuals who do take control of these systems have a for more vested interest in maintaining and expanding their power as they can become very wealthy by doing so. Moreover, when they give up power even well intentioned, good rulers run the risk of reprisal for non-work related reasons. I believe that formal structures emerged as a means to prevent corruption, and ease the integration of new comers.
While I'm not saying they should have banned one, and not the other it would have been entirely possible to say ban an opioids sales subreddit, but not the bb-gun subreddit. It would have been trivial to simply make the rule such that only illicit sales/transactions were banned. They decided to create these rules and if the rules make reddit look foolish than maybe thats because they are.
its hard to see that its anything but censorship when these platforms hold a pure monopoly on the space. If Gutenberg prevented anything displeasing to him from being printed, we would rightly see that as censorship. Further, censorship takes place in many ways only a small number are the result of state actors. In Mexico reporting on the cartels will cause them to target and perhaps kill you.
Unfortunately we've had a very poor week for internet freedom. However much of it has been the result of corporate overreach.
This week:
Reddit bans Cigar, beer and Alchohol trading subreddits, toy bb gun sales, and gun related coupon clippers
Youtube (and facebook?) banned Channels featuring guns they deem inappropriate. Including videos regarding proper safety and maintenance.
It has become clear to be that the internet is naturally monopolistic in a way physical institutions are not. One simply cannot move their gun channel, or the cigar trading forum to other sites and have a decent chance of maintaining even 10% of their customers. What happens if google also decides that they don't want these things to show up in search results. We need regulation to ensure that these platforms remain open for all types of users, not regulation that forces more content off these platforms.
[1] https://diplopundit.net/2017/05/08/statedeptusaid-staffing-c...