> I live in a remote place. Getting stuff shipped here is very hard and finding "Ubuntu-friendly hardware" is simply not an easy option, at all. I find it odd that Ubuntu is purportedly an answer for those who live in rural or remote areas, yet those are the areas where it can be extremely difficult, or expensive, to get specialized Linux-friendly hardware.
Why even worry. I build a new computer last year completely blind. Everything on it worked fine in Linux. Linux has far better hardware support now than windows does
Well, unfortunately, it didn't work out for me. I didn't think I was purchasing anything that wouldn't work in Linux for me but I was wrong. I don't know about Linux having better hardware support than Windows. I found the opposite to be true.
For me as a heavy linux user. I went to the store and Tried OS X for around 20 minutes. At the time I really wanted a macbook. I actually hated the OS experience. While the hardware is really nice, the software really wasn't up my alley.
I never have the same issues as this guy in Linux. I have been using Ubuntu 100% of the time for years.
Setting up dual monitors in Ubuntu is easy and has been for years. All you need is the drivers from the repo and use nvidia-settings
If she is burdened by property taxes, it's because she's living in an extraordinarily valuable house. Since property taxes are in the neighborhood of 1% of value, and real estate prices in NYC go up by several percent per year, your sainted grandmother could borrow the money to pay the property taxes, against the property, and the increase in property value would more than pay the taxes.
Rich grandmothers are not actually a problem we need to solve.
I'm sorry but this is just wrong on every level imaginable.
> If she is burdened by property taxes, it's because she's living in an extraordinarily valuable house.
Or because she's been on a fixed income for several years. Or because she has a lot of medical bills, as most older folks do. Or because any of a myriad of other reason that would cause someone with a piece of land to not be swimming in a pile of gold coins.
> Since property taxes are in the neighborhood of 1% of value, and real estate prices in NYC go up by several percent per year,
I can't speak to the real estate prices or property taxes so I'll take you at your word here.
> your sainted grandmother
I think we can all go without sarcastic ad hominems against our grandmothers. Jesus Christ.
> could borrow the money to pay the property taxes, against the property, and the increase in property value would more than pay the taxes.
For me, this is just the pièce de résistance of this entire convoluted argument. The idea that someone who is having trouble paying property taxes should get a loan and pay the property taxes plus interest is just laughable.
> Rich grandmothers are not actually a problem we need to solve.
You're assuming that because someone owns property in NYC that they're rich, which is clearly not the case, especially if they've been there for half a century.
> You're assuming that because someone owns property in NYC that they're rich, which is clearly not the case, especially if they've been there for half a century.
You need to read what you wrote again. "Just because someone has a very valuable financial asset, doesn't make them rich." ORLY?
Let me quote from a news story:
"These listings, along with several others at the extreme low end of the market, are well below New York City's median sales price of $635,000, according to StreetEasy.com, which excludes foreclosures from its data. They're also below the bottom 10th of the city market, which has a median sales price of $160,000."
Even if your place is worth less than 95% of NYC properties, it's still worth $160,000.
Your argument is that someone who has a giant diamond but little liquid income shouldn't have to pay taxes on the diamond.
People who are having trouble paying property taxes are RICH people. Their problems go away immediately if they sell the giant asset they are holding onto, or if they even take a loan against its value (and payable when the asset is sold, perhaps when Grandma dies).
Does your argument work for all taxes? Should I just convert all my money into a single diamond and then claim I don't have any liquid cash to pay my income taxes?
"Oh, my diamond is too big to carve up to pay the taxman! Whatever shall I do!?!?"
Not intending to be harsh, but your grandmother could use the equity established in her property, and move to somewhere where the costs of living are within her means.
In cases where the property has appreciated so much that the increase in property taxes is a burden, surely there is a corresponding increase in equity to lessen the blow.
The "CA Prop 13" option pretty much makes newcomers finance existing landowners' property taxes - not my favorite option.
Prop. 13 is a disaster in another way. Because commercial buildings are higher-valued, it is now common for them never to be sold. They are just spun out as a separate entity, and that entity changes hands.
Since they are never sold, their property tax base never increases (re-assessment happens most often after a sale). So there has also been a net transfer of property tax burden from commercial to residential property.
More and more people are doing it too, I think. I was looking at property records, and a surprisingly large number of them were owned by various "trust"s .
> but your grandmother could use the equity established in her property, and move to somewhere where the costs of living are within her means.
Isn't keeping people in the city the whole reason you want to raise property taxes in the first place? Reduce the incentive of people to hold empty condos, so people can live in the city. So asking her to leave is the opposite goal to raising the real estate taxes.
That is why we have prop 13 in California, but that ends up either stripping tax revenue, or heavily taxing new migrants to be state (tech entrepreneurs, international people, etc) -- or, in California, both.
It seems even github is susceptible to this. That is, for people who type www.github.com into their browser rather than github.com. They both did the redirect wrong, as well as left off HSTS of https://www.github.com.
It all depends on how good of a HS education you got. It also depends on the fun and relationships you are having outside of your school work. For me that was the best part
But it's not "Politics" that I want to show him. It's Judge Phelan's character. Poking through the wikis, I think I actually meant Season 1. It's been two years since I saw it; I need to do a re-watch.
College is not beneficial to all people but to many it is critical. At least in America the state of elementary, middle and high school is simple failure. Students are graduating with skills 8th graders had 30+ years ago. Students are graduating with only ever have taken watered down math and science courses.
I was one of those students who went to a public school which the standard of education was pretty darn low. When I got to college I was hit hard with just how behind I was. Many students were far above me all around.
When I graduated HS around 98% of students went off to colleges of some kind. Now when I look at facebook at least of the people I knew only a handful actually has a real job and of those people they are the ones who finished college. The rest don't have careers.
For me and the few others college fixed us. It forced us to do the work and work our way up to what most people are capable of.
So when you hear about the all star developer who never went to college and is doing great. Be sure of one thing, that person got a great education and good problem solving skills were learned. For the rest of us who never got this, you need to make up for it somehow. College is your shot.
Absolutely a valid point, that is defiantly the thought that has kept me in thus far. I know a handful of kids that graduated with me and literally haven't worked a day in their life. I think it's amazing that people are content with that type of existence.
I'm a sys admin too, just one with a CS degree. I don't think you need a degree to do well but it certainly does help. You were right in that many companies have strict education requirements. It may not limit you now at a younger age but once you are in your 30's or above and you start to be considered for management that's when the education requirements really kick in. In many cases you may be in line for the management position but they simply cannot hire you due to internal policy. That royally sucks. It's a reason why many CS classes are occupied with older students, they are coming back due to that limitation.
You're only young once. College is fun, especially if you go to a big school and live on or near campus. Yes it's expensive and a lot of potential income is lost but the experiences you can have are really priceless. I say can have instead of will have because it's what you make of it. If you go and are a hermit you will have some good times but not the full package.
Some people like myself didn't come from families who could afford college. I had to take loans. Some people who took loans hate paying them back and regret going. I happened to get a good job out of it doing something I really enjoy (I get paid to play with linux all day). I don't mind paying off my loans. I am very grateful that I was able to take the loans and when I pay them I know it was for one hell of a good time. It really made me who I am today. I was challenged in class, met a few professors who changed how I learned, was exposed to all sorts of new ideas and met a bunch of friends who were actually smart. I found it well worth it.
Why even worry. I build a new computer last year completely blind. Everything on it worked fine in Linux. Linux has far better hardware support now than windows does