I have swapped hardware many many times, multiple re-installs of Windows 7 and _never_ had an issue with licensing on a single key. I am very confused and skeptical of your claims.
Rewards are transparent. Spend some money and before you know it, you get a $100 check or gas cards or amazon credit etc. What a headache!!! I hate it when people give me money for free!
In this circumstance, I hate to defend those that did what they did. The comment above about authoritarian followers is a good explanation as to why the officers/medical staff would comply. But I could see how one would comply, not to serve or aid, but out of fear or simply the with the perception that they _had_ to comply.
With a title "To an alarming degree..." it immediately feels like a persuasive paper. Who thinks it's alarming? From the sound of it, everyone should (or does) think this is alarming.
But it may be a stretch to say this is someone trying to discredit global warming.
Science isn't broken. People claim what they see, sometimes they are wrong, sometimes they are right. But eventually we find out the truth.
And my point is that BIG policy makes it so that negative actions (not working _hard_, not investing, no personal development beyond what is required) are not a net loss to the family or individual. Thus, it promotes doing the bare minimum to get by, especially when the result is a very comfy, stress free lifestyle.
I do understand your point. And you gave perfect examples of situations where BIG would be beneficial. My problem with the idea is that proponents ignore the negatives or severely downplay them. My biggest argument against that type of idea is that it kills human drive and ambition and progress.
First of all, nobody's opinions are substantiated. I believe that human nature has not and will not change. By human nature, I'm talking about what drives us to do the things we do.
I understand the logic behind BIG. My problem with the _idea_, as it is, is that the idea ignores human nature. If you want to bring an idea to the table, at least be honest about it.
Agree with first paragraph a hundred percent. How can we teach those in poverty that the way they live their lives is counter productive? The politics have to get out of the damn way or it will never happen.
It does not remove "perverse" incentives. Human nature dictates our desires. If we could have everything we ever wanted then there would be no "perverse" incentives. I could have my own amusement park where there would be no lines and I could ride any ride I wanted at any time - not to mention someone would carry me from ride to ride.
People will always want more, to achieve more. The "perverse" incentives exist simply because of that fact. If you cannot accept that, you should go live in the woods far away from people and be happy.
Life isn't fair, you do what you can to help those less fortunate around you. But, if you think for a second that some sort of "equal" pay will solve our worlds problems you are either ignorant or in denial of our human nature.
Is this really necessary? How about 456 - unavailable because someone spilled coffee on our backend server? Or 467 - unavailable because garden gnomes invaded our offices?
"Except for one little problem: the economics of cord-cutting simply don’t make sense, for neither networks nor viewers."
Actually, it makes perfect sense for the viewers - the networks are the ones that it inconveniences. People simply won't pay the increasingly high rates which are borderline ridiculous. You could get a nice used car for the same monthly payment of some of these internet/cable bundles.
They need to be able to control the currency, thus bitcoin will never become more than it is now. I'd bet on the powers that be squashing it a million times.