I would love to do something like this but simply cannot afford it. I think it is good advice but going back to school for a degree one does not plan on utilizing is not as feasible today as it was in the 80's, largely due to the sizeable increase in tuition without reciprocal increases in wages.
So you would rather be known as someone who had an opportunity to report a violation, and chose not to? From my perspective it seem like you decided against acting with integrity in this situation - the moral thing would have been to report the violation, but you chose to look the other way and resign.
Why would you resign? You could have reported it yourself and then you would have whistleblower protections - if the company retaliated against you (e.g. fired you), you then would have had a strong lawsuit.
Many fast food wrappers/containers contained PFAS until very recently [0]. Putting hot food out of a fryer into those containers would leech some of the PFAS into the food.
I do exactly this but take it even one step further. My actual (primary) phone number is only ever given out to humans. I have a second Google Voice phone number that I give out to machines (e.g. online shopping that "requires" a phone number that will eventually be leaked).
My interpretation is that he provided enough evidence to the RCMP that convinced them to stay the case, since they likely thought the evidence they had to convict Barker was weak. This lead to him not having a chance in court to clear his name.
Had he not spoken to the police at all, and instead waited to present his evidence in court, he likely would have been found not guilty and therefore would have cleared his name.
Him talking to police worsened the situation because they are not the ones who evaluate the evidence and make a conviction decision (judges/juries do that). The job of the police is to collect evidence, and Barker did that for them (to his detriment).
> Their cost structure nickel and dimes the consumer so much that by the time you get to the destination you may have paid more for a much less comfortable trip
That lends more credence to the comparison against Dollar General and similar discount stores. Dollar stores generally charge a higher price relative to quantity, but they offer smaller quantities than big box stores which allows their customers to spend less (but also get a lot less). Wendover on YouTube did a video on this recently [0].
Does anyone know if this enzyme is present in B vitamins or produced by the gut biome due to excessive intake of B vitamins (B-2 and B-12 specifically)? In my experience, an excess of B vitamins causes the urine to turn yellow (independent of hydration level) and was curious if this enzyme plays into that at all.
I agree that demographics are a factor, but definitely not the only one and likely not the most impactful factor. Financial conditions are another big cause that likely had just as much if not more of an effect than demographics. We're coming out of a decade of near-zero interest rates, after a financial crisis, where millennials were just starting their careers and couldn't benefit from low rates anywhere near as much as older, more established (wealthier) generations. Millennials also have a significantly higher inflation-adjusted cost of living for essentials (housing, healthcare, education, food).
What's very bad is that we have an ongoing tragedy of the commons in the form of global climate change caused by human activity. What's even worse is that we know this, yet are not changing our society to alleviate the effects of our unsustainable carbon usage.
My hypothesis is that "the government" doesn't have the information the public is looking for. It is locked away in SAPs at defense contractors, which are essentially just a private extension of the government but out of reach of public scrutiny (e.g. FOIA requests).
Per capita metrics are useless when it comes to climate stats. The ice caps don't care about how much hydrocarbons are burned per person, they are only affected by the net amount of hydrocarbons burned on a global scale.
> public opinion would still make it palatable to continue hydrocarbon fuels extraction for another 2 to 3 decades
I don't think it's public opinion so much as it is necessity to maintain current standards of living for the next few decades. Renewable energy is still a relatively small fraction of overall energy use, and net global oil consumption has been steadily increasing the past few years (likely to surpass pre-covid levels this year). Our society is still very much addicted to hydrocarbons.
I'm one of those neighbors who doesn't seem to exist. I don't dislike my neighbors and would like to interact with them more often, unfortunately I don't often have time for it.