> And to top it off, we're working less than we ever have
This really struck me. I am going to assume your numbers ar correct, but if you could point me to a source I would love that. (did a quick search on the web, couldn't find exactly what I would like)
My first thought was that it is fascinating that we would be working 12% less hours per person. I wonder how that break down by gender. The number I keep finding is per day men @ 8.4 vs women @ 7.7 which doesn't match your number because it is only talking about full time employment. Hence if you can help me find better numbers that would be great.
Then I realized the horrible truth residing in your numbers: in 1950 it was almost exclusively men who worked. Today women make up almost half of the workforce. On a per capita basis we are working much, much more than we used too. From this Wikipedia entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_time#United_States:
The average working time of married couples – of both husband and wife taken together – rose from 56 hours in 1969 to 67 hours in 2000
Turns out things are worse than they used to be. Nobody spent $700 on a phone but they did spend $600, in 1986 dollars, on a microwave - which is roughly $1300 in 2016. And few people spend $5000 on a tv today. A $5000 dollar tv is likely 75 inches or more - I don't know if I have ever been in a home with a TV that large.
The middle class has disappeared and it is not because they became wealthy, lazy or demanding.
First, homemakers aren't unemployed. They just work at different things.
Second, look at the employment rate charted over the last forty years or so. Some of that may be explained by retiring baby boomers, but it's the following generations that will need to pick up the economic slack to pay for retirement, healthcare, prop up their home values so they can retire, etc.
>First, homemakers aren't unemployed. They just work at different things.
So you are agreeing - since before one person was devoted full time to homemaking, and now they must find paid employment - that work still needs to be done so it must be done in addition to the hours worked at an employer.
so instead of one person doing 40 hours at an employer and one person staying home to keep up the house - we have two people working 40 hours each and then working overtime to maintain their house after work. We've added 40 hours of work to the equation.
Until that "soon" arrives, there's a far greater chance that people will wipe out humanity. We have more suicidal terrorists today than ever in history.
All of it, sure. But most of it might be easier than you think. Just one bomb in the wrong place can trigger a chain of catastrophic events. Don't forget that we have nukes in places like North Korea and Pakistan, and Iran is building one as fast as they can.
Excuse me, but I'd rather worry about those threats, than about a robot uprising.
> All reported cases where the user consumed greater than 5 g/day reported symptoms of the lower urinary tract.
That only implies that if you do 5g/day, you will with near certainty get urinary tract problems. You can definitely get get urinary tract problems with much lower dosages.
You don't have to do anything close to that for it to destroy your UT. More like a couple years of occasional recreational use. It's a huge problem with younger people who use the drug recreationally.
I'm pretty sure the way in which you deliver the drug is the biggest variable as to how much damage it causes. The article briefly touched upon it; most illegal ketamine comes in a crystal form and needs rehydrating (cooking), most people do not rehydrate the ketamine and instead just crush it. Taking this instead of hydrated ketamine is much more detrimental to the bladder/ut.
Legitimately manufactured ketamine is typically in sterile saline solution at a fixed quantity per dose. This is because the usual medical route of administration is intra-muscular or intravenous injection.
For recreational use, (afaik) the majority is insufflated, or snorted. For this you need the dry, crystallised form.
You can either purchase it as crystal from your friendly neighbourhood drug dealer, or they may be able to supply you with vials diverted from veterinary or medical suppliers. To get this to a powder, you boil off the water "Cooking" and are left with a mixture of ketamine and salt.
The 2 biggest problems are trying to either rehydrate crystal powder for injection (because ensuring sterility and consistent dosage is hard), and that crystals are much easier to cut with other ingredients (because the legit. vials usually have tamperproof seals like other legitimate drugs).
The other point is that most people won't be injecting it right from the beginning. Only once they become tolerant and require high doses does the appeal of IM/IV's increased 'efficiency' (bioavailability) tend to override the common wisdom of not sticking needles in oneself.
From what I recall, most of the research has shown that long-term administration of high doses is where the damage is predominantly done, and even very high doses (1000mg would be a plausible dose for 'short term surgical anesthesia (15-25 mins) of an 80kg adult), if given very rarely, are not likely to cause harm.
But injecting that sort of quantity, multiple times a day, for weeks or months, is absolutely going to lead to problems, and even more of them if you're getting impurities or bacteria/spores along due to contamination.
I'm only speaking from personal experience, unfortunately I have friends that have been abusing this drugs for almost 2 decades (none that inject so I can not speak about that).
I might have my terminology mixed up, but there is definitely a difference between crystallised and that which has been cooked (possibly again). Some of it might possibly be myth on there behalf, as in they don't get as bad a "k belly" or irritated bladder after a binge on the latter.
As well as the bladder/ut issues, snorting (anything) also leads to the corrosion of the septum and also the bone(s) that supports teeth.. Basically excessive use leads to teeth falling out.
Nah, I've had plenty of mates that have done far far less than that (a few grammes on the weekend for a while) that have totally fucked their bladders.
I was really surprised that both of my browsers have bad color correction. What's nice is the pdf confirms this: this are wrong in the browser, but right in the external pdf.
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Frog_and_the_Mouse , you can find each moral in Aesop, with the frog and the mouse teaching that evil destroys itself and the farmer and the viper teaching that you're a fool to hope for anything but evil treatment from evil. Presumably, you'd target the first lesson at people you wanted to shape up, and the second one at the excessively giving.
I'm 40 and grew up online with an acoustic modem. There is no fucking way craigslist is the way the web should look. Many sites go to far the other direction but even CL is begging to update their look.
I really hope they don't change, I love the simplistic design and never having to worry about major layout changes is great. The downside, their massive legal team has a larger budget.
Even the small layout changes Reddit has done the past few years has started to drive me away.
This really struck me. I am going to assume your numbers ar correct, but if you could point me to a source I would love that. (did a quick search on the web, couldn't find exactly what I would like)
My first thought was that it is fascinating that we would be working 12% less hours per person. I wonder how that break down by gender. The number I keep finding is per day men @ 8.4 vs women @ 7.7 which doesn't match your number because it is only talking about full time employment. Hence if you can help me find better numbers that would be great.
Then I realized the horrible truth residing in your numbers: in 1950 it was almost exclusively men who worked. Today women make up almost half of the workforce. On a per capita basis we are working much, much more than we used too. From this Wikipedia entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_time#United_States:
Turns out things are worse than they used to be. Nobody spent $700 on a phone but they did spend $600, in 1986 dollars, on a microwave - which is roughly $1300 in 2016. And few people spend $5000 on a tv today. A $5000 dollar tv is likely 75 inches or more - I don't know if I have ever been in a home with a TV that large.The middle class has disappeared and it is not because they became wealthy, lazy or demanding.