Not exactly the same, but I once attended a work call when I was staying with my Dad after he had a knee replacement. He had decided to “tough it out” and not take painkillers, and during the call he started screaming “kill me! oh god kill me!” because of the pain, quite loud enough to be heard by everyone on the call. My boss said “it’s OK, ChickenLady, this call isn’t that important. Go ahead and kill your father.”
I honestly think that humor is the answer to most if not all issues. Bit iffy since we don’t share the same but humor is the answer. That and puppies and kittens…
Mine points to a Tumblr blog that I don't really use anymore because I'm posting here instead. I ought to turn it into a more professional portfolio page and use some of the other ideas in this thread. I have email at that domain thanks to my legacy free Google Workspace I've had for like 15 years.
It varies from country to country. Some countries don’t let you become a citizen again after renouncing, while others allow it.
Citizenship is related to taxes (which also varies from country to country), so some countries are very interested in your citizenship in order to be able to establish that you owe them income taxes.
How would your previous country find out? I imagine it’s like any crime: you either do something to make it easier for them (try to renew a passport, fail to file a tax return) or they find you by accident (some investigator notices a connexion between two observations that makes their mind tingle).
There’s probably more, but that’s enough to answer your questions.
Countries typically don’t allow that. (Do any allow it?) For example, Canada requires you (at least) to be a citizen of another country and to live outside Canada.
The UN would likely consider it a violation of their human rights if a country knowingly allowed a citizen to become stateless. I would hope that at least all member states would not allow it, but I don’t know for certain.
Yeah, being stateless is really bad. There’s a few international agreements to avoid the creation of more stateless people, but it still happens. You end up with people spending years in airports or jails as their visa expires and they have no way to renew it or get a visa for elsewhere, and asylum claims can take months to years to process, and get denied anyway.
Most countries tell you to renounce after you gain the new so it isn't a problem. A few allos dual citizenhip. (maybe most allow dual? I seem to recall that but it is outside where I'm sure)
It’s very difficult to enforce. I’ve heard of cases where people like show the embassy a passport of a citizenship they said they renounced by accident, and were just sternly told to renounce it, other cases where their new citizenship was revoked.
No, other way around. Most countries won’t even allow you to renounce if you don’t have another citizenship.
The US also charges $10,000 dollars to accept your renunciation. The US is one of the few countries that taxes its citizens in foreign countries so there’s a big incentive to renounce when you get citizenship in a better place. There is a substantial tax deduction for the first ~150K you earn in another country, as long as you spend less than 10 days in America or traveling and pay taxes in that country, as long as that country has such an agreement with the US.
When you know the dimensions of the legs of a right triangle but not the tangent of the angle opposite the height, you have to utilize the formula “height = tangent(ϴ) * width”.
Hauk Tuah was a pharaoh, little is known about him due to much of the writings documenting his short existence have been lost. However the few writings surviving indicates he spat on criminals’ thang as a form of punishment which was considered worse that death, and one person during his short period in power have convinced him to spit on a thang belonged to a man who wrongdoed him, thus the saying “Hauk Tuah, spit on his thang!”
Germany allows dual citizenship now, but used to not allow it in most cases. In those cases, if you applied for German citizenship, you had to express that you were willing to give up your old citizenship. Once you were granted citizenship, you had a certain amount of time (two years?) to show a certificate that you renounced your old citizenship. If you didn’t, your German citizenship would be revoked.
Actually, dual citizenship in Germany is only allowed for a few select non-EU countries. For everyone else: first you apply for citizenship. Then they say citizenship will be granted, under the condition that you provide proof of revoking your previous citizenship within 2 years. Then you revoke your previous citizenship and give the confirmation to the immigration department. They will process it (during those weeks you are practically stateless) and grant you citizenship on this basis. Source: did this three years ago
As of the end of June they significantly relaxed the rules around the path to citizenship, including dual citizenship. Anyone can now do it if the other country also allows dual citizenship.
I did computer science 5 years ago and it was mostly good. I used KDE Neon before it was considered a real user distro by developers so I had some Wayland issues. When I tried to use the commandline and edit config files manually I messed stuff up but using the distro as intended was always nice and easy.
Your milage may vary depending on what programs your school forces you to use because universities don’t support anything except Linux and Mac. I want to argue for accessibility but teachers don’t care enough.
My library offers free accounts for online courses like Coursera and Udemy. Saved me a few hundred bucks when I was trying to get into UX and web development. All I had to give was an email and choose my local library from a list, that was literally it. I was surprised these things were readily available for free with no hassle.
I work in a large corporation, I can assure you that the same kind of people in the same proportions in corporations as in governments. You really should not let low resolution ideologies impose their make beliefs on your world.
I used to also, and I understand the issue, but the mega corps will still be more efficient than the government. This brings up the other issue of how the government funds all the tax dollars to large corporations and also props them up with regulatory protections.
It really depends what you mean by “efficient”. But even if you go with “profit maximizer” that’s still an ideological truth that falls apart easily for most human endeavor. Since both organizations are made of the same kind of humans, have the same basic technology and access to resources (when not crippled in some way). When you add on top non monetary social goals, task more complex than “deliver commodity at lowest cost and max profit”, especially if you consider externalities, tgen saying " corporation are more efficient" as a blanket statement for use in all cases by default, it seems to me this is an ideological statement, really, an article of faith more then anything else.
Its not an ideological statement, it is a comment on the structure of the organizations and how they have to work to survive. Corporations need to do things efficiently or they disappear, the reason large companies are able to be so inefficient is that they are propped up by the government. But the big corporations still have to be more efficient than the other giant companies or their business gets taken.
When it comes to the government they can have irrational requirements and ways of doing things, and since they allegedly are beholden only to the voters (who dont have a clue what is happening) then they can be as inefficient as they want. An example that is non monetary is how the police will investigate themselves and find they did nothing wrong, they only have an incentive to protect themselves and their own people.
Basically because every time this happens the burden of debt is passed towards the tax payers. They just built a long toll lane in my city in what was a 2 lane highway. Adding another lane or two would have alleviated traffic immensely. The company that built it owns all profits for approx 50 years. What could have been a 5 lane highway is still two except now you have the option of paying a ridiculous amount of money to not have to deal with the traffic. This is money that could have been spent on improving the city’s other methods of transportation, trains, bicycles, etc.
It doesn’t affect me personally. I ride a motorcycle every day. It’s just painful to see how private interests are almost never in line with what’s best for constituents
I think this is a seperate issue when private corporations build and own roads. I dont know enough about that sort of thing, I was more referring to how the government hires out private companies to create infrastructure instead of having government employees do it.
This happens in most European countries as well, I believe?
It works fine as long as the private companies are held accountable for their shit and the high-level planning is done by public offices.
It breaks down when there are no consequences for budget or deadline overruns, or the actual deliverable failing to meet requirements, because obviously private companies are gonna fleece the tax payer.
Well since the privatisation of germanies public transport systems everything went downhill.
We have less lines and lots of late trains. Funny thing is that the private company “Deutsche Bahn” was doing so bad it is now 100%owned by the state but still a “profit orientated” private company that does weird shit in order to fake the numbers.
I’m not a fan of privatisation of existing systems either. Nor a fan of private companies providing public transport, but in Estonia that works because they have to adhere to strict terms.
What I meant was specifically in the context of private companies building infrastructure that’s specced out by the government and will be owned by the government - that it works in Europe.
In the US a large problem is that the private companies can own the infrastructure they build and then deny other companies usage
There is also an example of this happening here in Estonia too - Telia (which acquired Elion) owns way too much of the fiber optic networks, particularly the last mile connections and now you have relatively little competition - if you want an Internet connection at home, depending on where you live, you may only be able to get broadband from Telia.
But at the same time - we also have private companies build our roads and that works fine for us, because the roads still belong to the country and everyone can use them all the same. Our rail network is owned by the government and while there’s only one (state-owned) company running people transport on it, many companies can use it for transportation of goods.
As long as the product is owned by the government it works. You can pay a contractor to build it, maybe even manage it, but you can’t give the infrastructure to the private company that then has a monopoly
kbin.life
Newest