You got it backwards. Bill Gates and Alex Karp don’t pay megamoney for lumber or farm land. They consume a bit more than the average person, but not by the same %age as they are richer.
But everyone else can’t afford basic necessities or furniture anymore. And so being a farmer or a woodworker or whatever becomes a less attractive job, less people will do it, and you will have a harder time finding someone fixing your plumbing. Or pay a premium.
Instead, the ultra-wealthy are demanding extreme luxury, and so a would-be farmer is now a hotel page boy carrying around some rich dudes’ luggage, hoping for a tip.
Although looking at Levels.fyi, salaries in London are significantly more than Singapore, and that's with the CoL apparently being higher in Singapore.
You need to look at net salaries after taxes. And for CoL it depends on what your consumption basket is. My cost of living would be higher in London. (I lived in both places.) I don't drive, I don't smoke, I use public transport a lot, and I pay for household help. I do drink beer, which is expensive in Singapore, but it's a small part of my overall budget.
I save a lot of money on 0% capital gains taxes here.
I regularly check London jobs and interview for them, but the numbers haven't made sense so far.
I don't believe this. My latest job hunt was about 6 months ago, I had to stop applying for jobs I got so many callbacks. My CV is decent but hardly outstanding, good experience but no name-brand companies.
I saw another comment where you said you are in Russia, my guess is that is the reason. Not like there's much consumer tech investment flowing there at the moment.
I am in my fifties and have only spent 18 months or so in houses built after 1970 (both of which were, well… bad)
Grew up in a house built in the 50s, university dorm was built in the late 1800s, student housing was Edwardian at the latest except two houses I lived in as a postgrad, then a place built in 1720 or something, current place is 220 years old on the ground floor plus an Edwardian bit, and I suspect the first and second were first built in the late 1800s; nobody actually knows and it looks like it might have been substantially rebuilt.
The ground floor of this place gets cold; the upper floors have conservation-area sash windows but also ultra-modern insulation under the tiles.
I am trying to avoid listed buildings for the next place, but I would be a bit surprised if I bought anywhere as new as the 1970s! Kind of want an old interwar bungalow next.
To be fair, the people who think it believe that smart meters are how it will happen, so their existence would be all the evidence they actually need that it will.
One possible reference to rationing - that is actually not a reference to rationing - does not infer that the thread is loaded with Telegaph-esque rants about rationing.
You're doubling down on the misrepresentation.
There are zero references to rationing on this thread - and yet the top commenter calling this out as some kind of 'Telgraph-equ' nonsnes.
'Intermittent availability of power' - is absolutely not a reference to 'rationing' and if it were, it wouldn't be any kind of basis for hyperbole over 'rationing'.
I gave evidence of two examples of govenmental policies around rationing, and it's definitely not via 'power outages' - that's absurd - rolling blackouts only happen during emergency situations.
You've stated that the conversations has tilted to 'rationing' is 'trivially falsifiable' and at the same time haven't produced any evidence.
reply