Assuming the fine isn’t progressive, of course.
Over here in Finland fines for any but the minor offences are defined in percents of income, not in fixed sums of money. There have been cases of traffic fines of several hundreds of thousands for going 30 km/h over the speed limit. That makes them a punishment for very richest people as well, not only for the lower class.
A lot looks like we and champignons share a common ancestor that had already separated from plants. But, it’s not sure.
Breaking anti-bribery laws of a country is illegal, no matter whether they are enforced in some other country or not. Of course Microsoft can break the law and then keep paying large fines until they decide to no longer break the law.
Uh, the Russia is doing that on every possible platform. Why would ours be an exception? What makes Lemmy so special?
“cz” marks the same sound as the English “ch”. “j” marks the same as “y” in “yes”. Otherwise you read it letter by letter, a bit as if it was Spanish.
So… Is Ch’yvinos’tavch legible enough? :) Although, the pronounciation of the j would be so weak that you could perhaps skip it. It does alter the sound a bit, but doesn’t really sound as an independent sound in this word. So, also Ch’vinos’tavch could maybe be a valid transcription? And of course real Polish language does not have the combination czj anyway :)
You’re just saying “most people”. 60 % is “most people”, but that doesn’t mean you can just assume the 40% don’t exist. You’re jumping into conclusions.
And no, I don’t know if the numbers are 60 and 40, or even the other way around. What I’m saying that you do not have enough data to be as sure about this being a falsehood as you are.
I do agree that it’s entirely possible that the story hasn’t happened, but it’s not okay to deem someone guilty of something based on a guess.
About likelihoods: if you cross a motorway on foot, you most likely will not be run over. If 10000 people cross a motorway at different places at the same moment, some of them will get hit for sure. Most will not, but that doesn’t mean that nobody will. “Most people” ≠ “everyone”. You haven’t even told where the “most people wouldn’t” comes from, but even if it did have something to it, it would still be only “most”, not “everyone” or even “practically everyone”.
Internet would be a lot better place if people did less jumping into conclusions.
Uh, then I am sorry for the misunderstanding.
I have been trying to convince you that you should find some argument that actually holds water, or stop playing that your argument is sound.
In any case, you asked me to make my point, so here goes: Nothing in the post gives you enough data to claim that it’s a lie. You can say that the claim sounds implausible to you, but you cannot outright tell that it’s a falsehood, unless there is a reason to think so. And you say the reason to think so is that someone was doing the only logical thing, and you say – for whatever reason – that it’s extremely rare to do the most logical thing in such a situation.
It’s funny how you keep dodging everything I say :)
Repetition does not make an unsound argument sound.
…although, because selling a house ASAP if you have a loan with large payments for it, is the only logical course of action if long-term unemployment is assumed, nothing to that extent has been demonstrated.
Yup, because the burden of proof is on the one who made the claim. But that only allows us to say the text is not necessarily true.
When you say the op is lying, that’s a new claim, where the burden of proof is on you.
Thanks ❤️
In any case, all this is very little proof that the story is a falsehood. Obviously, by default everything you read online falls to the category “this may have happened”, but that’s all we really have.
If you have a reason to believe you might be living off your savings for the next two years, you will want to maximize your savings. If you have paid enough of your house to buy the smaller and more remote one with cash, then that’s what you should do.
No, I don’t.
Please elaborate.
So, basically we know it’s a falsehood because it’s plausible. Saying something plausible is precisely what a liar would do!
When you see moving to a smaller house is inevitable, it might not be worth it to delay for some additional months. Better preserve the savings so they last longer. When your economy goes south, better start more economical life right away.
You aren’t wrong with that :)
The problem exists, although its scale isn’t as big as it first seems. On Lemmy you can write “Airbrush” and join the biggest of the communities. It’s quite visible that this is what is happening in several communities. One starts growing and then that’s what people choose to join, etc.
It doesn’t matter almost at all which instance a community is on. People could just unite the different scuba groups into one. Basically any they see fit. I’m not sure the decentralization really causes this effect. Or does it make it too difficult to find communities? I’ve been plenty able to find communities from various instances, at least.
Some people remember things as images and see stories in books as images. Do you have a memory from that time that is preserved as images so that you can actually see what the world looks like from the perspective of a 2-year-old? Also, can you recognise things in that memory that have caught your 2-year-old attention that would not catch the attention of an adult who already has answers to many questions? Or the other way around, is something missing in the memory that by all logic should be there, because a two-year-old doesn’t recognise it as significant?
(My oldest memory is from about that age as well. It’s me looking at a pavement made of 30 cm (~1 foot) wide concrete slabs while sitting in a stroller, observing how the lines between the slabs are recognisable when I look further away but turn into a blur if I look as straight down as I can)