Does Australia have a fentanyl issue?
Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
I'm sure there's some fentanyl going around but meth, weed and MDMA is a far greater problem. Every high school/uni house party will have some people smoking weed.
Yeah, Sydney was always known to be a bit of shit place due to being the most influenced by the US. Been there a few times and it seriously has gotten worse each time I went
New Zealand will have a general election in October. Hopefully Labour wins. Their foreign policy seems wise and pragmatic.
Looks like MEK is no longer welcome in Albania. U.S. will need to find a new sanctuary for their precious little death cult.
A
azn_cyniq
Guest
You're absolutely right.
If your salary is $140,000 a year in San Francisco (this is well above the median salary in San Francisco), you'll end up with around $95,000 after taxes. A decent studio apartment in San Francisco costs at least $3500 a month, or $42,000 a year. If you don't feel like paying this much money, you'll have to live with multiple roommates or deal with a long (probably more than 2 hours per day) commute. Now you're left with $53,000. If you're frugal, you'll spend around $20 a day on food or $7300 a year. If you're lucky, you'll spend around $3000 a year on utilities and gasoline in San Francisco. I'll assume you already have a car. Now you're left with $42,700. Not bad.
If you're able to keep your job for the next 7 years, you'll have enough money for the down payment for a $1.5 million house in the Bay Area. A house worth less than that in the Bay Area is probably not suitable for raising a family. 7 years without eating out a single time, going on a single trip, or spending a single dollar to entertain yourself, and you can finally pay the down payment on your dream home (which probably isn't all that great). Now you can look forward to paying $10,000 a month for the next 30 years to pay off your mortgage.
If you don't want to spend your next 37 years like this, I guess you're a loser (according to another user).
That's what am so confused about @Witchhunter12 perplexing opinion that his experience isn't atypical but rather the norm. How is he basing his anecdotal experience and then transform that as the general trend and feeling of the majority of Chinese diaspora and Chinese students in America, when all he's been able to is nothing but anecdotal fallacy.
Studies after studies along with the myriad of data show that overwhelming vast majority of Chinese who studied in America from decades past to now have ELECTED/VOLUNTARY TO GO BACK TO CHINA as opposed to the Indians for example whom CHOSE TO OVERWHELMINGLY STAY IN AMERICA which largely explain the gaps in development of both countries.
Many polling and elite academic institutions like Harvard and York University in Canada did an extensive polling on the Chinese sentiment and confidence, approval of their government and overwhelmingly the Chinese people give support to their system and governing body which is the CPC. Yet, we are being told to believe that somehow the best and the brightest of China, if given the chance (which they have that option) would overwhelmingly choose America for better pay, prestige, and ChatGpt?
Last edited:
How much of the dataset are immigrant Indians and their short cousins pulling down the average height of Britons?LOL...
Economic cutbacks making British kids shorter – study
Cheap obesity-inducing junk food is viewed as the primary culprit
© Getty Images / Mike Kemp
British five-year-olds who grew up in the era of austerity are shorter than their peers in other developed nations by as much as 7cm (2.76in), according to data from the Non-Communicable Diseases Risk Factor Collaboration published by The Times on Tuesday.
Since 1985, when British boys and girls both ranked 69 for average height at five years out of 200 listed countries, their ranking has plummeted dramatically – to 102 for boys and 96 for girls, putting them behind countries as diverse as Canada, Kyrgyzstan, and Cuba.
Comparing the numbers to data on 19-year-olds, Professor Tim Cole of University College London’s Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health suggested to The Times that growing up in the 2010s “period of austerity” was what “clobbered the height of children in the UK.” The height of British five-year-olds peaked in 2011 at 112.8cm (44.4in) and has been falling ever since, the statistics show.
Because height is affected not just by quality and quantity of food but also stress, poverty, illness, and even sleep quality, Cole argued it is a uniquely “sensitive” indicator of living conditions. “It’s quite clear we are falling behind, relative to Europe,” he said.
“In modern Britain, the way we eat is one of the clearest markers of inequality,” former UK government food adviser Henry Dimbleby told The Times, pointing out that “children in the poorest areas of England are both fatter and significantly shorter than those in the richest areas at age ten to eleven.”
Family doctors in low-income areas have reported an “extraordinary” surge in the kind of nutritional-deficiency-borne diseases prevalent during Victorian times, Dimbleby explained. According to NHS data, 700 children are admitted to English hospitals every year with rickets, scurvy, or other forms of malnutrition, while nutrition charity The Food Foundation has found higher rates of type 2 diabetes and dental decay as well as obesity in poorer children.
It is not just European countries like the Netherlands and Lithuania which outperform Britain. According to the study, China and North Korea both raise taller five-year-olds than the UK. Even five-year-olds in Libya – born and raised after the NATO bombing campaign that helped to overthrow their government and turn the country into a failed state – are taller (boys) or as tall (girls) compared to their British counterparts.
Austerity has been linked to a host of socioeconomic problems in the UK, from soaring inequality to declining educational achievement. While supporters argue the program enacted in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis was necessary to rescue a floundering economy, critics have countered that the damage done outweighs any benefits.
given the nature of Anglo American society, the type of Americans who are on 200k prob lack the physical attraction to convince women to sleep with them without paying for their onlyfans.