In all probability. The people most likely to respond to a survey of this type and the discontented.

The fact that so many people consider their workplaces toxic, undoubted contains an element of unrealistic expectations, but the fact that numbers have gotten significantly worse in a year is worth noting. I am sure that these numbers are inflated, after all they are from a job search site, which is likely to be primarily used, by people who are looking for a new job. People who are satisfied with the working conditions are not likely to be included. On the other hand, it is well known to everyone who reads this site, that companies have been cutting staff without reducing the amount of work that needs to be done for several years. It is reasonable to expect people to be unhappy with working conditions, when this is true. Also, real wages have been falling in the US, for some time. I know it is popular to say that young people have unrealistic job expectations. The WW2 generation said it about the boomers and so on. The question is, is this really true or is the reality that the next generation is not going to have the standard of living that their parents enjoyed.

The biggest single factor in how long someone lives is genetic. What you do and what you are exposed to has an effect, but it is just a variation on top of your genetic predisposition.

The insurance companies are too big to fail and mostly too smart to fail, the AI companies not so much. They AI companies are like any other bubble; the value is all smoke and mirrors.

As a user, I want to say that this has been a real success. The app is easy to use and allows me to keep track of my observations. Most users do not care about the citizen science aspect as much as the ability to keep track what they have seen. I am a bit dubious about the ""science" aspect, although I have no doubt that good information can be extracted. My primary issue is that in areas where there are few observers, the data can be distorted, either by lack of observations or by incorrect ones. In Missouri, for example, where I do the majority of my birding, the map of observations reflects the locations of the observers as much as that of the birds.

Because the potential payouts are huge, the risk is unknown, and the AI companies do not want to pay ridiculous amounts of money in premiums.

It isn't the national representatives; it is the people from all the other parties (oil and coal companies, etc.) that drive up the numbers (and their flunkies, of course).

Even in Florida and Texas?

They have a phone? (other than a smartphone). Is there anyone home? In the US, will they shoot you?

Not if the banks cannot do business and the money being send from abroad is not being received.

It is way more complicated than that. Thirty production sites, each with their own inventory and production rate have to be coordinated with hundreds of delivery locations. Sure it could all be done with a spreadsheet. If fact, it probably is, which is the problem when you cannot get to the spreadsheet. Recreating from scratch is a much bigger problem, even assuming that you can get the data (locations, amounts needed etc.) in a reasonable time.

Are you paying no attention to what is happening in the world? This is guy who is accused of recently murdering a senior executive of an insurance company. The fact that he has an Italian name is irrelevant.

Murder is almost always the wrong answer. Not only because it is wrong, but because it is usually ineffective in changing things. If you do not like their policies vote with your feet. There are other insurers out there. United Health Care should be particularly vulnerable, since they owe much of their preeminence to being a partner with AARP. An organization of retired (older) people seems unlikely to be happy with an insurer who is trying to cut cancer care.

It is the government, of course, they lied. People finally seem to be catching on to that scam. Governments throughout history have loved taxes that are not obvious to the taxed. That is why, politicians in the US keep pushing for a value added tax (VAT). The tax which can be quite high is hidden in the price of the item. It certainly works for gasoline taxes. No one really pays any attention to what fraction of the cost is really going to the government.

For my doctor's, one the first things that I get asked when I come in, is what pharmacy I am using. I have no idea what they do, if someone cannot answer that. I suspect that it could be an issue in poorer areas, where someone might have to travel a considerable distance to reach one.