AI genie?

That’s how we got “Layla”…but it didn’t work.

I thought that was part of “some meds”.

In that a Gollum caganer?

The question implies that the OP wants to create one giant filesystem with all of their data on it. This has its own issues, especially if it is in /home. For one, as someone else pointed out, it’s fairly difficult to run your system without /home mounted, and that makes it difficult to resize. Sure, you can set up an admin account with it’s home in the /root filesystem and then log into that - but that seems to be a lot of work in itself.

If it was me, I’d set up mount points for file systems that make sense. Maybe /data/Photos, or /data/Music, or data/AppData, or whatever. As much as possible, I’d just point whatever software I was using to those new directories to find the data. If that isn’t feasible, for whatever reason, then a symbolic link from /home/Photos to /data/Photos will work seamlessly in most cases.

As far as I’m concerned, after administering enterprise systems using Unix going as far back as the early 90’s, symbolic links are a key tool in managing disk space that you shouldn’t just dismiss because it’s “an unnecessary layer of complexity”. Having smaller, purpose designed, file systems allows you to manage them better. Sticking everything into /home is probably not the right answer for anyone.

Resizing partitons is often not necessary. Use a symbolic link to relocate a subdirectory to another file system. For 99% of use cases this is indistinguishable from expanding the partition.

I guess they figure that Linux users already know what they are doing when it comes to security.

Except that the amount for a couple in the article was 24K, which is 8K less than individually. You even quoted the 24K and disregarded it.

If you have 60K employment income, then the UBI would push you to 76K and the UBI would effectively be taxed at the highest rate. If your only income was UBI then you would exceed the basic personal exemption, and would pay zero tax.

Everyone gets the same UBI, but some people pay more tax on it if they have other income.

If you did work in some reasonable proportion of married couples, it might get close to break even. Then remember that CPP, OAS and EI all disappear, and whatever funds they have would contribute to UBI. CPP at max draw by itself is almost as much UBI.

Then, for people that also have some other form of income, some quantity of the UBI would be taxed back.

I’m not saying that it really does scale up, but your analysis is overly simplistic.

Yikes! My mistake, $60K/yr, not $100K/yr. Basically, what it would cost you to buy an annuity at that age.

Fixed my earlier comment.

For sure, assuming that the annual amount isn’t indexed to inflation. But the question is just simple math if it isn’t. See my longer answer.

Indexed, $100K/yr wins hands down if you’re young.

Or you could invest the $100K a year. You have to compare apples to apples.

My father, who worked in Group Insurance for 35 years, had the best rule of thumb for retirement planning…

He said that $1M at age 65 is worth $60K a year, indexed to inflation, for life.

So, work from there. The original question didn’t mention indexing, so you’ll have to figure that in. $100K in 50 years will probably be below the poverty line. Also, if not indexed, then the question is almost a simple question of math. The $100K is 5% of $2M, so if you can get a better return than that then the lump sum is better…QED.

If you are younger than 65 then the amount you can draw each year will be lower because you’ll need to stretch it out longer.

Let’s assume that the amount is indexed to inflation, because that makes the most sense (to me, at least). If you were, say, 30 years old, then the annual amount from the capitol might be as low as $20K in order to last your whole life. In that case you be better off with the annual amount.

If you are older, then it becomes more and more advantageous to take the lump sum, and the two amounts are probably equivalent at around age 60.

Finally, there’s risk. With a lump sum you are at the mercy of the markets and your investment decisions. With the annual amount, the risk is involved with the entity issuing that payout. If it’s a government entity, depending on the country, it might be way safer than some private company.

[Edit: Really bad error fixed. $1M at 65 is worth $60K/yr, not $100K/yr]

I’m not so sure about the “jaws of Victory” bit. I think that Canadians were just fed up with Trudeau, couldn’t bring themselves to vote NDP and ended up polling Conservative. So it wasn’t really support for PP, but unsupport for Trudeau.

Take Trudeau out of the equation and the Liberals came flooding back to the party.

I’m not sure that I can remember that being done for any leader at the federal level in the past 50 years or so. We’ll have to wait and see.

He still gets to be party leader, but he cannot sit in Parliament. There are two remedies for this. First, the party can choose a new leader from their elected MPs. Second, they can have an MP in a “safe” riding step down and then ask the government for a special by-election in that riding.

I think it’s everything.

Not just the tarrifs themselves, but the idea of the tarrifs pisses us off. It’s a betrayal, and we’ve done nothing wrong and we’ve just helped the US to thrive.

The 51st state stuff is just added icing.

You can still buy American wine in some grocery stores, as long as they have stock. But the Liquor Control Boards in each province aren’t bringing any more in.

My local grocery store has some White Zinfandel still on the shelf. It doesn’t appear to be moving. Every time I go by, I turn the bottles in the front around - you can’t turn them upside-down.

That’s probably how the penguins got included.

This just in: Water is wet!!!

Who said anything about re-election? Perhaps a coronation?