If things aren't close they don't need to be counted.
It's a fact of voting that most folks can vote in every election they can for their entire lives and never make any difference whatsoever, as in, change zero outcomes.
We have social pressure and propaganda otherwise to get people to do it, because if too many people rationally stay home then the system works poorly (in aggregate, that does change outcomes). It'd be much better to just mandate voting, because it is individually irrational and it's not great to base a system on tricking everyone into behaving irrationally.
This feels different because they're not bothering to even count them, but it's not materially different from any voting.
(barring the "sometimes not even counted then" part, of course)
I do understand that, in principle. But having a mathematical reason to let some 'difficult' votes go uncounted gives ammunition to those who would put political pressure on vote counting for their advantage, while also making people in general feel disenfranchised. (We have a huge problem with turnout in the US in general, and the message you're presenting only adds fuel to that!) This is why I wrote "sometimes not even counted then", because we do have a kind of apathy towards these small and easily disenfranchisable groups, and once you open it a crack, it becomes easier for some partisan to drive a wedge into it (see Bush v Gore 2000).
Also, it's a mistake to think that the only result of voting is to produce the winner of the election. The margin matters also. A politician winning by a large margin (or even a majority) can claim a 'mandate'; one who only wins by a plurality will have more spirited opposition.
We've seen this in the most recent US election; imagine if small percentage of those who didn't vote in the solid blue states because their vote didn't matter (a refrain I've heard from many people) actually voted, and Trump swept the swing states but lost the popular vote. The entire political landscape would be different, and we might even have momentum in the coming years to abolish the Electoral College.
So if we are fans of liberal democracy, we should be doing everything in our power to structure the system to make people feel as though their voice and vote matters.
I wouldn't say every American should try to be an expat. I think we'd be better off as a society if everyone traveled abroad more. I know most can't afford that, but I'd be totally down for a state funded 'study abroad' program for bright students. Other places have ideas we can learn from (and vice versa)
The average American thinks the U.S is the best country in the world. I say that as an American. To your point if people saw how the rest of the world lives and how happy many of those 7.88 Billion people are they would start being more vocal about our endless cycle of work until you are 85 to be able to pay your property taxes.
For pete's sake, it's not legal in many states to even cover slavery, the indian genocide, or japanese internment in a way that actually holds the US responsible
>Taxes are also very high. In addition to the usual income taxes, you pay a wealth tax and the threshold is very low (around 55k EUR in savings/assets) so this isn't only targeting very rich people. This makes it a pretty bad place to live if you care about investing and saving for the future.
This was a deal breaker for me as someone on the FIRE path. It's neighbor, Belgium, is much better in this respect.
FIRE people are funny, I wouldn't retire in belgium even if I was paid for it personally. Do you just order by tax rate and move wherever the number is the smallest ? I never heard of anyone moving to Belgium for anything other than family or cross border workers
Because Belgium didn't have capital gains tax it was actually common to (fake) retire to Belgium for wealthy individuals. There's supposed to be a capital gains tax from 2026 though.
Quality of life for integrated citizens or for FIRE leeches ? The truth from quality of life polls can be far from the truth of migrants on the ground. If you're leaving CA for Belgium to save money and enjoy a nice "quality of life" you're in for a treat lol. People aren't interchangeable units of meat that can be integrated and fully acclimated to new cultures/nations.
I could understand Amsterdam/Berlin for the vibe and the fact that everyone speaks english. Portugal/Spain/Greece/Italy for the weather, the nordic countries for nature and the overall lifestyle... but Belgium, really ? no offence but it's like Luxembourg, if it wasn't for tax reasons nobody would ever willingly move there
When you say 'everything is better' are you just talking about higher compensation > *? Cause I can think a number of 'quality of life' things that europe does better.
Money can buy quality of life, and people earning 100-150k in USA per person in household do confirm this. And this purchasing ability is not linear, because of the fixed costs for many good and services. Previously many countries with low salaries had corresponding low cost of life (and cost of quality of life), but today the costs are rising faster than salaries everywhere across the globe, so the biggest winners are people who earn more in absolute values, hence rich Americans.
It actually can't, not generally at least for US labor.
One of the most important measures of quality is work-life balance. Basically, your life kinda sucks if you work all the time, and then you also get fat and sick and die young(er).
People in the US work a lot, and often the more wealthy, but not most wealthy, work A TON. In programming, it's not atypical to have "superstar" staff engineers putting in easily 60-70 hours a week. Of course, not including the commute.
But then there's the time off. Oh, where to begin. We're at a point where 10 days of PTO accrued a year is considered decent. It's work work work, and you can put in 20 years of service... and get, like, an extra couple days. Maybe.
None of this scales down. For example, I'm supposed to be working 40 hours a week. I'm not of course, the baseline is 45 because 9-5 is actually 9-6. And I haven't left at 6 in at least a year, so even that is underestimating it. But suppose I do work 40 hours a week.
Would I take a 50% pay cut to work 20 hours? Fuck. Yes. Yes. In a heart beat. But I can't, I'd actually be taking an 80% pay cut if I do that, so I couldn't live. And it's like this for literally ALL jobs. I can't just "move up", because the work-life balance doesn't get better, it actually just gets worse! And at no point can I take a "step down" and work less, because then I'm flipping burgers.
I just tried it, and it worked flawlessly. Now, obviously it's not great for privacy per se, but I'm not jotting down my plans for world domination or anything
Fortunately, your link basically says it doesn't apply to something you wear on your hands or arms:
> By way of derogation from paragraph 1, the following products incorporating portable batteries may be designed in such a way as to make the battery removable and replaceable only by independent professionals:
> (a) appliances specifically designed to operate primarily in an environment that is regularly subject to splashing water, water streams or water immersion, and that are intended to be washable or rinseable;
But the only mention of "medical" comes right after it, and doesn't include hearing aids, future smart glasses, etc.:
> (b) professional medical imaging and radiotherapy devices, as defined in Article 2, point (1), of Regulation (EU) 2017/745, and in vitro diagnostic medical devices, as defined in Article 2, point (2), of Regulation (EU) 2017/746.
So ironically, the law allows disposable "junk devices" people are complaining about here, but doesn't allow factory-only serviceable hearing aids. How 'bout that? We can buy our smart rings and throw them away, but hearing aids will have to remain giant hunks of heavy plastic, or at least the models purchasable by average people who can't fly out of the EU to buy the good ones.
Edit: It's easy to downvote. I cited the relevant law. If I'm wrong, cite other law that explains why.
Hearing aids have had replaceable batteries since they were invented basically. I still remember my grandma 20 years ago fiddling with the small batteries, so that really is not a problem.
I don't order from amazon enough to justify prime, but a few times a year I sign up for a free subscription for a couple weeks or so.
The prices on amazon are comparable to what I see elsewhere for everything I've ordered. The thing that sets amazon apart is that their delivery is blazing fast compared to everyone else. Yes, the reviews are always a little suspect, if I see tons of empty 5 star reviews, I suspect the product, but in general, I've been satisfied with my purchases.
reply