im not sure its any better or worse, really.
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion - Page 585
| Forum Index > Dota 2 General |
|
BluemoonSC
SoCal8933 Posts
im not sure its any better or worse, really. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
SKC
Brazil18828 Posts
I would say casinos are far worse at tricking people into spending money they shouldn't, and slots are the dumbest part in it. Unless they look like this: + Show Spoiler + | ||
|
TheEmulator
28101 Posts
| ||
|
BluemoonSC
SoCal8933 Posts
e: emu, personally i'll spend $10 when the pot gets really big bc you never know..i have relatives who drop anywhere between $20-$50 a week into it...thats a bill that could be paid. | ||
|
andyrau
13015 Posts
On February 24 2015 06:40 CorsairHero wrote: are your tax sheltered accounts maxed? 401k/ira/roth shit or something not maxed but i like the advantages of having liquidity. like you said smartest thing to do would be to put it into a large cap etf On February 24 2015 07:12 Plansix wrote: Lottery tickets are pretty bad and worst when you consider they are specifically designed to pray on the poor and uneducated. technically the lottery system in america gives a generous portion of the proceeds to the education system which is always the first thing to get budget cuts but one of the best long-term investments in a society thats something i can get behind cause god knows there are a lot of clueless people that could benefit from more education | ||
|
CorsairHero
Canada9491 Posts
![]() making money long term isn't hard and not investing is part of the wealth inequality problem. Most people don't have the discipline to follow through with it though | ||
|
Shaella
United States14828 Posts
| ||
|
CorsairHero
Canada9491 Posts
On February 24 2015 07:49 Shaella wrote: who CARES its canada. just 4 u Vanguard Total Stock ETF (VTI) Vanguard Total International Stock ETF (VXUS) Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (BND) | ||
|
eieio
United States14512 Posts
On February 24 2015 07:49 Shaella wrote: who CARES its canada. ![]() | ||
|
TheEmulator
28101 Posts
| ||
|
eieio
United States14512 Posts
| ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
| ||
|
tehh4ck3r
Magrathea7084 Posts
| ||
|
SKC
Brazil18828 Posts
It's a bit absurd that some places in the US would consider them closer to lotteries than casino style gambling. | ||
|
BluemoonSC
SoCal8933 Posts
![]() | ||
|
crms
United States11933 Posts
Here is a high upboat le redditor explanation in the thread for that article: + Show Spoiler + Seriously though, it's EXTREMELY important to keep in mind what this graph is representing. This is basically "risk of overdose" chart. Ratio between Toxic dose vs. average intake. So something like alcohol, you only need to consume 2-4x as much as a "normal" dose to be at risk of serious health concerns. Meanwhile something like 15x meth consumption compared to normal is required for a toxic dose, while it is virtually impossible to overdose on Marijuana. It is interesting to note how low the relative toxic doses of two of the most common legal substances are (tobacco and alcohol). I didn't even realize Nicotine Poisoning was a thing. This in no way takes into account any sort of other consequences of drug use. Side effects, addiction rates, injury due to consumption (drunk driving) and countless other factors are being ignored, as that is not what this test is about. Meth may be only a moderate risk of overdose, but there are also a large number of other health issues, long and short term, that must also be considered. TLDR: This chart is all about how much it takes to overdose. You may not overdose on meth, but it can still fuck you up long and short term. and here is what MOE is (Margin of Exposure) + Show Spoiler + The MOE is a tool used by risk assessors to consider possible safety concerns arising from the presence in food and feed of substances which are both genotoxic (that is, which may damage DNA, the genetic material of cells) and carcinogenic. The MOE is a ratio of two factors which assesses for a given population the dose at which a small but measurable adverse effect is first observed and the level of exposure to the substance considered. Risk assessors at EFSA use the MOE approach to consider possible safety concerns arising from the presence in food and feed of substances which are both genotoxic and carcinogenic. The presence of substances which are both genotoxic and carcinogenic in food and feed, while not desirable, could result from environmental pollution or manufacturing processes. The MOE is not used to assess the safety of regulated substances deliberately added to the food chain (for instance food and feed additives or food contact materials). However, EFSA’s Scientific Committee advised in a statement published in March 2012 that it could be useful in assessing the safety of any genotoxic and carcinogenic impurities present in such substances at very low levels. Use of the MOE can in this way help support risk managers in defining possible actions required to keep exposure to such substances as low as possible. EFSA’s Scientific Committee published a first opinion in October 2005 recommending the use of the MOE approach for the safety assessment of contaminants that are both genotoxic and carcinogenic. | ||
|
andyrau
13015 Posts
wheres my tinfoil hat | ||
|
teddyoojo
Germany22369 Posts
| ||
|
icystorage
Jollibee19350 Posts
![]() | ||
| ||
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/LqUaPjv.png)
![[image loading]](http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/canada.png )
![[image loading]](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=http://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2015/02/canna_risk.png&w=1484)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/humEcjs.png)