And the agreement continued with other nations, but IAEA started raising concerns in 2019 and Iran started breaking conditions. A bunch of countries tried to reinstate it under Biden but the Iranians wouldn't do it. Maybe they would have stayed compliant, maybe not. We'll never know. What we do know is that they wouldn't continue the agreement with other parties nor recommit to it later.
Because most world leaders are actors. They put on a show to get elected or retain power. They don't want to look weak and want to spin the final outcome to their favor. That can include one side allowing the other to take credit for an idea that wasn't their's.
Animals don't give off much waste heat. They evolved not to. And it's very hard to extract energy from small temperature gradients. The thermoelectric chargers that convert body heat to energy are only ~1% efficient. Compare to sunlight, which gives ~20x the watts per square inch, and can be converted at 20% efficiency. So a body heat charger needs to be roughly 400 times as big as a solar panel does.
This doesn't seem right. Anyone who has been in a cattle barn knows the kind of heat that cows give off. The energy demand for the sensors should be very small. 20% efficiency for the solar cells might be true on paper, but not in practice - diet, orientation, even needing 4x the solar cells because you cant guarantee the cells will always face up (collar rotates).
There is an interesting question - how can we prove paternity or other DNA based questions with identical twins (full sequencing looking for mutations?) and if we can't, how do we handle legal responsibilities in this sort of case?
no there isn't but i appreciate your amusing stupidity. this is a good example of the state of exception that most people with common sense intuitively understand.
I assume they are getting down voted because their statement is emotional and seemingly unsupported (seems to ignore child support). After accounting for child support, they should have similar resources. We can further investigate this when comparing to intact families - single parents of either sex have wealth gaps with intact families, yet outcomes in single father families tend to be close to the outcomes of the intact families. We would probably need more research into the topic to find concrete causes, but there doesn't seem to be much interest in that.
"I would have a lot more money even with child support just because I earn so much more than my wife."
That depends on the state, especially looking at after tax income due to the tax treatment on both sides.
"So having a man getting custidy is not normal at all. "
I agree there could be bias there. I think if we looked at households with deceased parents and then controlled for income, that would present a good elimination of bias.
There should be a cap in all states of child support. And independent of this, the person with a lot more income can do things the other person can't like getting a nani.
And lets be honest here: A single father is so rare that this alone raises eyebrows and questions. Ironically more like positive reactions and dismissive ones against the woman.
Independent of a cap, you don't pay 100% of your salary you pay a percentage. So at the end of they day, the afther still has more money left.
In texas there is a cap at $11.700 which will be $2k. Plenty of money left on the father side to provide better to the child.
And if you don't agree on the bias thing, how about you also bring up anything which supports your argument? Thats how an argument works.
Also you do know that there are 80% single mothers vs. 20% single fathers? 1970 it was btw. only 1%
If a man doesn't want to care for a kid, he doesn't has to while a mother has to. which elads to a wider spectrum of woman having to care for a kid.
Funny enough, i can't ven find a proper source for kids growing up better with a single father.
But i found this: "Children in single-father families exhibit worse behavior, and are slightly disadvantaged in terms of cognitive skills compared with children living with a single mother (Downey, Ainsworth-Darnell, and Dufur 1998)."
"So at the end of they day, the afther still has more money left."
Maybe, maybe not. Oftentimes the formula used ends up making a near even pre-tax split between the parents when the lower earner gets custody. The higher earner also pays the income taxes on the support payment, potentially leaving them with less after taxes. That could be different when factoring in alimony and when the higher earner gets custody.
"In texas there is a cap at $11.700 which will be $2k. Plenty of money left on the father side to provide better to the child."
Texas is an exception and not the rule. It's a major reason people like Elon move/live there.
"If a man doesn't want to care for a kid, he doesn't has to while a mother has to."
This isn't true. Either parent can abandon kids. Both parents have fought for custody in courts. The increase in single father households is a reflection on reduction in gender roles and court bias.
"(Downey, Ainsworth-Darnell, and Dufur 1998)"
That's old and from a time when single father homes were very scarce (by your own admission). Here is an article with multiple studies cited that are more recent.
Yet it's well known that if you want someone to change their mind it's most likely to occur if they think it's their own idea/doing. You're more likely to argue with me than if you just read sources you found and independently came to the conclusion.
Not the same person, but here's something. Just to note, the income portion mention might be lacking additional investigation as child support is typically not accounted for in income numbers.
The buried lede in that link is that mothers who don't have custody of their children are more likely to remain in close emotional contact with their children than fathers are when in the same position. So children living with dad still benefit from having both parents involved in their upbringing. Which undermines OP's assertion that this child would be better off without their mother around.
Yes, involvement from both parents seems to be the major factor regardless of sex. There is likely additional research needed on why fathers disengage more when the mother has primary custody. With a majority of single parent households being headed by mothers, it seems another area ripe for research is how unlikely it is that the majority of fathers are disengaged to create such a large effect on the whole single mother cohort. Likewise, with the way custody tends to be grated in court, you would expect single father households to have a higher percentage of unengaged mothers due if it was determined that the mothers were the lesser choice for child welfare. I would guess looking at outcomes where one parent died would mostly control for that support mechanism.
I'm at a different comapny and it's the same. They have some basic framework/matrix, but managers aren't going to help you get to the next level. In my experience the matrix isn't followed anyways - they promote whoever they want whether or not they meet the stuff in the matrix. It's all just opinion based anyways.
reply