Yes you can. Under View, then settings, there is a button to change contact email. This is on the new UI, but I'm sure the option exists nevertheless in the settings menu.

So here's my set up. I have a 30 inch pc monitor, with the appropriate computational power behind it. My 360 is hooked up to a monitor and uses the same sound system that my pc uses. I know I want to buy Mass Effect 2, but alas I sit and wonder without much tangible argument which platform I want to play it on. Anyone encountering notable experiences that are unique to either? I don't think I'm going to care to port my ME1 character over, since I can't remember anything I might have chosen years ago.

Bump. C'mon lurkers, get come on out.

Water with charge.

I'm required to complete a research essay. I'm trying to create or find a good topic. The only restriction is that it barely relates to a book published in the last decade. And by barely, I mean literally the smallest connection. I know my bit about economics, psychology, neuroscience, and of western culture. I ask you, my fellow posters and lurkers, to brainstorm.

Ideas I've been considering:

- The effectiveness of social programs that employ force as opposed to those that do not employ force(Government run versus charity organizations). I look away from this, since I don't want to further reiterate to myself certain political ideas that are teetering on fanaticism.

- The importance of family in the psychological development of children. Can't find a recent book on the subject that I can agree with on a logical/procedural basis.

- The economics of creating alternate energy schemes. (Boring as hell, but I can do it I suppose).

- The evolution of the American dream from one of individual enterprise to the suburban life. (Any good books that follow empiricism as the logical method behind the writing?)

Any other ideas?

//Activating shifty eyes

DOLLAR wages have gone up, but REAL WAGES have gone down. You seem intelligent enough that I don't have to explain the difference, so there you go.

Also, benefits today are nothing like they were when I entered the workforce in the 1990's. You get NOTHING today compared to the benefits available then. Not only that, but co-pays and premiums are way, way, way higher.

I'm not saying everyone should make the same wages, that's just dumb. However, I do think companies get away with what they can by paying as little as they can....of course except when it comes to management (who afterall pulls the strings).

If workers are making less today, and if economic principles are to blame for such, then it would only make since that CEOs would make less. But the two trends are opposites: CEOs and Management have increased their pay (as they, they themselves have decided they need an increase) completly in opposition to the performance of the rest of the company.

If it were true that JUST economic conditions were affecting the real wages of workers, then CEO pay would also decrease. This is not the case. What IS happeing, is CEO and management are skimming THEIR profits off before allocating funds to the rest of the company. How else do you explain bailed-out CEOs taking home millions in bonuses?

It's an unfair practice. If you want the market to rule wages, let it. But that means that CEOs and management need to keep their paws off their own wages and let the market decide what they should earn instead of making that decision themselves.

br0kenrabbit

Can I ask where you got this graph? I don't mean to impugn your integrity, but I'd like to know. 4.3% over 15 years may seem small, but if inflation is targeted around 3%, it isn't that terrible for only 15 years time. Now, as for the far larger increases in corporate finances, let us remember where that goes. Most of the capital is going into the company's assets, new factories, new wages for more employees. If it goes to shareholders, most shareholders will turn the money back into investment, again planting the seeds of more future jobs. As for CEO pay, they are just the result of supply and demand. These people happen to be the only people who have the tangible attributes that can orchestrate the ongoing growth of massive companies. Let me postulate that these CEO's were and are critical to the management of the large companies that supply all the benefits of modern living. Of course they will work for the highest bidder, and the demand for them just happened to be that high, and the supply is just that low. I don't want to sound offensive, but can the average American plan the construction of high technology fabrication facilities, organize the supply chains and the marketing effort that brings us as consumers the material goods we love? Again, I don't mean to sound evil, but the marketplace says that these CEOs are worth their pay. If they weren't, any right-minded board of shareholders would immediately boot them out.

As for a conspiracy of management against labor, I honestly cannot believe that it exists. Hasn't labor been the devil at times, crippling domestic automakers with contracts that ultimately end in job loss as the company at large fails to compete? Are you to say that there is a conspiracy within management to increase their own pay? If I postulate the management is greedy, hence is their motivation to start a cabal, then I also invoke then that the conspiracy won't last long. At the first available instance, someone will lack foresight and break the rules, ending the conspiracy out of personal needs. The same emotion of greed that would create a conspiracy would end it just as quickly.

[QUOTE="aveman1"]

Well, not entirely. The expansion of any economy is based on credit, for investments allow firms to create production facilities which then later pay back the intial loans. While this may not scale all that well to an individual, it can be appropriate if every party is aware of the rules. The problem is that as busy citizens of the modern world, we may not have the opportunity to learn all of the contract material, and how it applies.

trust_nobody

To be absurdly technical, interest rates are based on a number of metrics. I believe that credit firms will be priced in relation to the predicted rate of inflation, and to the demand and supply of the currency, which is influenced by the Federal Reserve. If a credit frim attempted to go above the normal rate, it would be undercut and lose market share.

I do not believe that any large credit lender is actively attempting to trick its customer. If a customer is tricked, they are less finaicially stable, which makes it harder for the customer to pay back his or her credit extentions. The credit card companies don't want the masses to lose their homee; they stand instead to make more if everyone is doing well, for everyone can then do more business and the credit card company can give out more credit.

Well, not entirely. The expansion of any economy is based on credit, for investments allow firms to create production facilities which then later pay back the intial loans. While this may not scale all that well to an individual, it can be appropriate if every party is aware of the rules. The problem is that as busy citizens of the modern world, we may not have the opportunity to learn all of the contract material, and how it applies.

It depends on your unique contract. As for any general use advice: Pay on time, everytime, and maintain only a few credit cards.