Both. It's satire.
The "benefit" of world hunger is that it keeps people locked in their place and entrenches the status quo. This is actually true, and the author believes it, but he doesn't like it.
Many people benefit from world hunger though, and every time you hear that poverty is a hard problem to solve you should ask yourself, how much of that is actual problems and how much is the status quo resisting change?
And all the doom games.
Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley
They forgot to mention he's funding a PAC that is financing most of Trump's campaign workers. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/sep/26/trump-voter-turnout-elon-musk-pac
Let's hope it's as well run as Twitter.
I used to love that every time I drove through Bedford, the sign said "welcome to Bedford midpoint of the Oxford Cambridge arc"
Such a nonentity that even the council couldn't be fucked to say something about it.
In theory. It's just standard contract law. You violate the contract, so you have to make the other party right.
In practice, the court is likely to go, "You should've hired someone else to do the work. No costs"
No, not at all.
If the company fire you they have to pay you, e.g., three months notice, regardless of if they want you to do the work or not.
If you quit without notice, you might have to pay the costs incurred by you quitting early, but that's not your salary -because they now wouldn't be paying you.
Costs might be something like the company having to refuse an order because they now don't have enough people to do the work, or the increased cost of an expedited hiring process.
I don't know how common costs are in France, but the UK has the same rules and essentially no one ever claims costs. You need to really fuck over your employee in a very explicit and well documented way for this to even be considered.
The main disadvantage is you will have a bad reference if you leave without notice.
If you hate billionaires but like steak, have you tried eating the rich?
"Get out to vote" is a direct instruction. It means you personally should go and vote.
"Get out the vote" means you should get everyone else out to vote. "Vote" is being used as a mass noun that you want to make as large as possible -by getting it out and making sure people turn up.
That's just what they want you to think.
It's probably easiest to ignore what lib Dems say because they're don't have to put out a coherent policy platform, because no one expects them to be in power.
Instead look at the seats they want to win. Their plan has always been to mop up Tory votes in places that can't bring themselves to vote labour.
It puts them firmly in the middle between the torries and labour. It's also why e.g. they played down rejoining the EU at the last election. It might be their official stance, but it doesn't play well in the rural Tory seats they're targeting.