What is the prize of life?

https://marxjatalous.blogspot.com/

Kimmo Huosionmaa

The costs of the life are one thing, what are relative. That means that the prize of the product doesn't tell everything about how expensive it is. Also, the salary or actually average salaries of the country are influential about the prize of the products. But as we know the average salaries are not telling about the salary level of the country.  Here we would not mention the benefits, what are belonging to some positions in business life.


One is free living in the top metropolis around the world and the free cars and travels to those places. So, in this case, the payment in money can be very low, but the benefits like the right to use the company's flats for own purposes, and free flight tickets around the world are rising for that salary. Also, free use of the company's cars and free gasoline for them is the very big benefit, and of course nobody mention, if there is the free parking place for those cars in some parking houses.


The top salaries can pull the average salary higher than it really is, and this happens in the cases, where the top salaries are class of millions of Euros, and the rest of salaries are far away from those top payments for business leaders. But when we are going back to the question, how expensive is my homeland, we must realize that the necessary payments are making the influence for the prize of the life. If the electricity, fuel, clothes and other necessary bills are high, even the high salaries are not giving much buying power for people.


And if the person lives in the country, where the four seasons are totally different than in Florida, the clothes are also necessary payment. If the transportation payments are high, the price of products is also high. But the shop would not get very much money from that product.  The high salaries are not actually telling anything about the lifestyle of people, because the taxes can also be high.


The low taxes mean that society or the state would not pay something, what would the society pay in the nations, what have high taxes. Then the costs of living are high, would that mean, that the salaries are not actually so high what people think about they are. The necessary payments mean, the payments what we must make. And is the salary low or high is the complicated thing because big houses cause big payments.


Also, the cold winters cause the rise of the electric and fuel bills. One way to meter the level of salary is to calculate how much money is left for fun or unnecessary payments after the necessary payments. Here we are facing the situation, that the good salary doesn't mean the high class of life. The high salaries at the top of the society would pump the average salaries higher, and if the calculations are made only by using sums that would be very much different than the real difference for salaries.


The average payments should be calculated by the connecting to formulas the number of group of the people, what gets some salaries. That means the number of cleaners are connecting in those calculations and also the how many people would get the highest prize in the country. That would tell if some group gets far higher salaries than other. Let's take the fictional state, where  3% of individuals gets 3 million euros per month, and the rest of the persons earn 1000 Euros per month the first 3% would pull the average payments higher than they are.

Why we afraid artificial intelligence and new killer-drones?

(Picture I)

https://vapaaverkkojulkaiseminen.blogspot.com/p/why-we-afraid-artificial-intelligence.html

Kimmo Huosionmaa

This is a writing about the paradoxes of war and militarism. The militarism and war are things, what is strictly out from normal people head, and there are many things, why is not very tolerated to speak about the military systems. One of them is that the national security is limiting the comments about those things. And when we are looking very sharply to the militarism and army, we are seeing that our religion has been against violence in 2000 years, and we still fight together by using weapons.


And even if we are against violence, many people are getting their salary from military forces their equipment, and the weapons industry around them. War is good business for the weapon dealers, who offers more and more lethal and advanced weapons, what suits for many missions. Also, support equipment like GPS systems is a very good article, because the owner of those satellites can cut the location signals of those weapons, and that's why they cannot use against the deliverer of GPS-system, and that ties the clients more effectively to the influence of another actor in the field of international politics and strategies. Strategies have always depended on the politics, and that's why the political support for weapon trade is extremely important.

We must say that using killer-drones would create the military, where doesn't serve a single man. But here we must know, that if there would be autonomous killer robots, what replaces the places of the military personnel, we would come to the situation, that there would be no work for the men, who serve in those military forces. And one of the first group. what would be lost their jobs, are the fighter pilots, who serve in the war against terrorism. Those missions can be done by using drones, what just fly to the target, and then drop their weapons.


The human's advantage in comparing with robots is that human would make surprising movements for those aircraft. And that's why human pilots still win the drones, and this is the thing, what keeps those pilots in the cockpits. When we are thinking that the use of missiles and drones is somehow cowardly action, we must say, that the leaders of the terrorist organizations and military forces would not be in any danger in those operations. If some Tornado or Sukhoi-pilot would drop the bombs from the high altitude like 10 000 meters, there would not have the single missile, what could harm that aircraft, if the opponent is some kind of Isis-terrorist.


The smart bombs, what have satellite guidance are extremely sharp, and in those operations, they could destroy targets very effectively.  The civilians are not suitable to comment those things, because that would be harmful to the reputation of military forces. If those pilots would be replaced with the artificial intelligence, there would not be heroes in another side, what is, of course, our side. But when we are going to speak about the fighters, we could act like some children at the sandbox, who are asking each other, whose car is the best?


In this case, when we are talking about multipurpose-fighter contracts, we can ask the question, what is the best, 4th,5th or 6th. generation fighter or multirole aircraft? And in this case, people have the right to talk, which one is the best, Super-Hornet, Gripen or SU-27? And if the writings have no influence or expertise, why those people would not have right to write about those things? Of course, somebody says, that I'm writing this for revenge because I didn't have promotion in the 100th. anniversary of the  Finnish defense forces, and that's why I' writing about this thing.  But people have right to their opinions.

Sources:

https://www.mtv.fi/uutiset/kotimaa/artikkeli/siviilin-ei-kannata-tehda-paatelmia-havittajakaupan-huutelijat-harmittavat-puolustusministeri-niinistoa/6936626#gs.wCcrRNM

Picture I
http://nationalinterest.org/files/styles/main_image_on_posts/public/main_images/testflyging_av_forste_norske_f-35_-_22492943335_14_0.jpg?itok=1NsSjsUW