Mörder ist, wer aus Mordlust, zur Befriedigung des Geschlechtstriebs, aus Habgier oder sonst aus niedrigen Beweggründen, heimtückisch oder grausam oder mit gemeingefährlichen Mitteln oder um eine andere Straftat zu ermöglichen oder zu verdecken, einen Menschen tötet.

"niederer Beweggrund" would be "base motive", Habgier is greed. And they're only one possible way to qualify murder. As I emphasised there, using means that are a danger to public safety is another.

Dolus eventualis aka Eventualvorsatz, which can indeed be summed up as "willingly hazarding the consequences". AFAIU in English that's not a type of intent but recklessness. It certainly is not intent to kill someone, just intent to not give a fuck whether someone dies, there's a difference there.

Trying to sum up the stuff that distinguishes Totschlag from Mord with "malice" is also rather... vague. The key factor in this case (or at least the aspect that's easiest to establish) is killing by using means that are a danger to public safety, to wit, a car going 226km/h. Certainly doesn't fit the dictionary definition of "malice".

Well, I wouldn't want to live in China or the US. Heck even visit. They're both bad in their own ways, and also bad in very similar ways, in particular completely rampant capitalism.

Foxconn is not the municipal water supplier, the one you'd be dealing with if you don't live in those barracks. Those high water bills are if you live in the "free" barracks, i.e. they're fooling people into thinking the barracks are free (yay! I can keep all of my wages!) and then they're getting billed for the shower by the litre or something. It's scummy but TBH also quintessentially Chinese. Their roommates are probably telling them they're stupid for believing Foxconn.

And if minimum wage doesn't suffice to have your own regular apartment, with non-extortionary water prices -- well, complain with the CCP. Though, I have to add as a smug European, working full-time and not being able to make rent is also very much a thing in the US.

Yes. That's one of the things you can criticise Foxconn for. Do it. Though they're certainly not the only company in China who are fucking over employees, making false or misleading promises, etc. China does not have rule of law, grease some party hands and you can get away with a hell a lot of illegal behaviour.

Also where in that article does it say that Foxconn would force people to live in the barracks. Not paying workers properly is one thing, actual slave labour, keeping people against their will etc. will cause the party to crack down on your operation, hard. Only they are allowed to do that.

Or maybe you’ll dismiss this as Western imperialist propaganda?

Do you take me for a tankie? Count the number me and you criticised the CCP in this thread and compare, please.

People don't work long at Foxconn. Poor, rural Chinese get a job at those kinds of places to have money to settle down somewhere else, to open a small business, to re-invest into the family farm, whatnot. They're thinking "I need this and this much money to open a noodle shop, if I live in barracks It's going to take me X months to have the money together, if I rent an apartment X+Y months", and then they do it.

The whole migratory worker thing is a Chinese phenomenon, feel free to criticise it but most of that criticism should be directed at the CCP who are under-investing into rural areas at the expense of a couple of big, centralised, developments.

Also how often do I have to repeat "employees are not required to live in barracks" until you acknowledge it. In fact, I'm going to answer nothing but that until you say it in your own words.

How much is tuition in that place the dorm picture is from? I bet just living in the dorms is more than Chinese minimum wage.

I'm not American. I lived in a flat when studying. From what I've heard you can't even cook in US student dorms that'd be an absolute no-go for me. Also, roommates are required and you get no choice in who that's going to be.

But maybe a better comparison would be to bunks on an oil rig... with the difference that Foxconn workers aren't required to sleep in barracks, they're free to sleep elsewhere. No such option on an oil rig. You also see temporary accommodation on larger construction sites. Or farmers offering bunk-beds to seasonal workers.

Now why would they fear Ukraine joining a non-confontational alliance?

I don’t think Russia sees NATO as non-confrontational.

If Russia is so afraid of NATO attacking them, then why did they withdraw pretty much all troops from the Finnish border? There's barely border guards there.

As far as I'm aware it's not a requirement. They're there to make money and the company barracks are cheap. Students in the US also aren't required to live in dormitories, but more often than not they do.

Google doesn't have a million employees. It also doesn't have company barracks, if a google engineer wants to off themselves they're probably going to do it at home or on the Bay Bridge, not at headquarters. Where you probably can't open the windows on the upper floors.

But if you can find suicide rates of google employees -- not just on-site, but overall, I'm all ear. You can look at literally any population, it's never going to be zero.

Not really. 14 in a year out of 1m employees makes a rate of 1.4/100k let's see how that number compares to WHO statistics. Armenia has a rate of 1.4 in the 25-34 age range, and it's the second lowest. China average in that group is 5.9.

What you're looking it is the suicide rate of people of a population which thinks it has a future: Students got into university, kids from poor villages made it into Foxconn to make money -- yes, minimum wage, but they're making money. Their alternative would be working on the family farm for much less than that (though including room and board). Or work in construction, a much more physically demanding and dangerous job. There's not many options in China for rural people.

There's a fucking fuckton to criticise about Foxconn not to speak of China or tankies or capitalists in general. This isn't one of those things. On the contrary, focussing in on a false narrative detracts from actual issues such as worker's safety, forced overtime, the right-out military company culture, etc. When did you last hear about those things? Did you hear about them, ever? Nah, it's always the suicides.

I mean, it depends. Sub-replacement birthrate means gerontocracy and you're currently seeing where that is leading. Pensioners by and large aren't great at changing things.

World-wide population growth is going to stop naturally in the next couple of decades as the last big countries finish their demographic transition, after that there's going to be at least a slight decrease and then stabilisation as industrialised countries figure out how to have replacement-level birthrates again. The earth certainly can sustain that many people indefinitely, with plenty of room to spare. Also at our living standards (minus cars plus public transit), and even with fewer working hours.

If you don't want to have kids fine don't have kids but the climate argument is BS. Don't think of it as producing a consumer, but producing a voter interested in the state of the earth 100 years from now.