Could you imagine if both of them just suddenly died of natural causes from old age in the same day before the election... like... the power vacuum would be wild.
Could you imagine if both of them just suddenly died of natural causes from old age in the same day before the election... like... the power vacuum would be wild.
First, an educated populous brings the entire economy up. It creates new markets, new fields and industries, and more opportunities for everyone. It also takes a large chuck of the workforce into offices, labs, and around the world instead of competing with you for your machining job at the factory, which would devalue your role and result in lowering your wage, if you got the job at all.
Second, the only reason for the massive amounts of student debt is due to universities massively inflating the cost of an education to milk the government of their federal student loans. This doesn't address that directly, but it applies pressure on the government to reign in these bloated tuition and book costs that universities are pushing.
Third, if we're so afraid Joe the Plumber and the rest of the Working Class might have to help his fellow man with 3 cents of his annual tax rate, then increase the tax on the wealthy controlling class to cover it instead. The same tax bill will mean waaaaay less to them.
Edit: for clarification, that was a rebuttal to Graham's comment, not yours, OP
So... I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think this is quite right. Intent does matter in a criminal act, yes. This is called mens rea. It is the intent and knowledge to commit a criminal act, rather than just the action itself. For example, causing the death of another intentionally (without reasonable cause like self defense) is murder. Killing them unintentionally is only a crime if you were criminally negligent (which also includes knowledge and intent) and said negligence caused the death.
However, motivation is not the same as intent and a potentially unethical or political motivation to perform an otherwise legal action does not make the act illegal. Especially in the execution of the law. If your political rival commits a crime, even though you may care more about their political challenge then actual justice in that case, you still can and should execute the law exactly as you would for anyone else. The alternative would be to allow personal bias against the criminal to make them immune to the law, which can clearly not be the solution. So long as due process is followed, the law is impartial, and the trial is fair, it doesn't matter what the motivation of the prosecution was. They are still subject to the law like anyone else.
I just had this same argument with my Father-In-Law a couple weeks ago about the Trump convictions. He said it was all politically motivated, so it was wrong. I said, maybe it was politically motivated, I don't know. I can't read the minds of dozens of people that I've never met before. But it doesn't matter if it was or not, because Trump still committed the crimes, as was demonstrated before a jury, and he was given a fair trial like any other person was and found guilty by a jury his lawyers helped to select. What anyone's hopes or reasons were are their own and completely inconsequential.
Let it be know that if you take office while actively committing fraud, embezzlement, and lying through your teeth about nearly every single detail of your life and accomplishments, the rest of Congress will ONLY let that slide for 11 months! You've been warned!
“Racial isolation” itself is not a harm;
Yes. It is. Isolation inherently breeds tribalism, prejudice, and fear of the other. It is extremely harmful.
only state-enforced segregation is.
And what would you call racial Gerrymandering if not state-enforced segregation, Clarence? I mean, apart from voter manipulation and disenfranchisement, that is.
After all, if separation itself is a harm, and if integration therefore is the only way that Blacks can receive a proper education, then there must be something inferior about Blacks.
No, the idea that separation is harmful doesn't presuppose the reason being that black people are inferior. It is harmful because black people are often treated as inferior and are not given equal treatment, resources, and opportunity. Black schools in the Jim Crow south weren't worse because they were full of and run by black people. They were worse because they were fucking broke. Schools are largely funded by property taxes. And black home ownership has always been lower than white home ownership, and the value of those homes (and thus their property taxes) has always been lower on average. That means less money going to black schools per capita. Less money means fewer resources and opportunities. It's pretty fucking simple, Clarence.
I'm sure your next question is why black families owned fewer and cheaper homes. Well, the first and most obvious reason is that black families started with a handicap. They came from poor slaves who had nothing and had to start completely from scratch. White Americans had control of industry, agriculture, commerce, and government. Black Americans had to play catch up once freed.
Then, when the GI benefits of the returning soldiers of WWII helped millions of white families buy their first homes, those benefit weren't honored for black soldiers. When new valuable homes and nice schools were being built in the suburbs, those neighborhoods were red-lined, preventing black families from buying these valuable properties even when they had the finances to do so. When new highways and industrial works were being put in, things that bring pollution and drop property values, those things were intentionally built in and around black neighborhoods, robbing the existing black home owners of long term wealth. Do those things still happen now? Mostly no, and never explicitly racially biased. But this is not ancient history. This is in your life time, Clarence. It's effects are still seen today and black people are still poorer, own fewer homes and less expensive homes as a result of generations of oppressive and unequal treatment. It's absurd to equate acknowledging black poverty with deeming blacks inferior. This state was inflicted in them, not their fault.
Under this theory, segregation injures Blacks because Blacks, when left on their own, cannot achieve. To my way of thinking, that conclusion is the result of a jurisprudence based on a theory of black inferiority,” he said in 2004.
If black people had been left to their own, they wouldn't have been slaves, wouldn't have been screwed out of their benefits they earned fighting for this country that hated them, wouldn't have been forbidden from moving into white neighborhoods, and wouldn't have had their homes tainted against their will by industry and transport that enriched white people. Let's also not discount the effects of unequal treatment under the law, unequal enforcement of the law, and unequal justice for crimes against them. Let's also not forget that at the time the Brown decision was made, black people were still being FUCKING LYNCHED, CLARENCE. This fallacy of "separate but equal" has no legs to stand on. It never existed. Fuck all the way off, Clarence, you fucking sell out self-hating prick.
Well. No points for subtlety.
What sort of asinine take is "Boat hit bridge? DIVERSITYYYYYYYYYY!" shaking fists
Elon Musk says he refused to give Kyiv access to his Starlink communications network over Crimea to avoid complicity in a "major act of war".
So, in the classic trolley problem, Elon's choice is to remove the track switch that his company produced so that no one else could use it to make a choice.
"Sorry, guys. Looks like those innocent civilians tied to the tracks are going to have to die so that I am not tangentially and tenuously responsible for your choice to save them in exchange for the deaths of Russian soldiers attacking your sovereign lands and people (cough and lose money from the Kremlin as a result cough)"
There's no "right" answer to the trolley problem. But there are definitely wrong ones.
Ancient city-sized dragon that is eons older that any surviving historical text or man-made structures in the world, speaking to the dwarf that stands bravely before her: "Well ain't chu just the most precious lil' thang I ever did lay eyes on! Wut's yer name, sugah?"
It is. But also still, in a way, worse. He's not creating or molding a show to fit the far-right viewpoint of the current Russian administration. It's pretty indicative of the negative merit, substance, and viewpoint expressed on his current show that airs on American television if the Russian government under Putin is taking it, as is, and putting it onto their citizen's tv's.
Is it possible? Yes. Shifts in personality, desires, etc. can happen for a number of reasons. People have had head injuries and had shifts in sexuality, including a heavily increased/decreased sex drive or shift in orientation, as a result. Sexual traumas, particularly on children, can have lasting effects on their sexuality and sexual development both before and after adolescents, possibly (likely even) including homosexual behaviors where it may not have happened before... though that's obviously not possible to know for sure. And to a lesser extent, situations like long term isolation, desperation, abuse, or social pressure can make people more likely to act in ways that wouldn't have before as well.
Is any of that the norm or common for homosexuals? No. First, none of those situations is likely to result in a mentally stable, well adjusted adult that simply has attractions to the same sex. Those shifts in sexuality are likely to be just one of many symptoms of those traumas, most of the rest of which will be notably aberrant behaviors or traits. Second, the majority of people who have same sex attraction, whether exclusively or in addition to opposite sex attraction, have similar stories about being interested in the same sex from the time they first began to have any such attractions. Whether there is some genetic, developmental and/or environmental component that differentiates or influences ones sexual interest is not really clear. What is clear is that those interests seem to be largely set by the time they begin to manifest and be expressed in adolescence.
The seven deadly sins, from right to left: gluttony, sloth, envy, lust, wrath, pride and Becky
Rest in peace, Matthew. Like many, I've been concerned about him for years. This is terrible news.
What's funny is that she hasn't endorsed anyone. But they keep raising such a stink on the mere thought that she might endorse Biden and have demanded that she doesn't voice her Biden endorsement far and wide to the point, now, it has become assumed by most that she does endorse him. If anyone does, in fact, give a damn about her endorsement, the wackos yelling on the right have made her de facto position a pro-Biden position. Exactly what they're complaining about. Now she doesn't even need to endorse him in order to basically endorse him. Dolts.
I'm in tech and "computer programmer" has always sounded to me like a grandma phrase. Like how all gaming consoles are referred to as "the Nintendo" or "the game station".
A Star Trekker on a big pecker? Resting scowl on a giant fowl? Half breed on an avian steed? Vulcan on a Hulk Hen? S'Chn T'Gai on a mount that can't fly?
Tomorrow's headline after Trump gets secreted away to a CIA prison: "Trump blacksited by Biden after promoting immunity for POTUS crimes. Irony lost on him."
A popular text editor that's infamous for being difficult to exit/turn off for new users, for additional context
Love his channel. He finds the most interesting devices and topics to talk about. Even when some of the electrical details go over my head, I still learn a lot. I share his fascination with pre- microprocessor electromechanical devices, even though I also love a good microprocessor. I annoy my wife with stuff I've learned from him all the time. Yes, including water heater facts. And because of him, I now run hot water tap until it runs hot before starting my dishwasher to make the first rinse more effective.
Also the man makes me feel contempt over things I had never even considered before. Taillights and blinker behaviors on cars, the rarity of single unit heating and cooling heat pumps, American outlets, power cords, and non-clicky switches, etc. And his indignant rage over product manufacturers competely missing the point of standards or choosing things like aesthetics or marketability over efficiency, safety, or usability becomes my own indignant rage.
In my junior year of high school, my (very strict) English teacher teacher was going over some common mistakes native English speakers make. One such mistake was using hanged vs. hung. She said when you do your laundry and put your wet clothes on the clothesline, they are "hung". When a death row prisoner is executed at the gallows, he is "hanged". Not "hung". "Things cannot be hanged. Men cannot be hung."
There was a brief silence and then, yadda, yadda, yadda, two of my classmates got sent to the vice principal.
It's the British version of the Drag Event Handler, init?
Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, loves talking about his creepy spy app he and his son have on their phone that alerts the other if they visit naughty sites. So the writers of this proposal and all that vote for it would be happy to put the same program on their devices and computers, right? And tie that straight to a public feed we can all see? Great Great.
There's a decent occult/sci-fi novel series called the Laundry Files wherein people sometimes stumble across or come up with forbidden mathematics that actually functions as a form of occult spellcraft. They then get forcibly drafted into this secret government organization that works to protect the world from extraterrestrial threats, occult creatures like vampires and succubi, and the lovecraftian horrors from the depths of the oceans or the fridge fringe edges of space. They're like the men in black crossed with Lovecraft crossed with a British comedy about monotonous office life and bureaucracy. It's a pretty entertaining series. Highly recommend.
Also, if I rewind to the Neolithic and I see a bunch of cavemen, sabertooth tigers and a Schwinn chained to a bike rack, I'm not going to just fast forward from there. I have other questions.
If they ever get divorced, family dinner night is gonna be real awkward.
So... do you think he has the objectivity to regret all of his actions yet? Not regret as in that he did anything morally wrong because he's far too much a narcissist to think that. But rather regret that he put himself in the crosshairs to be actually held to account for the first time when he's previously been able to mostly get away with criminal shit his whole life.
If he hadn't run for office, he could have continued to be just another sleazeball rich gangster wannabe in New York and probably lived out the rest of his life without any real consequences for being a piece of shit. He'd have been insulated by low expectations and mostly being a forgettable joke of a man. But now that he poses a real and ongoing danger to the public and democracy itself, people are motivated to hold him liable for his dozens of crimes in several major high profile cases.
Do you think he wishes he'd have just stayed in Manhattan and continued screwing people over in his property deals and business schemes? I bet it keeps him up at night, and it should.
That's not an apostrophe, it's a comma floating away.
This better but awaken something in me...
Right. Filing taxes should only be necessary if you have itemized writeoffs or wish to contest the IRS's statement of your tax liability. They already know what you earned their your employer, what's been paid in taxes, what basic credits your qualify for, etc. They know what you owe so long as you didn't have expenses to apply for that they couldn't assume or know about. The only reason they don't already do that or, at least until now, have a free public system for filing, it's because tax companies have lobbied for decades to be able to milk the public for cash to help them file and navigate their tax liability.
"Sneak" is a loaded term. I think what you mean is "do their job like they're supposed to and vote like they usually would." It's not like they're holding a secret/special session under the Republicans noses. They're just at work when they're supposed to be and others aren't. The alternative to "sneaking" legislative action in this case is just not doing their jobs for the day because a bunch of people decided not to show up. 12 people don't show up, so they send the other 400+ home for the day? Is that the moral expectation?
I don't live in Ohio, but I'm right on the state border. So many "vote no on issue 1" signs around here. I was worried that it would fail. Glad to see otherwise.
Can't say for sure, but if I had to venture a guess, it's likely the surface area and browning. Carmelizing the sugars makes them sweeter and have a more distinctive and noticeable taste. In addition, flour is a starch which is a complex carbohydrate. When you break down complex carbs through cooking, they become simpler carbs like sugars. I'm not certain, but I'm pretty sure that heats high enough to cause the browning is also enough to cause some of that break down of the carbs at the surface of the pancake.
P.S. If you have the self control, you can demonstrate for yourself this carb breakdown into sugars. Take a saltine cracker, chew on it for something like 5 minutes without swallowing (hard to do, honestly). It will turn into a mush and slowly start being broken down by the enzymes in your saliva. After long enough, the complex carbohydrate molecules will be broken down into glucose molecules and the mush will start to taste noticeably sweet. Kinda trippy.
"No one should be forced to bake a cake for a gay wedding." "No company should be allowed to refuse to give another company millions of dollars a month in advertising income just because they began vocally supporting nazism"
These are two thoughts that simultaneously bounce around in GOP politicians' heads. They seem to be contradictory ideas until you realize that they are simply ALWAYS in favor of harming the right people and do not give the slightest shit about applying the same rules to everyone if those rules harm the wrong people.
Breaking and entering into a sorority, barging into private rooms and house showers/bathrooms, stealing property, and installing hidden cameras in their rooms in order to casually spy on them while they are naked, sleeping, etc. Capturing images of the sorority girls naked, making hundreds of copies of those images, and sharing them with the entire campus to win a school-sponsored competition for a student government seat. Raping a woman while sharing said porn of her and her friends with the entire student body. Said woman then falls in love with her rapist. All played for laughs and zero consequences for any of it. An 80's hit! Make 3 more sequels of it!
The GOP depends on the integrity of the Left to not stoop to their level even when given carte blanche to do so. They'll openly follow the rules as written, loopholes and all, while the rest of us are following the rules as intended in good faith. Obviously, they'll also bend or break the rules too, but they're usually not as open about that as Trump.
"Wanna see me fail to hold Trump accountable for his crimes? [does nothing...] Wanna see me do it again?"
A two party system is an inescapable consequence of the plurality voting system (aka first-past-the-post voting) which is the system used by nearly all states and districts in the US, and much of the rest of the world. To fix the two party problem, the first step is to change the voting system. There are a number of alternative voting systems, each with their own pros and cons and situational uses. For legislative bodies, boards, or any other elected committee, I'm partial to proportional voting. And for single seat elections, I think approval voting is the ideal.
The thing that makes approval voting and other single seat voting systems better than plurality is that you vote for everyone you like. The way that that vote is cast and counted differs between systems. But in all cases, the benefit, ideally, is when 3 or more candidates exist for a seat, it prevents the least popular candidate from winning just because the other more popular candidates split the opposing voters. If you vote for each candidate you like, the candidates are never splitting the votes. The funny thing to me about most of these other fairer voting systems is that, while they are susceptible to a sort of spoiler effect from overly strategic or cynical voters who will simply only support one candidate, the result of that is just plurality voting, which we already have now. In other words, our current system is the worst case scenario for other, better, voting systems.
Some good videos on these systems...
CGP Grey video series: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLej2SlXPEd37YwwEY7mm0WyZ8cfB1TxXa&si=drEjNlgriHGg8feS
Primer video: https://youtu.be/yhO6jfHPFQU?si=IZNs8AAp3Xlif23X
If they required me to work in office (at minimum, they would need to pay me 30k more, 5-10k just to make up for gas and wear and tear on my car, 10k+ for the commute time, and 10k+ for the inconvenience, stress, clothes, eating out more for lunch, dealing with traffic, etc.)
Also, if my leadership was abusive and/or demanded prioritizing work over family and health.
I don't have the highest paid job in the world, but we're comfortable and I'm pretty happy with my company right now. Those are the things that would make me start looking elsewhere.
Everyone always asks "what the hell?" But nobody every asks "how is the hell?"
I moved out to go to college at 18 and back in with my mom as 21 after dropping out due to financial issues. I had trouble finding work there, nothing stable that paid well. I was a pretty lonely depressed guy, a virgin into my 20s, with nothing significant in my life and nothing to offer anyone else. It was a pretty shit time for me. I ended up moving in briefly with my dad 2 states away and was able to find a decent paying factory job shortly thereafter and got my own apartment. Then I found an even better paying factory job a year or two later, and got promoted to management within the year. I lost a bunch of weight, was able to save money, lost my virginity finally and I bought a house. I met the woman who would become my wife. Sold my house moved in with her. Went back to school, got my degree, got a much higher paying job, bought a much nicer house and we just had our first kid.
I don't want to tell you how to live and I am not under the impression that everyone can just do what I did. Everyone is different. Circumstances are different. I know. But nothing in my life started to improve from my lowest point in my adulthood until I stopped the complacency, moves out and worked to improve myself and my life. I would be shocked if your 50+ year old uncles who live with you grandmother and have never had a girlfriend are truly happy with their situation. I would encourage you to seek to change your situation if you can. I'm only a year older than you. At one time I was tens of thousands in debt, out of shape, had teeth falling out, living with my mom, no social life, no girlfriends, sexless, penniless, and had no hope or outlook in life. I have had my own share of failures, yet I am in a good place now. I got my teeth fixed, got a degree, i have a nice job, a nice house, a wife and beautiful daughter, and we're comfortable. I hope you can get there too.