If I call this socialism I'll probably get yelled at by a nerd
Year 1:
A farmer owns two cows. You offer your services to milk them. You are now co-owners of cow-milkers incorporated. You each milk one cow. This gives you more than enough milk for yourself, and you sell the rest of the milk to pay for maintenance of the cow and are still left with a little cash left over to purchase what you want. Much of your left over cash goes to a community fund.
Year 2:
Your cow business is going well. You and the farmer agree that you could probably handle more cows. You opt to purchase a bull. This is a large purchase so you petition the community to allow you to dip into its funds and purchase a bull. You do so and soon you have five or six cows, still enough for you and the farmer to handle but honestly, it's a pretty full day's work. You employ a third person for the business. They become a co-owner and are afforded an equal share of the revenue. This share of profits is still larger for all three of you, you can even reduce the price of milk, in a similar manner the beer producers are reducing the price of their products because the community agrees for them to buy a bigger still and the vegetable sellers are reducing the price of their products because they were afforded larger fields. Now you're selling stuff for cheaper but so is everyone else so it feels like you've got even more spending power to buy luxuries on top of the public good you support!
Year 3:
Here's the kicker: you and the other two people think you can keep expanding. You dip into the communal fund to purchase new automatic cow milkers that were developed by the egghead academics that were funded by part of that community fund you keep contributing to. The same community fund that's stopped you from being severely sick at multiple points in your life and has been used to provide housing for everyone in your village.
And suddenly.
You're making more milk than you ever dreamed of! Sure you've got to clean the machines once a day, but you're milking a hundred cows! And maybe you add, hell, five new people onto the company! That just gives you more free time, you can sell the milk for dirt cheap and still make more money than you ever were. Sure, you've got to divide the work up now. Shipping 100 cows worth of milk a day to the market ain't easy but you're going gangbusters.
Not to mention! The vegetable farmer and the beer producer automated their own stock, so they're selling beer for carrots for milk for pennies on the dollar they cost last year, and they're only getting richer!
But... Free school lunches benefit the majority in a very similar way that universal healthcare does. By your own logic you should be rioting for free school lunches. What on earth are you on about?
When violence is witnessed, one fantasizes that it is always unjustified.
I'll first say that from a social standpoint it makes sense to focus on yourself when asked that. But the person asked "tell me what you look for in a girl". You would have to be pretty damn masterful at thinking on your feet to take that question and immediately flip your answers into I statements. Especially if you're anon and obviously don't get asked things like this a lot.
No kids is a common wish although the reason for it can make or break how fine it is to have.
My guess is that anon is overweight, and the person they were talking to was thinking of friends they had that were overweight and were great people.
Anon betrayed that their preference was a bit delusional and/or didn't understand that it can take work to be in shape and takes it for granted that women should be expected to be fit for him without him having to do anything. That's a pretty sour fart of an opinion.
The no dating apps thing is pretty cringe. And could certainly make you seem like a pariah to most people. It definitely betrays a sense of superiority if it's in your top 3 dating requirements. I feel like anon knowing the word demisexual is slim to none but that would be the best thing you could say.
Actually my guess is that this is fake and anon is just stirring the hate mongering pot.
Yeah, my bet is that the writers did look at it as starting over from square 1 after the bombs dropped just as a writing shortcut. But after many games of lore it's clear that that's not what happened so it's just a vestige of a plot hole.
That's kind of what I mean. Usually resisting torment like being in a war zone or some injury is done so because you know that eventually the pain will go away. The war will end one way or the other or your injury will heal. "breaking" is like when soldiers go into shell shock. You've just endured so much physical and mental anguish that your body just shut you down and made you numb to the world. This is bad if you eventually recover from your injuries because PTSD can ruin the rest of your life even after the physical pain has gone away. In this case, though, you're in hell for the rest of eternity as far as you know, better to just let your body go into that shell shock state and numb as much pain as you can.
I think the issue is the label "18+". It's clearly arbitrary. In many countries women's breasts have little to no stigma attached to them and are freely shown in media allowed for children. Even more so for sexual innuendos and themes. On the other hand, things I'm sure you would consider "cartoon violence" are outright banned or just not considered children's content in these same places. (In America we normalize showing guns to children, but in places with more gun control a gun on TV can be shocking).
So when you (and not just you, many people have this same sentiment) say
Kids (talking 10 and under) shouldn't be subjected to media or adjacent media that deals with 18+ adult themes. Period.
You're appealing to a very very narrow definition of 18+ defined by your upbringing, time period, and region. To the poster before yous point, it's pretty clear that kids are adaptable and are much less negatively affected by "adult themes" than we fear monger about evidenced by my earlier point that kids around the world are raised with wildly different standards as to what's "18+" and they are all able to grow up into functioning members of society.
Now from what I gather about Hazbin Hotel it's a pretty adult show, I've never seen a frame of it, but after looking it up it's rated 16+? And people online are saying it could be fine for 13+ with adult supervision?? So how nasty can a panel get? (Edit: sorry I thought it was an "adult" adult show. This is just a YA show, seems like a lot of todo about nothing. Maybe the children were loud and it got annoying). I really don't know. Maybe the show is extra gross but I'm not defending this particular instance, just the topic of this one thread.
It's tough, cause a lot of history did take a long long time. The "dark ages" lasted like 500-1000 years and are significant for having little to no technological advancement. Before then empires would last hundreds or thousands of years without ever developing things like electricity or using the same exact agriculture practices. Then again, as I mentioned, history after the 18th century exploded and got super condensed.
Based on how the fallout games work. It makes a lot more sense for society to rebuild quickly. They have electronic written communication and working electricity/power plants basically right off the bat. If the writers wanted to make it make sense they would have to put more work into explaining that we were sent more into the dark ages after the bombs dropped. But that just isn't true in the lore because there are well educated people that canonically survived right after the war and began rebuilding immediately.
Yeah anarchism is a lot of theory and at this point, someone calling themselves an anarchist in good faith would be referring to it as a kind of ideology or faith rather than some end goal in their lifetime. At best anarchist thought right now can guide you like a religion to make you more pragmatic and participate in pro-social programs in your community.
It's funny because unfortunately, as far as I understand it, this meme uses anarchism in the incorrect meme-y way that people understand it. I.e. as an angsty "no rules, mom!" way. Anarchism as written by people who actually sat down and thought about the practicality of it would probably see someone or a group of people who sit down all day and make it their "job" to come up with agreed upon rules. Not as a leadership or a hierarchy, but just because division of labor is necessary for a flourishing society and because "no murder or we kick you out" is not a rule you should be letting people who live with you make for themselves.
That is funny. 200 years is a long-ass time to build a civilization. America was rocking it within like 50. Although if I remember there is talk in some of the games about some very large empires that had risen and fallen in the last 200 years.
I feel like the key to being in hell is to break right away. You're in there forever, no matter how much of a tolerance you could build up here you're going to break down eventually. And in the long run it won't matter if you held out for ten minutes or ten years.
Having watched interviews with him it's an interesting case study cause you can kind of track how he just fell into it. He didn't start as a rich kid, he lucked into the money with Bitcoin and started making random high-budget YouTube videos (his videos were always on the slop spectrum but in the beginning they were genuine). Over the years he has just devolved into chasing the views. He thought (and probably still thinks) that he does it for fun and it's just his nature to follow the views but it's pretty clear to anyone watching that fame via YouTube has changed him significantly.
Notice the first guy is in a wooden boat and the second guy is in a boat most likely made out of some plastic-based fibers. 🤔
You can see on the road that it takes up one lane like the cars and is equivalent to about 2.5 cars lined up accounting for gaps. Also the point of this post is that if public transport was normalized then this bus wouldn't have six people in it because half of these cars would be people on the bus instead.
You're free to control what your kids eat even if the school provides free meals.
Even if it's only carrying 6 people it's still doing a better job than the cars which on average probably have 1-2 people in each of them.