I hate southerners and am from a proud Union state. What the hell are you talking about?
I hate southerners and am from a proud Union state. What the hell are you talking about?
We called it senioritis. That sudden change of excitement to dread as seniors realize they are going to be separated from the peer group they’re mostly been with for years at their local school and now have to go out and make something of themselves on a new, unfamiliar environment.
I have read it, and find it bullshit. Libertarians always manage to decide to “strategically” vote for the Republican that promises authoritarianism but also promises low taxes. Again, it’s not about what Libertarians say they support, it’s who they actually support.
Paying lip service is meaningless. I look at who self-professed libertarians actually vote for. That is the basis of my statement.
You want to maximize liberty, but have a funny way of showing it. Libertarians vote for the most authoritarian they can, as long as they will cut taxes. Even if that means banning abortion, keeping marijuana prohibition, forcing religion on children in schools, supporting civil forfeiture, preventing people from choosing sustainable energy, and so much more.
As has famously been said, taxes are the price we pay for civilized society. The non-aggression principle I believe is absolute bullshit. Libertarian would happily screw over anyone, claiming they are simply exercising their personal liberty. They couldn’t care any less about the well being of anyone else but themselves. Absolute barbarians if you ask me. Personally, I’m happy to get good services for my taxes, and not see my money go to a greedy asshole CEO. Sure, politicians are also greedy assholes, but at least the people can vote them out.
It would cost less because a single entity, costing much less overhead. Also, a single entity would have far more buying power. Almost every doctor would have to accept them, eliminating out-of-network costs. And we wouldn’t have hundreds of overpaid executives that pat themselves on the back with multimillion dollar bonuses for denying sick people coverage. And we can see it in action. Most industrialized countries already have some form of universal healthcare, and they all cost less per capita. People that actually have universal healthcare generally love it. And don’t talk to me about waiting lists. I’ve been on plenty of waiting lists right here, and lots of people can’t even get on them because they can’t afford the care they need.
Competition simply does not work in the healthcare market. When people are sick, they are limited typically to one option. And it has inelastic demand, so changing prices don’t change demand, and thus hospitals and doctors can charge whatever. The system, built on the economic principles libertarians espouse, is god-awful.
Libertarians only care about 2 things: lowest taxes possible and legal weed, and they would gladly sacrifice the latter in favor of the former. Anything else is nothing more than lip service.
Universal healthcare means taxes, and that is the one thing Libertarians hate above all. Never mind that it would be cheaper than private insurance. They relish in the fact they can skip buying insurance, and if they get hurt, ERs are required to treat them anyway.
Lots of companies are willing to pay for international business class, but not first class. So airlines have responded by making business class nicer and nicer. That, in turn, has made former first class passengers just buy business class because it’s almost as good for cheaper. So people are not buying first class tickets, so might as well eliminate them and add more business.
Worth noting that domestic first class (which is what they show) is a totally different thing.
The smaller communities just aren’t here yet. Lemmy scratch’s the itch for news, politics, and memes, but does not cover many niche interests.
deleted by creator
The even bigger issue is the Bible Belt is those moron’s reading of Revelation, which has them thinking Israel has to control Jerusalem for the rapture to happen.
Personal negative dealings with the Catholic Church
From a contemporary article:
O’Connor, in a statement Thursday in London, reiterated her objections to the church, which she holds responsible for the child abuse she suffered.
The Vatican uses “marriage, divorce and in particular birth control and abortion to control us through our children and through fear,” she said.
So, even then, it is less specific than us commonly credited todays it was not about covering up child sex abuse.
https://books.google.com/books?id=IalJAAAAIBAJ&pg=PA114#v=onepage&q&f=false
Yeah, there is a lot of revisionist history about this. This was well before the sex abuse story came out. The idea that that’s what she was protesting was lost on everyone.
John Paul II had an attempted assassination a decade before this (where he literally met with his attempted assassin to offer forgiveness), and was also leading efforts to apologize for past church participation in things like the holocaust, the slave trade, oppressing women, and even executing Galileo.
This is not to defend him. He absolutely ignored sex abuse and deserves hate, but when O’Connor did that, he was immensely popular. Tearing up his picture while singing Bob Marley’s War (a song about racism and inequality) was just a protest of which the purpose of which no viewer could figure out. She merely said “fight the real enemy” and didn’t reveal any additional reasoning until she sat for an interview a month later.
It’s still different from what most people are used to. Thee would be a learning curve. And swapping an operating is no easy task for most, either.
A ton of people can barely open a PDF and this sub thinks those people can change to a completely different operating system.
I wouldn’t go near Russia. But she is a tad bit biased.
Wasn’t worth it.
If only he was a WNBA player vaping THC.
It was his first day in charge, but far from his first day with the FAA. He still had a lot of experience.
He also played himself in United 93.
Seems you haven’t had a good veggie dish yet. I totally get how enjoyable food is central for a happy life, but you don’t enjoy it because it was killed instead of harvested. I’m pretty sure you have a few veggie foods you enjoy, maybe without realizing they don’t contain meat.
Or maybe I have different tastes than you.
I really hate that attitude that because it isn’t much of a sacrifice for you, it isn’t for anyone else. People are different.
Heck, even if I found your one magical dish, I’m not going to eat it for the rest of my life. Even with meat, I choose variety.
As said in a nearby comment: Only if you didn’t want to have kids anyways. In which case it should not be counted as a saving.
If you want to have kids but don’t because of climate, that’s probably tougher to stomach than a slight composition change on your plate.
Oh, so personal preference suddenly matters? Seems you haven’t found the right hobby yet. I totally get how kids are central for a happy life, but you don’t enjoy them because they are your kids instead of pets. I’m pretty sure you have a few activities you enjoy, maybe without realizing they don’t contain kids.
See how you sound?
How about this, you don’t eat meat, I’ll not have kids? We’ll see in 100 years who had a more meaningful impact on climate change.
I don’t know that he has refused, but he definitely allowed Russia to play him like a fiddle in having him publish the DNC hack (and let’s not forget, it was a hack, not a leak) while holding on to RNC hacked data.
I have questions on if Trump wins in 2016 without Assange, and that’s enough to make me hate him.