There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

LEONHART ,

WELL, I DON’T NEED SAFETY GLOVES, BECAUSE I’M HOMER SIMP–

ZombiFrancis ,

Good ol’ Grimey.

root_beer ,

[hnngk] change the channel Marge!

eran_morad ,

He’s no Al Bundy.

morphballganon ,

There are jobs that provide that kind of compensation (granted, a very small % of total jobs are like that), and it’s actually very realistic for an absolute moron to have one of them.

Have you never spoken to someone who makes much more money than you and thought, “wow, what an idiot” in your life?

Kecessa ,

I had many colleagues like that in my previous job that only required a highschool diploma 🤷

the_rogue ,
@the_rogue@sh.itjust.works avatar

You missed how he is dumb as fuck and how all he have is by luck . As another person commented there is an episode in which a real hard working man gets mad how homer has everything even tho he does’nt deserve it and i agree he almost causes nuclear melt down atleast twice a day, abuses his son, ignores his daughter etc.etc.

Seraph ,
@Seraph@kbin.social avatar

Frank Grimes: If you lived in any other country in the world, you'd have starved to death long ago.

Bart: He's got you there, Dad.

Grimes: You're a fraud, a total fraud. (To Marge and the kids) Was nice meeting you.

OneWomanCreamTeam ,

I mean, this is how far our standard of living has fallen in the US.

Like, back in the 80’s and 90’s it was pretty normal for a family to subsist on a single income, in a reasonably nice house, with all of their necessities taken care of. It was so normal that even a brainless loser like Homer could do it.

Also because back then, kinda fat = automatic loser

massive_bereavement ,
@massive_bereavement@kbin.social avatar

That said, suburbia was built on borrowed money from the future , and the reason why most cities are broke.

Kbin_space_program ,

It has nothing to do with suburbia.

It has everything to do with the politics of Thatcher and Reagan. Their policies of annihilating unions, human rights and creating tax cuts for the rich by passing on the taxes to the working and the poor created this dystopian reality we now have.

If we cut out the rich and restore what we used to have for rights and protections, we can try to save ourselves from extinction.

bionicjoey ,

The two are related. Oil money supports both the suburban Ponzi scheme and also Reaganite deregulation.

massive_bereavement ,
@massive_bereavement@kbin.social avatar

My point is, for a city, every square foot of street has an operational cost, and on top of that infrastructure needs to be rebuilt every x years (I think around 20 ~ 25).
While the upfront cost of said infrastructure tends to come from subventions when building a new development, the city needs to cover the costs for both operations and rebuilding once it's needed.

Why does this matter? Well, detached single-family houses provide lower revenue per square foot of street than middle housing or mid-rises, eventually creating a hole in the city's pockets.

I'm not explaining it very well, but I'll suggest taking a look at this:
https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2023/6/21/whats-the-sweet-spot-for-building-housing-inexpensively
Climate Town - The suburbs are bleeding America Dry

If cities had money, they could build public housing or promote affordable options.

JoShmoe ,

I’m more convinced the human race is gonna die off the way futurama predicted it. The one named “I Dated a Robot”

tacosanonymous ,

Don’t threaten me with a good time.

EldritchFeminity ,

The suburbs are just another part of tax cuts for the rich. They’re subsidized by the tax money from more dense parts of the city, which tend to be more poor (and usually filled with ethnicities other than white people - hence the term White Flight).

Singke family homes with big grassy lawns and McDonald’s parking lots bring in less tax revenue and cost more money in city services per square foot of land than apartment buildings, being a net drain on the budget. So, there are higher taxes on the poor so that the wealthy suburbanites don’t have to see them.

exocrinous ,

The content of your message is right, but you’re using the wrong terms. You’re referring to middle class suburbanites as rich.

ILikeBoobies ,

Frank Grimes pointed out the insanity/luck of his living situation and your last part is true today “bumbling oaf” is still an archetype

samus12345 ,
@samus12345@lemmy.world avatar

Ah, good ol’ Grimey (as he liked to be called).

Kusimulkku ,

Like, back in the 80’s and 90’s it was pretty normal for a family to subsist on a single income, in a reasonably nice house, with all of their necessities taken care of.

I wonder what “pretty normal” is, according to actual numbers

Signtist ,

I remember growing up in the 90’s, my classmates and I all thought that one of the other kids was a liar because he said he didn’t have a yard (he lived in an apartment). It didn’t make sense - everyone else in the class of 30+ kids lived in a house with a yard, so he must just be making stuff up. Obviously that’s anecdotal evidence, but still. It was weird for a kid not to live in a single-family home back then.

EldritchFeminity ,

You’d have to look at the size of the middle class back then, as that’s what the “American Dream” scenario is based on there, but as a kid born in 1990, I can say that when my dad was looking for apartments when he was around college age in the 60s, the rule was not to rent an apartment that cost more than 25% of your salary. By the time I was around that same age in the late 2000s/early 2010s, it was 50% of your salary. Now, it’s closer to 120% of your salary for those same apartments.

bobburger ,

To be fair a nuclear operator can typically afford to support a family of 5 even today.

Socsa ,

This. The show routinely makes fun of the fact that Homer is completely unqualified for his job and seems to keep it because he amuses Burns. They had a whole episode recently about how Homer got a new job over a nuclear engineering PhD because he Cyrano’d the interview via Fink. Meaning his job title likely commands well over $200k, though it is implied that Burns pays him somewhat less than that.

Hikermick ,

It wasn’t normal

Dagwood222 ,

Up until Reaganomics hit, ‘Middle Class’ was defined as one Union job supporting a family of four. In 1980, $1 million was still considered a vast fortune. By the time Bush Sr. left office, middle class was two jobs to keep the house going, and $1 million was what a rich guy paid for a party.

Hikermick ,

I was an adult in the mid 80’s. I was there

Dagwood222 ,

So you remember that American housewives started looking for jobs in big numbers after the Oil Crisis of 1972. Before that, only the poorest people needed two jobs.

ryathal ,

The show quit caring about money because it’s not interesting. The early seasons have money as a constant issue. It’s just not that interesting to she them constantly needing money, so they just stopped.

saruwatarikooji ,

Except that idea was completely undone by Malcolm in the Middle… The Simpsons just didn’t do it right.

ryathal ,

Simpsons did it just fine for years, Malcolm was only 7 seasons, Simpsons is on season 35.

itsnotits ,

back in the '80s* and '90s*

OneWomanCreamTeam ,

No, I meant 80-99 AD

psud ,

Many style manuals allow referring to decades with apostrophes before the s, and no apostrophes before the abbreviated year

itsnotits ,

Could you provide some example style manuals that say that?

psud ,
itsnotits ,

In your reference, I think this summarizes the issue nicely:

As others have said previously, the apostrophe is a way to indicate that something in a word is missing. In one case, it may indicate the omission of numbers (ex. '20 instead of 1920). In another case, it indicates the omission of words which may be used to expression possession (ex. 1920’s music instead of "music that was recorded in the decade that began with the year 1920). It is never, never, never used to express plurality.

psud ,

Too also quote:

The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage (1999) agrees with Words into Type about the apostrophe, although about little else:

decades should usually be given in numerals: the 1990’s; the mid-1970’s; the 90’s. But when a decade begins a sentence it must be spelled out. [example omitted]; often that is reason enough to recast the sentence.

NY Times seems pretty reputable and they like the grocers’ apostrophe

squiblet ,
@squiblet@kbin.social avatar

He’s portrayed as a loser due to being self-unaware and generally clueless.

PP_BOY_ ,
@PP_BOY_@lemmy.world avatar

Because he’s a little overweight, and in 1989, that was reason enough to laugh at someone.

Plus, all of those were commonplace thirty years ago.

Cruxifux ,

Homer is like average North American weight now haha

PP_BOY_ ,
@PP_BOY_@lemmy.world avatar
Zehzin ,
@Zehzin@lemmy.world avatar

He’s also endearingly dumb, it’s why everyone likes him in the first place.

sirico ,
@sirico@feddit.uk avatar

I live in a single room above a bowling alley and below another bowling alley

tygerprints ,

Wow. Lucky!!!!

xantoxis ,

He’s not? There’s literally an episode about how Homer is so lucky in life that he drives a man insane.

ThunderclapSasquatch ,

And the man’s estranged bastard son!

CorneliusTalmadge ,

He happened to like hookers.

wise_pancake ,

He’s like Candid but doesn’t make you want to gauge your eyes out just to avoid reading the book, but it’s due in you philosophy class and you can’t afford to fail.

oce ,
@oce@jlai.lu avatar

What’s the issue with reading Candid?

wise_pancake ,

It’s not a long book but it is for me very frustrating to read.

It’s about an optimist who keeps dismissing the shitty things happening to/around because it’ll all work out.

I just did not enjoy reading it at all.

oce ,
@oce@jlai.lu avatar

I know the book as I’m from the same country, so I wondered if there was some specific issue from the English side. It’s a satire of Leibniz philosophy and religion, so I think it’s its purpose to make you frustrated with the character.

wise_pancake ,

It did a great job making me want to smack him

It’s just not my kind of book, I don’t enjoy that type of thing.

usualsuspect191 ,

In fairness, that entire episode was lampshade hanging

state_electrician ,

What is lampshade hanging?

Kiosade ,

Calling themselves out on how ridiculous the situation is, basically.

Obi ,
@Obi@sopuli.xyz avatar

I also never heard it before, probably should have, here’s the first part of the definition from TV tropes:

“Lampshade Hanging (or, more informally, “Lampshading”) is the writers’ trick of dealing with any element of the story that seems too dubious to take at face value, whether a very implausible plot development or a particularly blatant use of a trope, by calling attention to it and simply moving on.”

norbert ,
@norbert@kbin.social avatar

Lampshade Hanging (or, more informally, "Lampshading") is the writers' trick of dealing with any element of the story that seems too dubious to take at face value, whether a very implausible plot development or a particularly blatant use of a trope, by calling attention to it and simply moving on.

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LampshadeHanging

fidodo ,

Yeah, I don’t think he’s portrayed as a loser, just as dumb. You don’t need to be smart to be successful in this world.

intelisense ,

Uhhhh… Homer has three kids, surely?

FfaerieOxide ,
@FfaerieOxide@kbin.social avatar

Uhhhh… Homer has three kids, surely?

Only two of them, along with his wife, love him.

MrGerrit ,

Maggie hates his guts.

Death_Equity , (edited )

According to the available tax information he has nine kids, one of which is a Vietnam veteran.

anarchrist ,

Why can’t I have no kids and three money??

alquicksilver ,
@alquicksilver@lemmy.world avatar

C’mon, Marge, the dog doesn’t count as a kid.

DScratch ,
  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines