The AMPTP has explicitly said that their plan is to starve the workers out of their homes. This necessarily means starving the strike fund, which is not designed to provide long-term living wage in the first place.
If they cannot do that, they will be under more pressure to resolve quickly. This means a resolution for workers, for the industry, and for the broader economy that is being negatively affected. This makes fiscal sense, and is the socially responsible thing to do.
The online version of Andrew Tate has already divided the world into prosecution and defence. But in the legal process that’s about to begin in Bucharest, it’s his real-life actions on trial.
What a beacon of sunshine you are. Nothing stopped you from just scrolling past if you didn’t want to read it, or unsubbing/blocking it. For someone who doesn’t give a shit, you sure had to let everyone know you don’t.
This is true, I was criticising the weird tone of the article for implying it was some great burden to only have one or two large dedicated living spaces and 100sqft bedrooms rather than three and 200. It would be a whole lot less unnatainable if 2 bedroom/1 shower, 800sqft units in a multiplex or 5-over-one were the default rather than half the size of what this article is trying to present as some bizarre abberation.
I will say, as someone in a house with just one shower, when you have a teenage daughter, things can get accidentally awkward. I wouldn’t complain if we had a second. But overall I’m fine with smaller houses. We rented a two story house when we first moved to this town and we had a room we literally had nothing to put in. We just left it empty. No one needs a big house unless they have a big family.
I live in Brazil. One of the classic questions we have to answer when the government is doing a census is how many bathrooms our home has. Along with other data it is one of the best indicators of how you’re doing financially. Nobody wants to have only one bathroom but nobody is building a second bathroom if they can’t afford to either. Number of phones and cars and that stuff can’t be trusted because people often buy those without being able to afford it.
Everything else in the house can be expanded with just some extra wood and room, but bathrooms don’t lie.
Then go in and remove all Bibles, see how they like that.
But, yeah, they don't know what's in their bible as 99.99% of these fucks never read a book, let alone actually read the book they are ready to kill people over.
Hatchett said she told Coody she wasn’t sure where his home county was located. The sheriff pointed a finger at her chest, she said, and replied: “In the heart of Georgia.” She said he then repeated those words as he grabbed her left breast and began squeezing and rubbing it.
I rarely have cause to use this word, but I am absolutely flabbergasted at this behavior. I mean, what was going through his head? Seriously, I would love to know what he was thinking in that moment, because I just don’t understand his actions. This is the kind of thing I could see a 12-year-old thinking was funny, maybe, but a full-grown man? I don’t get it.
I dunno, I’ve been pretty fuckin’ hammered before and nothing like this has ever crossed my mind. I’d be more likely to lose my balance and accidentally grab her tit whilst stumbling for support. I think I just need to accept that there are limits to my ability to understand others.
Alcohol lowers people’s inhibitions, so basically they are more likely to do things they want to do but their internal “supervisor” doesn’t let them do normallly.
In other words, it lets out people’s true selves.
This is why often “nice people” turn out out violent when drunk.
All this to say that deep down you’re almost certainly not the kind of person this guy is.
That’s a misunderstanding of how alcohol affects the mind. Alcohol does lower inhibitions, but that’s not the same as revealing your “true self.” The part of your mind that inhibits your baser instincts is very much a part of your “self.” It’s therefore incorrect to say that subtraction of this element of your personality reveals your “true self.” All of us would likely do despicable things if left to our baser instincts. The part of our mind that regulates those instincts is very much a critical part of us. I’m not defending what the guy did, but if he did it under the influence of alcohol, that simply serves to explain his actions, not reveal some secret truth about his essential character. The man has issues, clearly, and needs to address them, but that’s no reason to label him an inherent degenerate. Such labeling only reveals your own tendency to oversimplify people and dismiss the complexity of the human mind.
I was being judgy and far from scientific when I wrote “true self”, probably because one of my grandfathers was a violent drunk so I do need to make an effort to be objective on this, and I didn’t.
Your ability to take criticism and change your view is to your credit, and a rarity on social platforms like this. I appreciate that. We all make mistakes. I’ve certainly written things online that I regret in hindsight. We’re cool. Thanks for being reasonable. 👍
It’s bizarre, for sure. Unless he has a substance abuse issue, I would think there is some mental condition going on. Anxiety, depression or even schizophrenia could be in play. His actions are absolutely disgusting, but they are too weird to ignore.
If it was just him and her in relative privacy, I could easily see that being a contributing factor, but he was talking to her amidst a group of other people. You couldn’t get away with that shit in the 1600’s; either her husband or simply a man defending the lady’s honor would have challenged you to a duel and murdered your ass. Look, we’re post-#metoo, I get that sexual harassment/assault is commonplace, but still.
I’m more persuaded by SheeEttin’s point that alcohol was involved. It’s still a bit mind-boggling to me, but I can see it.
That’s a very simplistic way of viewing the situation. I admit I’m confused about his actions, but I’m not so prejudiced that I would reduce him to a stereotype. People are complicated. If your explanation for their actions is simple, that’s a pretty good sign they’re inaccurate.
Those employers stealing from their employees are the same ones who would never hire a former felon. Maybe wage theft should have prison time for the owners added to the punishment.
I mean, I created my standard username when I was starting highschool and haven’t changed it. Considering at the time I was literally being paid to yo-yo, it stuck. If your never ending need to project is that strong and all you have to counter what I’m saying is literally attacking a username then go ahead. Maybe one day you’ll grow up enough to realize that shit like this never convinces 3rd parties of your views.
Outlawing conservatism is essentially outlawing liberalism because outlawing thought is absolutely tyranny.
Conservatives are all wrong about pretty much everything pretty much all of the time, but a core aspect of liberalism is that they’re allowed to be wrong.
news
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.