Stand back and pick up the soap, nutty. I hope they send him to wherever they lock up the Bloods and Crips gang members they arrest, maybe he can explain to them how he’s not a racist.
As a historian, I can say something over 1000 years old that is not fragmented or on the verge of being fragmented is very good condition. Not missing anything or any notable pieces too? Damn near mint
On top of the other comments, I’m also depressed because I don’t see myself having much of a future. I’m likely not going to be able to retire because I won’t be able to afford it. We are already seeing people reite later and later. It’s a slow build, sure. But where are we gonna be in the next 30 years when I should be at that age? Am I gonna be working till I’m 75? Can we even retire at all? Most of us can’t get enough money to build a retirement fund. We are way behind fancially where we should be. That’s not only harming us now, but at this point I’ve seen a lot of people say they just don’t have any hope at retirement. It’s just no longer a thing people are striving for, because it doesn’t look like it’s gonna be possible. Right now you’re looking at needing around a million for many people, and we can’t even get a couple thousand saved up.
On top of that, I have to worry about global warming. Which not only will fuck up things even more for the stuff in the first part, but I don’t even know if I’ll be alive to retire. And living is gonna fucking suck in so many ways. I’m in Oregon, and we have fires every year now. Last year we had some days reach 115°F. Things are going to be fucked.
It’s sometimes hard to be happy and optimistic when there’s not a lot to look forward to in the future.
I’m old enough to remember a time when the future seemed bright and optimistic. It felt like everyone was excited about what’s next, and we wanted to get to the future more quickly. In the late 80’s and part of the 90’s we had tv shows like “Beyond 2000” that painted this utopian future, and all the promises of the democratization of ideas and information were promised by the internet.
Now it’s just wealth gaps, social media poisoning society at large, climate change intensifying, and the consolidation of the social middle class into a uniform lower class. We don’t see the seeds of any positive change, and only expect things to get worse.
The one thing I can say is that the future also looked bleak around WW2. We had come off a world war, pandemic, the Titanic sinking, and then went right into WW2. I could understand why people back then had even more dire survival types of concerns. Not that it makes us feel any better today, because the catalysts for progressive changes back then were horrifying events.
If anything that makes me feel worse, as the true fix for today’s issues mean we have to be super-fucked before it’ll get better. Right now we’re just fucked.
the early days of airbnb was basically this concept.
they didn't start out as a marketplace for unregulated hotels that destroy housing markets. that didn't happen until after they started cashing checks venture vulture capitalists.
So many people forget this origin. Air mattress in your spare room (in SF), iirc.
As much as I, personally, prefer a house when away - either with the family or as a couple - this is one of the drivers behind the crunch in housing. People can’t possibly afford to by a place to live when the competition is a wanna-be property “entrepreneur” who is going to get 2-4x market rent by doing short term rentals.
Originally my mum moved my brother and I into the same room and rented out the empty room for $40 a night. The cleaning fee was $20 and we still cleared $2,000 in one summer.
My brother and I each got a 5% cut and we bought ice creams from Safeway every day for a week until we got wicked stomach aches
Hasn’t Hawaii (at least on Oahu) had this for some time now? I know when you look up AirBNB and VRBO there are mentions of it, and to contact the owner directly, etc.
It’s had it for a while, but enforcement was pretty spotty. I believe they’ve recently gotten buy-in from AirBNB to not list properties that weren’t permitted.
The free market isn't going to solve this problem. It isn't profitable to solve climate change.
This is where Governments are meant to step in, to serve the best interests of the people... instead they're too busy bickering over bullshit, and giving themselves and their cronies handouts.
If you’re impressed by your number, you just don’t understand how big China is…
And tarrifs on cheap foreign profits is really the only way to stimulate internal production. Not sure where you were a few years ago, but COVID should have taught you why domestic production is important
Because the people working those sweatshops have such great lives too.
Their lives are demonstrably better than before those opportunities arrived, and the increased wealth enables governments to grow inclusive institutions that ban sweatshops and still benefit from the relative value of the US dollar to local currency
People with my views do run the economy. This is economic orthodoxy.
No I didn’t bring up slavery at all, and equating paid jobs that do not exist until a company invests in a developing nation with slavery is disgustingly offensive.
Developing nations are developing because of outside investment, and equating that to the rape of their lands and people that was chattel slavery is a monstrous thing to do.
Sweatshops, while terrible working conditions, are paid labor and people seek out those jobs because the money is so much better than what they were doing before.
I am not pro sweatshop. International trade is so good for developing nations that even sweatshops are better than what they had. I’m all for treaties that straight up require investment capital to regulate that any foreign suppliers meet a certain level of safety and health regulations.
The reason that foreign investment in labor is profitable is not because of sweatshops but because of comparative advantage. An easy example is Mexico where the US dollar is currently worth 18 pesos, meaning you can pay a Mexican laborer 1/5th of what you pay an American and still are actually paying them more relative to their cost of living than an American.
This is true worldwide and is the essence of global trade, and it is impossible to call this a bad thing without just straight up saying you don’t give a shit about the livelihood of the Global South.
Comparative advantage is the reason that standards of living are rising worldwide. This investment spurs local capital growth, grows institutions to be inclusive instead of extractive, and in the long term encourages democratic reforms.
The US should, and does when our President isn’t a drooling imbecile, see global trade as a form of soft power and spreading of democracy.
So after reading the article, there is no information as to what China is spending $6 trillion on. The vast majority of the article discusses how China is building a really long road and that they will be depending on coal until at least 2050.
The free market is the only solution to climate change, and it is absolutely profitable to solve climate change.
The problem, as the article indicates, is that we currently subsidize fossil fuels and do not tax them to pay for their externalities, stacking the deck in favor of fossil fuels companies and away from green energy transitions.
Even with that in place, capital is flying toward green/renewable energy.
A carbon tax is 100% needed, and dividends can be handed out to bottom quintile earners to offset the cost for those who literally cannot survive the increases a carbon tax causes. Problem there is just that taxing fuel in the US almost guarantees you lose your next election.
As a queer person, extending the acronym past what is necessary feels like pandering in the best light, and purposely trying to bait ridicule in the worst. The whole point of LGBT was to include anyone on the spectrum that was gay or trans, and the Q was supposed to include anyone who considers themselves queer, even if they don't meed those parameters. I can understand wanting to include I because intersex people are often left out of the conversation, and I even understand A because there is a lot of debate even within the LGBTQ community itself as to whether asexuals are considered queer or not. But when you start incorporating numbers, symbols, or extending past 5 letters within the acronym, you are defeating the purpose of having an acronym, creating confusion, baiting ridicule, and even making people not explicitly represented in the acronym feel excluded.
And there is already a single, all encompassing, inclusive, one syllable word that describes the community and all who occupy it: "Queer." It's easier to say, remember, and hell, even type if you are typing LGBTQ past 5 letters. But because of it being appropriated and used as a slur, there are many even within the community who are even afraid to utter it, let alone identify with it. Which is a god damned shame there is nothing inherently wrong the word, cause even in its original meaning, it meant someone who was outside the norm or otherworldly, and in literature has been used to describe characters like Gandalf, and characters in Shakespeare.
It describes me without having to explain or justify how or why. It describes how I feel as a person, how others see me, how I interact and relate to others. Its an adjective that can be verbed and adverbed. It's sharp and provocative, yet also warm and natural, like a forest green. People who have adopted and embraced the word for themselves feel the love within the word, and can extend it to others. And even for those outside the community, those who are brave enough to use it when talking in our defense come off as more decisive and confrontational, than the person who thinks adding another letter or number to the acronym will make them seem more legitimate.
It's time we stop fearing our word. It's time we recognize the difference between queer as an insult, and queer as a description of who we are, and we need to extend that to people who are willing to talk about us and our struggles or come to our defense. The word is only as evil as we are willing to reject it, and I will be dead in the ground before I let our word be the domain of queerphobes and bigots.
edit: It's late and I'm going to bed. Apparently some people think I'm a self hating queer for thinking the acronym should be dropped for an all inclusive term, and so be it. It's late and I want to get some sleep. And a lot of the people making this argument I know haven't read past the first paragraph, much less to here. Anything clarification they could want can be found here and in my other posts here. Otherwise, if they are not going to put in the effort to read, I'm not going to put in the effort to respond.
edit 2: I wanted to make a separate inclusion because I have had a chance to sleep and cool off, and I wanted to address some of the more combative posts in my replies: I get it. We as a community suffer attacks constantly, even from within the community, so I understand why so many here are on guard and skeptical of my intentions. And I'll admit, my post probably could be better written. I'm not exactly the best at articulating my thoughts. But the point of my post is not to exclude anyone from the community, but rather embrace a word that includes everyone. I would like to hear counterpoints to my argument, because maybe what I need is a different perspective on the issue. I would love to hear from people who prefer the acronym, and why they feel it maybe more inclusive. I am a flawed human being with many faults. I grew up in a conservative background, and my life up to this point has been trying to unlearn a lot of that. But I did not write this with the intention of excluding or singling out anyone. Forgive me I have done so.
Two spirit is a native cultural thing and I think acknowledging it is a good idea. It used to just be LGBT, why should we stop expanding inclusion the moment you find a word you’re personally comfortable with?
Better question: What makes you think they are not included in LGBT or Queer? Also, I know the inclusion of two spirits within the LGBT acronym is contentious with many native Americans as well. It's why the pride flag with the native American feathers is frowned upon at many queer events.
If everyone is included in queer why be anything other than the Q community? What elevates some queerness to a place where it deserves recognition on its own and why is some queerness relegated to a bucket labelled “Miscellaneous”?
In case you missed it, we don't need the acronym at all. We already have one word that describes us all in any form that takes, and making an acronym that is overly long and extends/contracts depending on the whims of the writer is overly complicated and defeats the purpose of having an acronym.
Also, funny how you aren't going to argue the point that the inclusion of two spirits is controversial within the native American community itself, when that was the point you jumped at me with.
Controversial in a community other than my own means that two spirit isn’t my point to argue for or against. I led with it because it was the thing that was there after the Q, which seemed to be where you were drawing the line in the sand. I’ll concede that point.
The only thing I’d say about adopting “queer” as an umbrella term for all of us is that, as a term of abuse, a lot of us have strong negative associations with it and would hesitate to self-apply it. I use it, I like stealing power back from the bullies in that way, but I’m not gonna force someone to self-apply a slur that dredges up memories of being physically beaten, or their friends killed. An umbrella term could work, but maybe not that one as long as that trauma is still present in the community.
I think you and I agree on more than we may think. At the end of the day, I want everyone in the community to feel not only included, but unified as well.
I understand the word still hurts others, but so do so many other words commonly used within queer spaces. Gay is still used as a slur and pejorative and yet is still used universally amongst the gay community. I think part of the reclamation process is not only using the word whenever you can, but taking pride in the word as you do it. I do mean it when I say I feel warmth and love in the word queer, and I try to extend that to anyone I use it to describe. If someone within the community expressed discomfort in the word though, I wouldn't use it for them.
And I think at the end of the day you and I can agree we need an all encompassing term. Something that is inclusive, easy to say, versatile, and if possible, steeped in tradition within the queer community, I personally feel queer is the best candidate for that term, but I would be welcoming to better suggestions.
Queer makes me think of weird. Odd. Not normal. I wish gay meant more than just homosexual lol. I mean I don’t identify with a gender, I don’t have preferences and if I had to label myself that way it would be longer than my name. But I also don’t feel like I’m different or abnormal for not caring if my SO were male, female or whatever they want to be, I’m not abnormal for being part of a spectrum where I don’t see things as feminine or masculine. I don’t feel like I need to be labeled but I also have an easy time blending in with those whose religion and culture is limiting them from who they are. I guess once more people get comfortable with the fact that it’s normal to be who you are then they’ll start being themselves and lgbt+++++ will just be everyone.
I mean going on your second point, I think it demonstrates the difference between a slur and a descriptor is how it’s used as a word.
Like transgender is neutral term but we see it becoming a scare word by fascists recently by changing how its used in speech. Like “transgendered”, “transgenderism” or “transing” (as a note, it’s kinda scary how the first two no longer set off window’s spellcheck). Basically turning trans as a state of being adjective into a verb makes it seem like an act you can do to someone or have happen to you.
I mean, I don’t identify as queer and plenty of my friends don’t. One of my exes did and great for him but this just seems like the wrong argument. There likely just needs to be a technical, non-inflammatory term.
I like it, even tho usually I include a “R” there for romantic minorities(eg people who might not be a sexual minority but are a romantic one) when discussing this with other people, but I guess it could be argued that they still fit into “sexual”.
R or not, I like that it includes everyone without any identity being shoved into a letter or a “+” along with lots of others as if they’re an afterthought, not as important as the ones that get to show up as their own letters.
Literally your entire first paragraph is you trying to explain why you get to decide which parts belong, based only on how YOU feel about it. It’s weird you can’t read what you wrote.
I said I understand why people feel the need to include terms that are already covered by the Q in LGBTQ, but overextending the acronym and including symbols and numbers causes confusion, defeats the purpose of the acronym, and makes people who are not included feel left out.
The whole point of my argument was I think queer should be the go to term cause it covers everyone and leaves nobody out.
I have nothing to hide. I'm a dumb irresponsible formerly conservative queer person who is still learning and who says stupid shit all the time, some of it I even come to regret. It's all there for anyone who wants to judge my character. Happy reading. Hopefully your assessment of me is more forgiving than @Hyperi0n.
You’re like “ I want to hear counterpoints to my argument”.
Okay, well not everyone likes or associates with the general term “queer”.
You say “ I want to support and include people who need it”.
Then act like it my guy, here’s your chance to attempt to understand something separate from yourself that wants to be included and supported. You got this!
Extending the acronym to cover everyone is becoming ridiculous. I think we just need a word that covers all the bases rather than trying to shoe horn one more letter/number/symbol/wingding that’s already becoming difficult to keep track of. It doesn’t bring attention to any one group, nor does it help individual groups as a whole when you’re summed up into a letter.
I hate labels in general. I’m in the Q part (enby) and I’m completely fine with it, I don’t need my own letter, nor do I need to identify with anything.
I had a teacher in highschool (04-08) whose name was B Gay. In his lifetime Gay want from “happy” to a slur. Machine shop was the best because of him too
Can we apply this logic to the flag as well? I thought the rainbow of the pride flag was meant to represent diversity and cover all orientations…like how a rainbow spectrum of light literally covers all colours. Now specific groups are being added and people are finding ways to add another line to represent something. The flag is a mess.
I tend to think of the Progress flag as a product of the times, not as a replacement for the rainbow Pride flag. We added these additional signifiers specifically because those groups were under-represented or under particular attack, not because they aren't included in the Pride rainbow.
How to defeat a slur, take it as your own. It’s simply as easy as that.
Growing up I was fat as fuck, people made fun of me all the time. One day I decided it was enough, I started making fun of myself for being fat, suddenly everyone left me alone because it no longer got the response they were trying to get.
Ignoring / getting angry is what they want, turn around and happily scream yeah I’m queer, ya looking for a good time? (For example) ya know what’s gonna happen? Their gonna start stammering and come up with another way to bother you, and when you don’t give in and don’t show a reaction they will end up storming away angrily. Then you have something to laugh at for the rest of the day.
What the fuck do you think pride parades are for?
My grandfather got caught downtown Toronto in one and spent 2 hours throwing slurs. Ya think a single person in that parade cared?
My biggest qualm is a qualm I have with any acronym/abbreviation. If you’re going to introduce a letter that is unknown to many, then define your term. Otherwise, I’m going to assume it’s a typo, or I going to not recognize it.
All acronyms and abbreviations, or at least those that aren’t commonplace, should be defined somewhere adjacent to their use, or else you are excluding people.
Speech/text is only useful if you’re using it in a way that appropriately conveys a message to it’s intended audience.
I’ve come to realize that whatever it is that causes people to have alternative sexual preferences, I’ve got a little bit of it. However, I’m heterosexual, so I don’t really identify with the community. I could accept the queer label, though.
news
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.