Here is a map of basic income pilot programs from around the world.
Not only has it been studied, the studies have been taking place for over fifty years. Universal basic income is cheaper in practice than the numerous other social programs that help people who either can’t work, shouldn’t work or can’t work enough to afford their needs.
In a lot of cases the people who choose to work less do so because they have children, health issues or dependants.
The children aren’t fucking right, they need to be shown.
Soviet style mass apartment complexes to combat homelessness but you have to download an app to get in and out, and the app collects and sells all your data. There’s a concierge who does spot checks but they accept bribes in fresh fruit, vegetables and old N64 games.
The internets. Multiple internets, like different streaming services and you need to pay a subscription to each one to access all the websites.
Rail guns. Everyone will have a rail gun. It will be awesome.
I was gonna say this, but not specific to USA and UK. Other countries have thriving music cultures born of immigration we just don’t hear about. Nigeria, for example, had a progressive rock scene in the 70’s and it was kinda baller. Check out the Lijadu Sisters.
I’ve been listening to Creole music all morning as “research” for my next writing project.
Made me think about the volume of information we take in about other cultures through stories, art, music and food without ever opening a history book.
Edited for context and to clarify I don’t think slavery was a necessary evil. Because I have to do that now.
Reading OP’s comments and posts I’m not finding anything particularly deep or groundbreaking. I assume OP wrote this about people who disagree with them.
Jung noticed this a century ago.
In a creative writing class we were told there are no new stories. How they’re put together and dressed up is a little different, but ultimately it’s all been done.
What if the straw man is more coherent than the person you’re making fun of?
The consideration is the exclusive romantic relationship. They wouldn’t have given him gifts if they didn’t believe they were in a relationship.
But this is probably fake.
For people outside of Canada, Doug Ford called the last provincial election in the middle of winter right after sending Ontario residents rebate checks. It was one of the lowest voter turnouts in history with winter storms impacting a lot of people.
Thank you for this. I had to read the article to follow the chain the events.
Interesting, I’ve heard that was a wheat allergy, if you react to flours in general. Since gluten is present in wheat flour, but a wheat allergy may include other grains that don’t contain gluten.
Regardless, I’d find it so difficult it wouldn’t be doable to cater to that allergy in a restaurant or store that serves wheat products. There are gluten free production kitchens out there, but they might use other flours that share proteins with wheat, that could trigger an allergic reaction. So yeah, sounds tough as hell.
To answer your question, to cater to all allergies, we could introduce regulations around opening packaged foods in places that -only- sell packaged products, and I would support it.
People just shouldn’t be eating shit with their hands and touching stuff at the same time anyway, I’m more likely to admonish someone for that.
Correct me if I’m missing information, but I was the head chef at a restaurant that did gluten free stuff years before it became a common menu option. Additionally, I lived with a celiac for a few years. Admittedly, I’ve been out of the industry for a long time.
As far as I know, gluten allergies are only related to injestion, if people can have fatal responses to airborne particles, that was never a part of our food safety protocols. With celiacs, which behaves a bit differently from an allergy - they can have an extremely painful response to even small amounts of gluten, but it has to be injested. I mean, I baked bread with my roommate and he’d be fine, but he would have a reaction if he accidentally used my butter after I cut it with the same knife I used for bread.
I used to think leashes should be optional until I had a dog who was perfect off-leash. I could be anywhere from a wooded path to a crowded sidewalk and that dog would be right beside me, but I only ever took her on hikes or through calm neighborhoods. Plenty of people knew my dog was friendly and would stop to pet her when I was out.
My boyfriend at the time had her just as long as I did, but couldn’t control her off-leash as well as me. He tried anyway. He walked her next to a highway, she got overwhelmed, went chasing someone across the street, through traffic. Both him and the dog almost got fucked up on the highway when he tried to get her under control.
After that I only let her off leash in places where it was safe and allowed because she’s a dog and it just takes one bad moment to get her or someone else killed.
Beyond that personal anecdote, if you look at pet insurance claims statistics there are hell of a lot of accidents and attacks that start with “Dog was off-leash.”
Most people who have sexist or racist opinions don’t know their behavior is sexist or racist, most of it is conditioned socially.
So maybe the perfume analogy is good?
A person might not be aware is harmful, but there’s information about it, they just don’t seek it out. Maybe someone tried to explain their perfume is overwhelming, making it difficult for a small group of people to concentrate, but they’ve ignored them. When they see groups trying to get their perfume banned from public places they think those people are overreacting because they like the perfume. The perfume clearly isn’t hurting anyone because anyone who would be affected by it has left their workplace, or decided not to say anything because they keep getting ignored, and management thinks they complain too much, and they can’t lose their jobs. Socially, anyone who doesn’t like the perfume already avoids them. The perfume can’t be that big of a deal.
There’s a bit of a difference between a re-packaged cash grab and the continuation of a series, or modern recontextualizing of a story.
We remake Batman like every 10-20 years because we’ve been writing Batman stories since the second world war. Batman is more of a legendary folk hero, an archetype to build stories around, like Paul Bunyan was to early settlers (And the indigenous people’s Glooscap, upon whom he was based.)
And then there’s concepts that keep inspiring more stories that can’t be contained in one film. Alex Garland is an incredibly talented writer of original films, he wrote 28 Days Later and returned to write 28 Years, which is a sequel and not a remake.
Saying you’re supportive vs. actually doing the work to listen, understand, and be supportive, are much different things. Your empathy is performative if you don’t back up your words with actions, no matter how you dress up your opinions with empathetic-sounding statements.
Consider this: If you’re truly empathetic and open minded, why do you need to keep pointing it out?
The fact that you present an opinion piece from media owned by special interests to support your argument is enough to see why you believe what you do.
I have a group of friends, some of whom are trans, some of whom have medical degrees, and we have these discussions all the time. However, when someone talks about their right to exist being threatened, in a world where their right to exist is being threatened, is when you’ve decided to come in complaining about how poor you can’t engage in any polite discourse because people downvote you.
A number of people here have told you why this is the case, but you proceed to play the victim.
There are more than two sides, and no, the science on sports isn’t more clear than it is on gender affirming care. Even in the pub med links someone else posted, which they apparently hadn’t read in entirety, go into how controversies around trans identities is sports has become a solution in search of a problem. You should read those links.
I don’t know what about my post made you think I wanted or was willing to extend empathy to your point of view. Was it when I called you a moron or an idiot?
Making immigration more difficult already benefits the wealthy. Not having birthright citizenship won’t change that.
Citizens are already being born without any questions about their character. And voting. And changing politics. Because foreign influence doesn’t come from some kind of sleeper agent citizen who was bred to take down governments, it comes through social media, embargos, lobbying and data harvesting—which is way easier than some kind of Bourne Identity plot.
But it’s become clear you’re arguing in case of a specific worst case scenario that I don’t believe is any more likely when jus soli comes with few or no conditions.
Unless you have specific data to support jus soli’s direct responsibility for the modern day manipulation by foreign influence, I don’t want to continue this conversation.
Have a good one.
That’s assuming foreign parents who had no intention of staying in a country decided to take the option of granting their child citizenship to that country for no reason. Then, that child lives somewhere that allows dual citizenship. And then, that child, once grown up in a foreign country, who has no commitment or interest in the nation of their birth, goes out of their way to vote and exert political influence on the country to which they have no commitment.
In those few, extremely rare cases are enough to fuck up a nation’s politics, immigration isn’t the problem.
One last fuck party before we let the moss take us.