A lot of people in the US argue that the poor don’t deserve anything, any lack of money is a moral failing, and they don’t deserve any kind of help.

A bit of a reduction. It’s not that being poor is a moral failing, but there is a mindset that if you don’t have a job, it’s your fault, and that if you have a job but are still poor, you’re probably wasting money on drugs or something. It’s not so much “they’re poor because they’re a bad person so I shouldn’t help them” as “if I help them then they won’t help themselves.” Which is an easy position to hold if you don’t consider how little the low-hanging jobs can pay, how much rent costs, how much food costs when you can’t home-cook it, and how hard it is to get a job when you don’t have a number, address, shower, or clean clothes.

And then there’s a second group that thinks “Well, we have systems in place. There are homeless shelters somewhere, so they should be going there instead of begging on the streets.” And they can be right, but you should probably do some research on said homeless shelters before you take that stance, in case it’s too far away to walk, understaffed/underfunded, or poorly managed.

It’s easy to think the poor don’t need your help if you don’t think on it too much, and to be fair, not everyone has the bandwidth and energy to be thinking on that. But at the end of the day, we have poor people, so those with means should be doing what they can to help.

I’ve seen this one before, but the alt text had me in a (silent) laughing fit anyways.

I wouldn’t say nothing. After stopping the Flag Smashers, they went to the GRC and told them not to be so mean to the refugees. But they didn’t really address the world borders thing or anything (as far as I remember,) so I guess this counts.

Well there’s that (and an answer to that,) but I meant superheroes enforcing the status quo by beating up people who want a change for the better without addressing their complaints. Like Killmonger comes to mind, but Black Panther did listen.

I can’t even remember the last time a superhero was like this.

Ah, yeah, nah, this whole thing is a circle. But not a real circle, more like a freaky circle.

Disney says Piccolo agreed to similar language again when purchasing park tickets online in September 2023. Whether he actually read the fine print at any point, it adds, is “immaterial.”

Whuh? Why didn’t they make their case around that instead of Disney+?

Thank you for this. I used to hear the term “wage theft” and associate it with underpaying workers relative to the value they produce, until I learned that wage theft refers to underpaying workers relative to what they’re contractually entitled to.

Don’t get me wrong, I do believe that it’s a problem to pay workers far less than the value they give, but “you’re not paying me what I’m worth” is not as egregious a problem as “you’re not paying me what you agreed to pay me.”

In most cases, underpayment can’t be fixed by an individual for themselves without a wide scale strike (which many workers aren’t in a good position to risk,) but wage theft is currently illegal and can be addressed by filing a complaint. So it’s better to keep it clear what wage theft is so that the average worker doesn’t dismiss it as some communist idea, at least until wage theft is no longer the greatest form of theft in the US.

WEED EATER.

I’ve heard it’s full of cliches ; )

Forgive me for not knowing the names, but I randomized a few to test.

Red: “We slice the meme. Everybody is using panels.”
Stripes: “We slice the meme.”
Red: “A sliced meme.”
Stripes: “A sliced meme.”
Red: “We use slices.”

Red: “A sliced meme. Everybody is using panels.”
Stripes: “A sliced meme.”
Red: “We use slices.”
Stripes: “We slice the meme.”
Red: “We slice the meme.”

Red: “We use slices. A sliced meme.”
Stripes: “A sliced meme.”
Red: “We slice the meme.”
Stripes: “We slice the meme.”
Red: “Everybody is using panels.”

I guess it works? Weird that it ended up with the same speaking order each time.

If you want an honest answer, I’d recommend finding some place that has a decent population of openly right-wing people so you can get an answer from them directly, rather than left-wingers snarking and saying they’re all brainwashed fanatics that would never dissent from the party’s candidate.

I’ve never seen that association with my friends who use it. It’s always been more of a meme word, a meaningless adjective you throw into a sentence to make it “funnier.”

Two wars can exist simultaneously.

I was surprised when I made attackPower and it suggested defensePower next. It was then that it sunk in that the autocomplete was AI.

Thanks for this. I had read up on it some time ago, and it seemed like par-for-the-course “paint the government our color once we’re in power” except for a couple concerning points, so when people around here were talking about it like it was literal fascism, I dismissed that as misunderstandings and exaggeration. I hadn’t realized that civil servants were hitherto untouched by the government switching colors.

So it sounds like it’s not literal fascism, but it’s more like… how in some fantasy worlds, higher powers will avoid getting involved in mortal affairs because doing so will give their enemies license to do the same and then the world becomes a mess. It sounds like if Project 2025 happens, then blue’s going to retaliate in kind when they get power back (because otherwise they’re at a major disadvantage,) and it keeps going, majorly hampering the government’s operations. Who wants to get a job that you’re gonna be fired from in 4 years? There’s a chance that blue’s just going to try to hit the undo button, but if red keeps knocking the block tower over and blue keeps rebuilding it, that’s still not going to go very well.

But at the same time… they’ve already stated their willingness to do this. So the damage to the unwritten contract between parties is already done, and the only way to avoid the consequences is to keep blue in power until red redacts, and hope blue doesn’t decide to do it first (which they probably won’t, unless they say something like “the only way to defend against red doing it is to make sure they don’t have their own people in there when they get the power.”)

I don’t like that, though. Sure, blue is generally more reasonable than red, but that’s because they have to be in order to secure votes from reasonable people. If all they need to be is more reasonable than the guys who are literally planning to destroy the government, that’s going to let them get away with some pretty undesirable things. I think a better move would be to try to address the deteriorating two-party dynamics we have. My money’s on Literally Anybody Else.

That’s made with a real apple, just coated in 17 metric tons of gold.

Calling someone a quitter, defeatist, etc., is not positivity, and I don’t think positive encouragement (in most cases) counts as indirectly saying they’re a quitter if they don’t do the thing.

Toxic positivity?

Carbs alone don’t make junk food. It’s the absense of other nutrients that make it junk food.

If carbs were inherently bad for beings in a survival situation (as ducks and other animals generally are,) we wouldn’t think they taste so good.