The phrase "the police should have handled it better but..." should just be outlawed. I guess it does let everyone know to never have a conversation with whoever says it though, so I guess there's that.
This 21 Year old has a 6 and 3 year old sons. I'll let you do the math on that. But it adds up to before some states had bans.
First of all, red states made it next to impossible to get abortions even when it was legal. Also, they cost money. Contrary to apparent popular belief, George Soros or the DNC don't just appear to fund every abortion. Or, sometimes people are Catholic, which is fucking stupid, but maybe there's some family shit you don't know about. Especially for a minor trying to get an abortion. Again, contrary to popular belief, they weren't just being handed out for free on every corner to every 16 year old who wanted one. There were still a million obstacles long before the Dobbs decision.
Second, "I'll let you do the math" is a judgey, self-righteous, and gross statement.
Especially fucking Wiley. If you're a student paying hundreds for a textbook with a "supplemental code" that makes it so you can't buy it used, then it's probably by fucking Wiley. Fucking greedy cunts.
So UPS will only put ac in new trucks, sometime next year, and possibly get them to the hottest parts of the country, and old trucks will get "cabin fans" (?).
I know negotiations must be really difficult. I know everyone is relying on their jobs and paychecks to survive. But it seems like too often these corporations get away with half measures and vague promises because even when we revoke our labor, they're still the ones in control. Workers from a company like UPS seem like they should have more control than most though. Shutting down deliveries across the US indefinitely is a pretty big threat. So maybe they could have gotten better results.
Wtf is this thread. I will never understand people who will try to justify shit like this. What does the average person think they're getting out of fighting against better working conditions and higher pay? This is why it's so funny when Americans say they aren't affected by propaganda. Only other countries have that.
Why is it next to impossible for people to get approved to adopt, but any asshole can become a foster parent? I think you need more in-depth screenings to adopt from pet rescues. If the US is going to force pregnancy on people, then they really need to get a handle on the foster system. Because it's always about "protecting the children," right?
Exactly. Plus it just further stigmatizes people with actual mental illnesses by constantly associating them with the absolute worst dregs of society. Why is it so hard for people to understand that there's a wealth of sadistic, selfish, and unfathomably stupid people out there in the world, and none of those things automatically equate to mental illness.
Anytime there's a conversation about trump, fascism, and white supremacists in America, there's always at least one of the "dEmOcrAtS sHoUld HaVE dOnE MoRe" crowd. It's so stupid, I can't help but think it's very intentional misdirection. Like it's some astroturfed bullshit from a conservative think tank.
America is shitty for the poor (there is no middle class anymore). So at this point, if voting for someone who is not a fucking fascist dictator is all we can do, then that's what we're going to do.
I absolutely agree. But I do think it's interesting how there's almost never any discussion of drug use and alcoholism among housed people, as though that's not a social problem in itself. And imagine how much more severe the consequences are of people going to work fucked up, driving their cars, selling drugs in their dorms and getting kicked out of college, raising a family while trashed on xanax, and so on.
But when this happens, it's an even more individualized matter than it is with homeless people. When we look at homeless folks, we individualize the blame and socialize the consequences (it's the homeless person's fault they're homeless, but that's fucking up our city etc). Somehow, we never consider the social repercussions of housed people with addictions, especially if they have an addiction to alcohol. Alcoholism can get pretty far in an "average" person's life before anyone really steps in and sees it as a serious problem. Same with prescribed drugs, because they have some psychiatrists signature on them. Millions of people drink when they get home from work. But if we see a homebum with a 40, we first make a snap diagnosis, then widen our judgement to everyone whose ever been evicted or had to sleep in their car.
All I'm saying is that half the problem is ingrained social stigma, when they're really not much different from the rest of us.
Thank you for this, it's very interesting to hear more details about how this was handled over there. In the US we tend to either have a very idealistic view (liberals) or very negative view (conservative) of Euro and Nordic countries' social policies. No country is perfect, but I guess if the outcome has worked well then we can't fault it even if the reason was to maintain their image by hiding poverty.
Regardless, it is an important study to disspell stigmas that have existed since the beginning of private property.
But it is still important when it comes to housing. This argument of homeless people being untrustworthy with money has undoubtedly already worked it's way into that debate. If people won't trust them with money, why would they trust them with an apartment? Canada and the US don't see them as "worthy" or responsible enough to be given anything, not even food. Look at what an insane process it is just to apply for food stamps in the US, and that applies to low income folks as well as homeless people. Everyone is considered a criminal until they can prove otherwise, and they're rarely given that chance
Not that I think academic research will make much of an impact. Research from the social sciences consistently debunks all kinds of common, harmful beliefs, and yet is still often ignored by policy makers and average people. It's depressing as fuck that there are academic researchers spending years on studies like this, convincing people to fund them, getting paid dick by their universities, and still a bunch of assholes who have never set foot on a college campus get to just cut it down by saying "oh, well, that's what I heard." And then move on with their lives while homeless people continue to suffer for no reason. This is an example of the far reaching impacts of devaluing education I guess.
the Heritage project leans into what legal scholars refer to as a unitary view of executive power that suggests the president has broad authority to act alone.
Did the fascists not just come for student loan forgiveness on the bullshit claim that Biden didn't have the executive power to do something like that?
Fuck these traitorous pieces of shit. If this shit doesn't stop we're about to be living in the fucking Pinochet regime (which was the brainchild of American conservatives, because of course it fucking was) and academics and musicians and authors are going to start getting disappeared along with our LGBTQ family, friends and neighbors. What a fucking shit show. And apparently there's not much we can do about it, except vote. As though that's ever done a fucking thing with an absolute anachronism of an electoral system.
What happened to the supreme court cases that said it's ok to discriminate against protected classes as long as it just so happens to be "against your religion"
What happened to those supreme court rulings they were so in favor of, that allowed poor little christians to blatantly discriminate against people they don't like
I wouldn't underestimate it. I also wouldn't buy into the "I have nothing to hide" narrative. It's not about hiding or not hiding. The fallout from the Dobbs decision is a great example of why, if you aren't concerned with privacy now, then you will be in the future. All of a sudden, the right of 51% of the population to make decisions about their own bodies was suddenly gone, and handed over to state governments. The day before that decision, people needing abortions and the doctors who provide them had "nothing to hide." The day after? They're suddenly criminals. Their social media can be monitored. Their online and in-person purchases. Where they travel and why. Their medical records. And maybe worst of all, their fellow Americans are offered prize money if they turn someone in so that they can be charged in criminal court.
Or what about Florida's "risk prediction" software that supposedly can predict which "at-risk" (aka non-white) kids will become criminals? Maybe I'm wrong for finding that unsettling. This is from 2015
What about social credit scores? Which we already have, we just don't get to see them (LexisNexis "risk solution" software). But sooner rather than later, every word and action will be recorded and held against us in every aspect of our lives, rather than just when applying for jobs and mortgages. And anti-discrimination laws don't do shit. They always find a work around. Although with the current supreme court I'm sure all forms of discrimination will be perfectly legal soon enough.
Btw private browsing doesn't prevent tracking. It just doesn't store anything in the broswer history.
The phrase "the police should have handled it better but..." should just be outlawed. I guess it does let everyone know to never have a conversation with whoever says it though, so I guess there's that.