krellor @ krellor @kbin.social

Posts

0

Comments

253

Joined

2 yr. ago

Schumer is the senate majority leader, he is the person who can bring things to a vote in the Senate. AOC should have focused her lobbying on the chamber of Congress she is a member of to bring a vote on a bill. Or even draft a bill for committee. Not just exhort the president to a course of action that was unlikely to proceed. I'm sure they did it either because they knew they didn't have the votes, or to protect Dems in vulnerable seats. Either way, they shouldn't have pushed their portion of the governments responsibility to the executive.

Yeah the biggest win was the change to repayment plans. If you get on an income based repayment plan and make your payments for 20 years, the rest will be forgiven, and the monthly payment can be $0 if your income is low enough. That sounds like a long time, but it makes it so these are not forever loans anymore, with more obvious financial benefit to students to pursue a degree.

What more can he do without Congress? He tried to act unilaterally through executive action and it didn't work. He told the house and the senate, back when there was a (slim) Dem majority in both that he needed them to act and Schumer, AOC, and others kept publicly insisting he had the authority to act through executive action.

So blame the folks who failed to act when they might have had a chance to get it through Congress.

I don't think there is a technological silver bullet, but technology might enable you to overcome your concerns. Reading other answers and your comments, one concern seems to be the inability to influence mods once they are in their post. That seems easy enough to address through community voting implemented and enforced by the software.

What your really need to do is sit down and game out the situations and actions you need, and that becomes the basis for your functional software spec.

The bigger issue is who runs the software and on what hardware? Implementing safeguards to keep server admins in line with the community would be much more difficult than mods.

Sometimes "I don't know" is the only correct response yet one so few are willing to give. Kudos.

That seems reasonable. I also think it stems from my idea of ownership being a standalone house, and didn't include things like owned apartments, flats, condos, etc that would make up a large state of ownership in big cities.

It's not that I didn't think anyone had the means, but that there would be a lower percent than they have due to wealth inequality. And yes, we are a product of our environment, and much of the western media covers the bad behavior of oligarchs. I don't routinely get exposed to contemporary slice of life vignettes of other countries.

Lastly, when you try and shame others for showing that they learn, challenge the internal biases that we all have, and change their own opinions, you only serve to show others the calcified state of your own perceptions.

I was surprised as well. It would be worth confirming the dates from a second source, but there are some ready possible explanations for it as well. It could show a large number of multigenerational households. It could relate to the distribution of the population in high and low cost areas (rural vs urban likely). So it does seem high, but not impossible.

Cheers!

So your comment made me go "lol, imagine buying a house in Russia." Meaning my preconceptions were that most in Russia didn't have the means to own a home.

But then I'm like, I don't actually know that, let's check it out.

According to this site home ownership in Russia is over 90%. So what you outlined is a real problem for people there, and changes some of my mental picture of Russian life.

The more you know!

I think even worse than the expectation of instant knowledge is the expectation that everyone must pick a side and must do it now. There are dozens of conflicts around the world with atrocities being committed, but this is the only one you consistently get called out for not picking a side.

I think it's healthy for people outside of the conflict to ultimately feel one side has more or less justification, while still acknowledging their faults and mistakes.

So the history of Israel and it's neighbors is long and complex. A short summary might be that when Israel was formed none of its neighbors recognized it as a state and invaded. Over the years there has been significant conflict, with wrongs perpetuated on both sides. Eventually Egypt and Jordan officially recognized Israel as a state and began a long period of normalization of relations between the two.

The remaining neighbors, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, and the West Bank are more complicated. Gaza elected Hamas who has sworn to destroy Israel. West Bank and the Palestinian authority has negotiated over the years with Israel, and in my opinion been treated poorly. Syria and Lebanon (with Hezbollah) still refuse to acknowledge Israel as a state and vow to fight it until it's destruction.

Behind all of this is Iran, who funds and coordinates training and resources for the various Arab groups fighting against Israel. The ongoing terrorist activity in the region makes it almost impossible for a true negotiation to occur and a transfer of stewardship of the three districts in the West Bank to full Palestinian governance.

So why does Hamas invade and take hostages? Because they have seen ongoing efforts to normalize relations between Arab countries and Israel, including with Saudi Arabia, and that is exactly what they don't want. Remember, they only exist to destroy Israel. That is their entire governance platform. By provoking Israel to invade, it creates unrest in the region, staining relations between Arab leaders and Israel. Which is what Hamas wants.

The take away should be that religious ethnic states are a humanitarian and diplomatic mess. There are no easy answers or solutions when the platform of one country is that the other country must cease to exist. Likewise, Israel just can't get out of its own way with respect to exacerbating tensions via settlers in the West Bank and occupation of the Golan heights. Though to be fair, the Golan heights were captured, like the West Bank, after the countries who controlled them attacked Israel in the six day war.

So to answer your question, yes, this is all playing out like someone wanted. That someone is Hamas.

Not the person you asked, but I have the same general sense that most women would not find it a positive thing to list. Without making broad unsupported generalizations about women, I would suggest:

• it's a TV show, not a personality. It's a bit much to list as an important detail on a dating profile.
• similar to the first point, there is a stereotype about certain men that made the show their personality. Cringe.
• the show is largely shock humor, irreverent, pithy comedy dialogue. Not bad in and of itself, except when paired with the above mentioned points of it being used as a surrogate personality, or listed as if it's an important part of a person's interests.

Anecdotally, my wife also dislikes the show.

I would suggest that listing broad categories of things you like is probably better than an individual thing. E.g., saying you like reading and listing a few authors isn't weird, but listing one single book seems a little obsessed.

Agreed. Don't know that I ever really followed gear threads online. However I did feel really clever when I made an altoid tin that carried a little baggy of tooth powder (basically dry toothpaste), a spool of floss without case, firestarter, small knife, cut-down toothbrush, and sewing kit. Small, cheap, mostly from the dollar store, and lets me get by for up to a week without much else.

If you are taking about supporting a particularly flagrant bad corporate actor, then I agree. If about the safety of the milk chocolate, then the article indicates otherwise.

So the whole motto is that ounces add up to pounds, so it's not 5 ounces making of breaking the lid, but ounces here and there adding up to many pounds.

I've done a substantial amount of hiking and climbing, and I definitely learned to appreciate cutting ounces over the years. Like all things though, done folks take it to a crazy extent or even dangerous.

The common thread seems to be the concentration of cocoa solids, since all the concerning products had greater levels (dark chocolate, powders, etc). The Chucky bar being milk chocolate should be fine, per the article.

I do occasionally. I'm mindful of my caffeine intake, so if I really want a hot beverage and herbal tea doesn't cut it I can make up a light cup of coffee, or a mix of coffee and cocoa. I usually do this after I've had my coffee for the day or when I'm planning on having my regular coffee later than normal.

I can appreciate that position, but let's dig into the nuance a little bit.

After 2005 Israel had a temporary blockade which ended in 2006. After 2007 and the election of Hamas, a new blockade enforced by Israel and Egypt was implemented to isolate Hamas. Excerpt from Wikipedia:

Israel blockaded the Gaza Strip temporarily in 2005–2006. In 2007, after Hamas seized control of the Gaza Strip, both Israel and Egypt have imposed an indefinite blockade of Gaza that is ongoing to present day, on the grounds that Fatah and Palestinian Authority forces had fled the Strip and were no longer able to provide security on the Palestinian side..

I fully recognize that traditionally a blockade can constitute an act of war, and exerts control over a region or country, so I understand why the UN considered a blockade am ipso facto occupation.

At the same time, where is the outrage against Egypt, and what less invasive measure do you propose Israel and Egypt take to ensure regional security when you have a neighbor whose stated purpose is the violation of UN recognized borders?