I think it should be legal, with extra protections for the workers to protect them from exploitation and abuse. Unfortunately though, our entire economic system is exploitative, so I’m not sure if it would ever entirely be by choice that somebody turned to prostitution, though labor itself is never entirely by choice. I only work at my job because I have to, not because I really want to. A worker selling their body to perform legal labor for money is on par with a person selling their body for another’s sexual gratification. Making it illegal just makes it worse for the workers, since they’re obviously going to do it anyways and won’t get any protections from the law.
Sex doesn’t always have to be for love, equating it with love is something religious people have forced on the world to get over their own religion-induced guilt over the whole thing. Bonobos have a crazy amount of sex and use it for all sorts of social interactions, it’s something animals do to feel good and relieve stress. There’s instances of other primates even engaging in prostitution as well, where they trade sex for food, and prostitution is one of, if not the oldest job among humans.
Punch in the face that makes Russia & especially Putin look bad/weak, so it may hurt Russian/help Ukraine morale
May peel Russia's forces away from the fight in Ukraine, since not only do they have to retake it (it's not an option), but they may have to commit more forces across the rest of their border in areas that were once considered "safe"
If they're able to secure the territory long-term, it could help in potential future peace talks as a bargaining chip
Makes the effects of the war more widely felt by average Russians, since it's likely conscripted middle-class soldiers there vs the volunteer peons that are sent to die in Ukraine.
There is a supply route and a nuclear facility close by to that area, so potentially they're trying to hit supplies behind enemy lines.
Hopefully it works out well for them, as it is a big risk given that Russia is still on the offensive.
Fuck the polls, VOTE. They'll go all out on trying to manipulate the election, prevent people from voting, and throwing out votes where they can, unfortunately an overwhelming majority is needed to blow these people out of the water.
I wouldn't trust him to handle a casino, much less the economy... oh wait, he ran several casinos and bankrupted them all.
And his "signature issue", building a wall between the US and Mexico was a joke that really doesn't even deal with why people are coming into the US in the first place or who is giving all these undocumented workers jobs in the first place, not to mention that they're not taking jobs that any Americans even want.
Yep, I really enjoy his viewpoint on the Ukraine war, it seems a bit more balanced than alot of the other channels out there. Youtube commenters seem to run the gamut of either Russia is on the brink of collapse and the Ukrainians are achieving victory at every turn, or the opposite, that Ukraine is on the edge of collapse any day now. I just want something closer to the truth, I don't want cheer-leading or hype, just an assessment based on what we know. I get the sense from Nielsens that that's what I'm getting. He's a military analyst at the Royal Danish Defense College, which seems to suggest that he has at least some knowledge about how these things work.
I heard one analysis of this attack has to do with the ebb and flow of offensives/counter-offensives and also about Russia's volunteer vs conscript troops.
Militaries can usually only support big offensive operations for so long before they need to go back on the defensive, build up reserves, and equipment again, while the other side goes on the offensive. And it goes back and forth like this, almost cyclical. Russia has recently been on the offensive for weeks/months now, but they're coming close to reaching the end of this "offensive cycle", they're about to transition back to being on the defensive and waiting out Ukraine's counter-offensive. So what this attack seems like it may have been designed to do is to keep Russia on the offensive, since taking territory inside of Russia is NOT something Russia will back down on. Ukraine taking their own territory back is whatever, but taking Russian territory? Putin can't lose territory and will have to respond. All this basically keeps Russia on the offensive, which gives Ukraine a slight advantage as a defender while Russia throws more troops against them. The idea is to wear down and split Russia's forces.
The other thing is the idea that Russia's military is basically a two-tiered military, with Volunteer troops coming from the poorer, outer regions of Russia, they're joining for money and it's not as big of a deal when they die in droves in Ukraine, whatever. Conscripts, on the other hand, are drawn from the inner, more middle-class areas of Russia, but those aren't the troops that typically go out to Ukraine. Those are the troops that most Russians in the more well-to-do regions know and they're not typically put in the line of fire, they get the "safe" jobs defending Russian territory. So they're probably not as battle-hardened, and if Russia has to start using Conscript troops in the fighting, it starts getting felt by the average Russian. War is no longer this far-off thing that doesn't affect them, it's their family members that start dying now and potentially pushes the Russian public more to start caring about the war.
Still early though, so maybe it doesn't do much to push the needle, but it'll be interesting to see how it all pans out.
I think good people try to help those around them, they think more in terms on the local level, they want to be more hands on in helping and less about commanding militaries or directing a huge bureaucratic behemoth like the US government. That's for people with a lust for power for the sake of power or for building a legacy or whatever. I keep waiting for some sort of crack or bad thing to suddenly pop up about Walz and he just seems like a genuinely nice guy, it's kind of weird, but not in a Republican kind of way.
I used Win10 mostly without issue and when I transitioned to Win11 that went without issue as well and it's been pretty much smooth sailing the whole time. The few annoyances I had with it, I was able to find something that fixed the issue, it just works. The only thing I really didn't like was that the only reason I transitioned to Win11 as early as I did was because of an update they sent out that made it sound at the time like I had to switch over, something about the wording made it seem like I had no choice, I remember it being a bit confusingly worded. I had wanted to hold out as long as possible on Win10, but because of that went ahead with the switch. It's been fine since then, but I would've preferred not having to switch because of that.
Primitive Technology: Just a guy out in the forest making stuff by hand, absolutely no talking, no drama. It's somehow relaxing to watch. He may have even built the camera itself out of sticks and stones.
Any “on the fence” voter who does even the barest research or watches one event will go “Oh HELL no”.
That's still actually a pretty high bar for "on the fence" voters. Anyone who is of voting age, lived through the past 8 years, and is still undecided about Trump is probably already an idiot who can't even be bothered to do basic research outside of reading facebook while on the toilet.
There should be a No Vote tax, make it just $1–10 or something small. If you vote, you don’t pay it. Use the money to help pay for administering the elections (wouldn’t cover everything, but it’d help).
Simpler times. He gave us these nuggets of wisdom:
"You take the UNCF model that what a waste it is to lose one's mind or not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How true that is"
"The Holocaust was an obscene period in our nation's history. ... No, not our nation's, but in World War II. I mean, we all lived in this century. I didn't live in this century, but in this century's history"
"I have made good judgments in the past. I have made good judgments in the future"
"I believe we are on an irreversible trend toward more freedom and democracy, but that could change"
"potatoe" (when trying to "correct" a 12-yr old's spelling of "potato")
I think it should be legal, with extra protections for the workers to protect them from exploitation and abuse. Unfortunately though, our entire economic system is exploitative, so I’m not sure if it would ever entirely be by choice that somebody turned to prostitution, though labor itself is never entirely by choice. I only work at my job because I have to, not because I really want to. A worker selling their body to perform legal labor for money is on par with a person selling their body for another’s sexual gratification. Making it illegal just makes it worse for the workers, since they’re obviously going to do it anyways and won’t get any protections from the law.
Sex doesn’t always have to be for love, equating it with love is something religious people have forced on the world to get over their own religion-induced guilt over the whole thing. Bonobos have a crazy amount of sex and use it for all sorts of social interactions, it’s something animals do to feel good and relieve stress. There’s instances of other primates even engaging in prostitution as well, where they trade sex for food, and prostitution is one of, if not the oldest job among humans.