• 0 Posts
  • 230 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 18th, 2023

help-circle
  • I’ve been in your position and in the other person’s position many times. It can be frustrating but we need to think about the big picture. It’s possible you hadn’t considered a certain approach, and it’s probable that many other future readers will not have considered a certain approach. So even though you might have said that you want to do something specific, it’s often helpful to some people to provide general information of another way to tackle the same issue.

    And of course you know your own situation, so now there are these comments that appear off topic, and they kind of are, for you, and that’s just how it is on forums.

    The other situation that comes up a lot is that people are doing it wrong. They are misusing some piece of technology and while their kluge might kind of work right now, it’s setting themselves up for bigger issues in the future. Of course no one appreciates it when you tell them they’re doing it wrong.


  • orcrist@lemm.eetoPolitical Memes@lemmy.worldHey little man
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    21 hours ago

    One of the articles I read yesterday mentioned that it’s quite likely the fetus will have health complications, possibly incredibly severe ones, but the doctor they interviewed didn’t make strong direct claims.

    So the answer to your question is yes, it does affect the pregnancy, most likely somehow. This news came out fairly recently, so perhaps we will get some more expert opinions over the next week or so.



  • orcrist@lemm.eetoPeople Twitter@sh.itjust.worksCopaganda
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    21 hours ago

    It sounds like you’ve been luckier than most, because in my limited experience personally and my extensive viewing of YouTube videos, it’s so clear that the vast majority of cops in the US are bad cops. Remember, good cops don’t let bad cops do bad things. Bad things include intimidation, lies, crimes, and civil rights violations.

    But what about patience? What if cops are only being patient because the law is not on their side? That doesn’t really make them good cops, now does it. For example, if the cop pulls you over and asks you for your license and insurance, of course you have to present it. But you don’t have to present it within 10 seconds. A cop might appear patient because they wait a minute or two, but actually state law probably requires them to do so.

    I think it’s also fun to depart from the law and to briefly consider basic morality. If a cop pulls you over and asks you questions, you don’t have to answer any of them. How many cops tell you that before they start asking questions? None. They’re trying to take advantage of the fact that you might not know about, or you might be scared to express your constitutional rights. And the law is on their side, but morality isn’t. We should keep that in mind, because the goal might be or could be to make the country a better place, and not merely to follow Supreme Court rulings.


  • There have been many at various times, and it also depends on your values, obviously. It also depends on whether you’re looking at things in specific times as opposed to generally.

    There have been many times when many mainstream Democrats were pro-censorship but most Republicans were not.

    Then there are other situations that I think are edge cases and therefore interesting. For example, Obamacare did make life better for real numbers of Americans, but it also guaranteed that we wouldn’t be looking at universal healthcare for a few more decades, if ever. And that was a law pushed for and passed by Democrats. Of course you could argue that it’s better than nothing, maybe it was, but medical debt is far worse now than it ever has been, and predictably so. So then you wonder why Democrats pushed for it, and we all know the answer to that, corruption. Of course they would say that it’s the best they could do, but is that even true? We’ll never find out, cuz they didn’t try.

    So how do you rate rate these gray area situations? Things that are better than nothing but worse than a lot, but the politicians are only voting for them because they are corrupt.




  • Right right that’s true, we should focus on the future. But if you’re too blind to realize that most Washington Democrats are never going to help make things better, you need to look at the past more.

    We got where we are for many reasons, which definitely include the actions of Democratic president and congresspeople over the last three decades. Those people brought us where we are, with Republican help of course, so we would be fools to expect any better from them going forward.


  • A few of those bullet points make the classic blunder of US election conversation, ignoring the electoral college.

    For example, Democrats who realized they were not in a swing state and stayed home didn’t actually make anything worse. They were using their brains. Maybe they didn’t stay home, maybe they were actually going to their job and making money. So when you’re looking at total national turnout, it actually doesn’t tell you anything useful.





  • I don’t quite agree. On the one hand, all of those companies that publicly caved to Trump are f****** terrible. On the other hand, a lot of DEI policies are actually basic common sense, because if you want to get skilled employees, it’s pretty ridiculous to exclude everyone who’s not white male. Which is to say, if companies have similar policies to what they had before even using a different name, it’s probably good for them and their employees, even if their cowardice is bad for the nation.



  • Except what you’re describing doesn’t make sense. If the new owners purchased all of those things, then in reality they purchased the company. Courts are very likely to agree on this. It looks like a company-wide sale, therefore it probably is, even if someone tries to add a line saying “we aren’t liable”.

    But imagine someone could “sell everything other than the liability”. In such a case, the seller would be putting themselves on the hook to pay outstanding debts (i.e., the seller would be liable). And we know they have money – they just sold the thing. So then the seller would pay… But they know that in advance, so they would not agree to such a sale in the first place, unless they were planning to steal that money through creative accounting of some kind… But both parties know all of that that in advance, so they would both be acting fraudulently.







OSZAR »