You might able to shoot down 20 nukes you aren’t shooting down 1500

And in the same day the crime was at the lowest someone still got killed, and the day the stock market rose to a new high some stocks went down.

Just because a problem exists doesn’t negate that it was the best time period

From 2006-2012 we had decently reliable, simple to operate vehicles, that got not shit gas mileage

Women have much higher rates of being sexually assaulted than men. But unwanted sexual harassment can increase with both sexes which is an objective negative. More attractive women are also more likely to have their intelligence questioned compared to a more attractive male. There are also issues of not knowing if people like you for your character or just your appearance that negatively affects everyone. The point is life isn’t just better in every way if you are attractive there are some downsides as well

Comparing a drug manufacturer who supplies drugs to people in hospice care and an insurgent group is such a strange comparison.

Did a pharma company make a drug that could cause harm to patients? Yes.

Did they pretend it was less harmful than it was? Yes.

Did they encourage over prescribing? Yes.

Did they intentionally try and kill off their paying customer base? No.

Your preference is posting the image on the left and saying I like this

Your phobia is posting the picture on the right and saying eww

Your weird and non funny if you are posting anything about it in a subreddit dedicated to shitposting…

Like imagine a person posted “what I mean when I say I like dark men” and the picture on the left was an Italian man and the picture on the right was an African man. Wouldn’t you think that is vaguely racist? And wouldn’t you also be really confused why someone randomly posted that here?

Curvy would at least make sense but chubby?

Like if you are going to be fatphobic can you at least make it funny?

The point is that may people will instinctually call mushrooms a vegetable

If we take that same example and add 4 categories and then add milk as another item I am still willing to bet the average person will put mushrooms as a vegetable and make the categories fruit vegetable dairy meat even though vegetables aren’t real and you could have a category of animal products.

Now if you only quiz the biology majors you might get a different result but in the U.S. only 38% of people are college educated and the most common major is business

Did it actually help people understand it?

In my experience most laymen’s explanation involve knowledge of the word superposition but not any clarity on what it is and they treat the cat in the box as a real cat

Every once in a while someone seems to understand it but that seem mostly limited to people who had to take a class on quantum/ statistical mechanics

Because adding more staffing is really hard and will take a very long time even if we started today.

We still should be working for that ideally today, but in terms of immediate actions taking away/delaying healthcare is something that can be done today

Apple, tomato, peppers, and cucumbers are all fruits

Mushrooms are mushrooms

Pork is meat

But if you give the average person those it’s much more likely they will make the categories fruits, vegetables, and meat and put mushrooms in the vegetable category

Thank you, schrödingers cat is one of those things that a bunch of people have heard of but it seems nobody actually understands

Take a piece of paper with 3 squares drawn on it

And hand a person a picture of an apple, tomato, pepper, cucumber, pork cutlet, and mushroom and ask them to put the pictures into the squares and then label each square

Average person will definitely label a box as vegetables and put the mushrooms in it

She killed multiple people, in what world dos that not deserve serious prison time?

People are dead…

2 years per person killed of prison time and a permanently suspended license with the caveat that if she is ever caught driving again she gets 10 more years in prison

That’s a debate since authoritarianism to libertarianism is a spectrum so there is no official “normal” and its generally used qualitatively on individual polices

Regulated and censoring speech - auth Absolute freedom of speech - lib Limiting speech to prohibit only speech that can cause harm to others - somewhere in the middle

Requiring the state to dispense all drugs - auth No drug regulations, no dea, no fda- lib Some drug regulations including requiring “generally recognized as safe and effective”- somewhere in the middle

No country is full auth or full lib

It’s not done and it’s annoying. Logically speaking management knows what you are working on so if you are working on a 25% complete deliverable they have a reasonable expectation what that should look like. When management doesn’t do that it’s also annoying.

I literally never did and I am done reading your page long responses that involve you not reading anything I wrote, making up an argument and then responding to that I have had more productive conversations with a homeless man on the bus

Dude are you a bot? For the 500th time I NEVER SAID YOU HAVE LESS FREEDOM IN A SOCIALIST SOCIETY

That is a straw man you have made up and keep arguing against

You are the one making it binary when it isn’t and when I say it isn’t you bring it back to being binary. You can have libertarian beliefs without wanting a complete dissolution of the government the same way you can have authoritarian beliefs while still wanting people to have individual freedoms. So yes you can have libertarian capitalism which is simply a less regulated form vs authoritarian capitalism. We can see this in the UK vs EU where the UK is requiring people to submit official IDs to see porn (auth) vs the EU passing data privacy laws (lib)

You are inventing all these other arguments that I am not making. I have never said socialist countries have less freedoms and don’t even remotely believe that so if you are not making a strawman then try rereading what I am saying because you are arguing against an argument I am not making which is the literal definition of a strawman

That’s called being authoritarian, there is nothing wrong with that and as long as the state is using that power fairly that can create a great society but you must realize that on a 1-10 scale of government authority with a 1 being full on anarchy and 10 being the state has full control to make all decisions that you are closer to a 10 then a 1

As soon as you give the state power to go after people with different beliefs (even if those beliefs are deplorable) you are being authoritarian

They believe in an authoritarian government systems. Where the state has extra power that they can use to enforce their goals. That is in contrast to anarcho communists where the state is dissolved.

Logically most leftists fall somewhere in the middle as not wanting full on authoritarian government but also not wanting a complete lack of government

In theory if the state has the best interests of the people, then by giving the state extra power all you are doing is reducing bureaucracy and increasing efficiency. That however also makes it easier for the state to abuse that power so I am not saying one is better or worse than the other