• 8 Posts
  • 386 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 2nd, 2023

help-circle
  • You make some good points, but i cant resist the thought experiment:

    Is there even an incentive for solving women’s problems? Patriarchy can use women to portray the ultimate evil; influencers can use that portrayal to criticize women, engage in rage bait, get attention and secure brand deals.

    Capitalism can appease men to promote consumerism wrapped in misogyny. Corporations can capitalize on women’s loneliness and low self-worth.

    I have noticed that women with low self-worth find meaning in work, which ultimately profits corporations, the money they will earn will be expanded on consumerisms/additions which again can be profited by capitalism and corporate.

    The rich can have as many resources as they want, so why solve it? Other than individuals (women) taking matters in their own hands and rescuing each other I don’t think there is enough incentive to help women as community or whole



  • Quantitative analysis showed a steep and consistent decline in institutional religious involvement. The number of respondents attending religious services dropped dramatically between 2003 and 2013. At the start of the study, over 80% attended services at least occasionally. By the end, nearly 60% reported never attending.

    Affiliation with religious institutions also declined, with formal identification falling from nearly 89% to just 60%. Belief in God showed a more modest drop—from about 83% to 66%—while individual spiritual practices like meditation actually increased. The percentage of participants who practiced meditation rose from 12% to over 21%, suggesting that spirituality remained meaningful even as institutional ties weakened.

    The ‘nones’ didn’t say no to religion, just to organized religion. Atheists are not in that percentage, nor are people who have a religious identity (eg Pagan, Jewish etc) but don’t actively go to gatherings of that religion.











  • Kryten: [Talking about his new human penis] Well, tell me, sir. Is that what it’s supposed to look like? Lister: Well, yeah. Kryten: It’s hideous! That’s it? That’s the best design they can come up with? Are you seriously telling me there were choices and someone said, "Ah, there. That’s it. That’s the one we’re looking for - the last chicken in the shop look’. Shakespeare had one? Einstein? Perry Como sang “Memories Are Made of This” with one of those stashed in his slacks?

    https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0684152/quotes/

    You reminded me of my fave red dwarf episode





  • You’re right. It should be all 2+ homeowners. I gave the concession because my target is the ultra rich and the rich, not just the boomers that bought at the right time and have holiday homes.

    In my head I could see if we all pushed for 2+ homes instead of 3+ homes then the result would be only to tax the second home and not the 3rd, 4th, etc.

    Although the best result would be to tax the 2+, i need to attack the rich and ultra rich right now. Those fuckers are really ruining it for the rest of us



  • In this fantasy, market rate for comparable houses, so that’s usually based on sqft, rooms and location. If you’re thinking apartments in a complex I would say each apartment is a unit and taxed fair market value. I wasn’t thinking about taxing spare rooms, just to avoid taxes on middle class. All of my hair brained ideas target the wealthy.