Meanwhile in the states. My parents used to fly me alone when I was 12 on an airline nicknamed Scare-West.

That’s not true at all. Sometimes the cost is more for men. But almost universally the costs of the same item are more for women than for men. The running joke is that if you take the same volume of shaving cream, stick it in a taller narrower bottle, and add a label with purple and butterflies; you can slap a higher price on it.

Look at pockets. Women rarely find clothes with pockets. When they do the pockets are usually very inadequate. Their pants use less material but cost more.

Alternatively, their clothes often take more materials to clean, so drycleaners cost more for women’s clothing. Haircuts cost more for women but they usually take more time and materials as well. So there are often hidden considerations that complicate how we judge and view this matter. At the end of the day it costs more if manufacturers can get away with charging more without losing sales.

Oh boy. You struck gold here.

The US Constitution is the highest form of trade pact. That is all the federal government exists for, is to facilitate trade. Catching murderers, building roads, investing in education, stopping infectious disease… All there to keep us working, buying, and trading goods and services because without that whole segments of society starve and start wars.

I love how dumb the anti-taxation argument is because they have zero idea that they wouldn’t have any money, or jobs, without the government doing what it does with all that tax money.

Also, never forget that when you work for a wage you are selling your time. Looking at it that way changes how you feel about your life and job. It is 100% a choice that you make because the trade is worth the pay. If not, make yourself more valuable and get out. (It would take too long to explain how that works with disabilities and government aid).

Or, they balance the benefits of corrupt practices with equally detrimental (to the corrupt entity) costs. Making them less profitable than fair trade.

That’s why an oligarchy is NOT the same thing as capitalism. You cannot have a free market if an oligarchy exists. Additionally, the four foundational principles of capitalism are:

1. The right to own property and work for your own well being.
2. The right to own the profits of your labors, after modest taxation.
3. Laws and regulations to prevent corruption.
4. The enforcement of those laws and regulations.

Edit: wow, the spelling errors sure make that seem crazy as hell. Fixed.

Bleach, actually. A small amount of bleach added to spoiled milk makes it taste brand new. The government actually suggested this in a few countries for a while.

Plaster in flour was common enough that after the miller, the middle men, and then the baker all added a cut, there were loaves being sold with less than 20% flour in them. The result was mass malnutrition.

Also, and this is a spicy one but backed by basic economics, regulations are a required element to capitalism. The notion that deregulation is pro capitalism is a misinterpretation of the idea that markets are self regulating. A free market is one that is free of corruption and unfair business practices. Which cannot exist without regulations and the enforcement of those regulations. All our current economic woes are the result of straying away from proven economic theory (mostly deregulation) to the right allowing the corruption of the marketplace and emergence of a strong oligarchy.

The future is now the arrow of time old man.

So asking it to fuck off is the best we can hope for.

Same with my wife. A tummy tuck results in swelling by the end of the day if she pushes it too much. She is still incredibly active, even works as a fitness instructor and her coworkers call her nuts for how much she does. But sometimes she just needs some targeted massaging and rest.

Einstein might have something to say about that. Not necessarily a counter argument. But something for sure. Or maybe his chauffeur…

Actually there are whole segments of science that deal with the problem of observation. Many things are altered by the very act of observing. Some of those are easy to understand. Like photons being used to observe things will drastically alter subatomic particles. Other are a complete mystery.

I am not qualified in the sciences, just what I’ve picked up a long the way.

Just yesterday I had my locomotive catch on fire (I drive trains). After hours of dealing with the fire department, and then getting new engines brought out and set up to replace it so the train could get moving again, we got in the van to go home. And what did I see on a huge big screen TV inside the house next to where we were dealing with all of this? Mario64.

Excellent analysis. I often remind people that every economy that has allowed the wealthy to rule unrestrained for long enough has undergone a socialist revolution, which resulted in horrible conditions. The only exception was England, which adopted a new economy invented by Smith (capitalism, the most misunderstood/misrepresented economic concept on the planet right now). We don’t have capitalism in the US, we have slid back to what it replaced, which is a class system ruled by autocracy and oligarchy.

I think people often fail to understand just what they are asking the wealthy to give up. Yes, they should give it up, and never should have gotten it. But they have the power to prevent the government from taking it away from them, and that blinds them to the dangers of revolt. For them those changes would feel similar to how the average person would feel about inviting a random homeless person into their home. Sure, most of us could make that work. We probably have the room even if it is a squeeze, and it might even benefit us if they help around the house (my parents used to take in homeless people and give them off jobs in the hotel I grew up in. They usually stayed for a few weeks to a couple of months. They paid for their room and board, gave them free meals at the restaurant next door, and an hourly wage). But most of us will never do that (including me) for a number of reasons. Same with the wealthy. They could give up their profits, they definitely have enough to never need another dime. But the concept is so abhorrent to them they will never even consider it.

I think they need to update the laws regarding light placement. Right now they have to be placed at the top corners of the hood. So trucks and SUVs are forced to have their headlights positioned at eye level with many smaller cars. It’s absolutely bonkers.

It can construed as a side step around the protected classes. Which means it could open up the opportunity to be sued. Since there are so very many lawsuits on the books about this, there is a likelihood that there is a precedent that would hurt someone who tried to use this side stepping idea. So most (wise) employers would avoid doing this to avoid the risk. It isn’t black and white.

Hate me all you want. I’ll burn your eye sockets out with my high beams.

I spent an extreme amount of time aligning my low beams so they don’t point up into people’s eyes. And I drive a fairly low to the ground Hyundai Elantra. I am very careful with those high beams.

I think it is more accurate to fear the transition. Economically speaking, there will be turbulence. We have already seen some companies try to eliminate all their employees and replace them with AI. But we have already been here before. I work in railroading, and in the 80s they all got rid of huge portions of their employees by replacing them with computers. Those people found new jobs, and some of them fell on hard times, while some made out better. There are whole industries that were completely transformed due to technology changes in the past forty years. But it wasn’t the end of the world. It was just turbulent for some.

So for me, I’m not worried, but I am weary. I welcome AI as a new tool for humans to use. I just don’t welcome poor decision making from shareholders and shitty management.

I work on-call. Any hour day or night. I frequently go back to sleep after getting called. I have like fifty alarms on my phone.

As an actual Locomotive Engineer (I drive freight trains) I am having a hard time conceptualizing the level of stupidity here.

For me he’ll is a place of our own making. Like, heaven is a state of being we grow into. Like dieting and exercise changes us for the better, commandments are there just to help us grow into a better being that is heavenly (more and more like God). Hell is the state of missing out on that eternal progression. Which means is is always an option available to us, and it doesn’t come from God but ourselves.

My mom used to be an official Ty ^® dealer. She has bags and bags if those leftover in her basement. Iirc she has the Erin one that is worth an absolute fortune.

Right before the market crashed on them, some flipper sold one to a secret Ty representative and told a story about how she bought them at my mom’s store. They instantly pulled her from being a dealer. It was devastating at the time. Just suddenly cut off her main source of income. In the end though, I think it was a fortunate blessing.

She was skirting and Ty’s rules though. She couldn’t sell them for more than the price set by Ty. But she could give them away as a promotion if people bought other merchandise. So she would give away the highly sought after ones with a purchase of $100-200 of other merchandise. She had lines out the door.