No good reason to support a monopoly. Sure, I know we can’t help some monopolies (grocery stores, internet service, etc.), but this is an entertainment thing.

There are unlimited ways to be entertained nowadays and YouTube is not a necessity. Let’s see how well YouTube gets by if we all stop watching for fun, and instead only watch when we have to, such as when we’re trying to learn how to fix a car the one time a year we need it.

“Help me build my echo chamber.”

Agreed. Not everybody can or wants to own a home even with a 25k bonus. Some people want the freedom to move around and explore without being bound for any more than a monthly or yearly term.

The solution is to pump up availability and let the prices correct themselves. Bind pay CEO as a multiple of their employee wages, and address economic shenanigans like stock buybacks and tax loopholes so that people end up with a larger piece of the pie–that way people can do what they want instead of being forced into one option or another.

It was just the Republicans who had a problem with it. Seemed like Biden was doing fine, so why complain? Haven’t you heard of this concept of giving someone a “taste of their own medicine?”

200% justified lol

Didn’t even notice that at first. All I could see were the thousand-yard stares

Sigh

Insufferable.

I can’t believe I even have to explain this.

There is no way to argue against a statement like “Women’s safety is more important than men’s feelings” because it’s such a loaded and ambiguous statement. It’s just as loaded and misused as the statement “it’s wrong to murder children” when used by proponents of banning abortion and limiting women’s reproductive rights. You can’t argue that it’s okay to “murder children” because it’s not okay to do that, but they’re intentionally misusing the statement to their own benefit for the emotional impact.

There’s probably some name for this logical fallacy, but I don’t know what it is. But the important thing is that you’ve fallen victim to it. “Men’s feelings” and “women’s safety” don’t negate each other, and they don’t have to compete; not unless you challenge somebody to argue against the statement “Women’s safety is more important than men’s feelings” exactly as you’ve done here. You’re manufacturing conflict from out of nowhere, and it’s an annoying distraction from real-world issues.

Why don’t you target your statement a little better? Why don’t you hold the actions of rapists and abusers against rapists and abusers, instead of innocent men who’ve done nothing but try to live their lives and respect the people around them?

Get off your fucking high-horse and rejoin reality with me where we have mutual respect for each other, whether you’re a man or a woman.

You are, right now. This post was, as well as every other post. I’m not just going to sit here and bite my tongue. The entire thing was designed as an attack to get a rise out of people, and here it is. Thanks to whoever made this post.

What kind of person would I be if I weren’t willing to defend myself?

Feel however you want, but don’t drag me into the what other people have done. I don’t deserve the prejudice, and I’d rather just not interact with you.

Okay. I don’t care enough to argue, so you win. Go hang out with the bears.

“How dare you try to defend yourself or half of all humanity.”

Since we’re crunching numbers, go ahead and normalize these as a percent based on number of direct bear encounters and number of direct man encounters. This will be the real numbers you care about hahaha

I’m all about personal choice. Please enjoy the nightmare of a bear mauling over just hanging out with a random person (if I even understand the question correctly–what the heck is even going on)

People who downvoted this are retarded. I’m just explaining the reasons for the lawsuits, which are being carried out by hundreds of professionals who have been working in industry and government for decades. Sorry if the truth is too tough for you to accept.

I want to reply to this, but people who type words in all caps are just too annoying and emotional to bother. It never fails that they just get pissed off and even more entrenched in their opinions lmao

And as always, it’s more complicated than the headline. Governments and oil companies are suing over this because EPA has instituted new rules that will require many oil companies to use calculation methods that will vastly over estimate their emissions, even though there is legitimate proof that their -actual- real-world emissions are lower than the emissions factors that have been written into law.

There is a fee associated with these emissions estimations, and it will be in the millions for many companies, while their actual emissions, should they have been allowed to base their estimate on real-world data, could have resulted in no fees at all.

The emissions factors were poorly designed because EPA has tried to push this through in record time in case the next administration aims to shut it down entirely. Had the regs been implemented better, it could have been really great–but our discontinuity of government is not great in every way, and this is just the latest example.

I’m in the US and I have a professional career. I’ve had many jobs where I’d travel around the US for short trips, or just have to work in the mountains for weeks on end, followed by trips back home via. plane or by car.

Carting a desktop and monitor around is impractical, and asking for trouble, and certainly wouldn’t fit in the carry-on luggage shelf or under an airplane seat. Additionally, gaming laptops generally have way nicer screens for watching Netflix or YouTube or whatever. I have a 17 inch Omen with a 1070 from like six+ years ago and it’s spent most of its life just being a way to use Excel, watch my favorite shows, and more recently, finally do some gaming.

Now that I’m more settled at home, I’m probably just going to buy a new gaming laptop because they’re so much more flexible than a desktop, and who cares about the most modern, graphically intense games nowadays. There are a few exceptions, but I could stay occupied forever playing games from five years ago, or whatever interesting indie release is coming out tomorrow.

He traveled out of state, with a gun, looking for trouble. And killed two people. He’s a murderer as far as I’m concerned, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he ends up killing again. He’s so proud of having shot those people that he’s literally going around the country and speaking about it lol.

Yeah, you didn’t know this back then. Maybe you did if you were a healthcare professional or a specialist in virology. In the US, all we had to go off of was the CDC, who are supposed to be the apex specialists, fighting with Trump who just had gut feelings about drinking bleach to kill the virus, and a literal ocean of misinformation and horrifying lockdown/mass casualty stories coming out of China.

It was clear that nobody actually knew what was up, and that public safety advice was biased through this filter intended to get people back to work to save the economy. Someone at some point decided that X number of people might die to save X percent of the economy and apparently we were supposed to be okay with that?

Hmmm.