It's been incredibly in your face if you aren't a privileged white person since basically the dawn of the country, with a small period of kind-of-not-really-thoufh improvement around WWII. Workers rights have always been shat on, being poor sucks and keeps getting worse with every year that m4a isn't a thing, and being a visible minority obviously also sucks what with the whole police murdering you thing or ICE gestapo knocking on your door etc.
Frankly I hope they ramp it up, because maybe it'll at least open up peoples eyes to all the other insane sorts of injustices that go on.
Libertarians (the right wing kind, at least) pretty commonly get made fun of/characterized as pedophiles among other things so they probably did mean libertarian lol
This comment has been downvoted but the phrase, "What if the child consents?" Is actually bandied about frequently on political subreddits like r/libertarian as a mockery by their detractors
You're too used to 8 hours - its been the standard for as long as you've been alive, but there is no good or scientific reason for it.
The work day used to be 12 (or in some cases more) hours, and a lot of people fought and literally died to get it down to 8. And the expectation wasn't that it would stay there - instead, the common idea was that as productivity due to technological advances etc. would keep pushing it down to only a few hours per day.
Instead, productivity has soared and the parasitic capitalists of the world and their legion of class traitor middle managers have managed to convince people that 8 hours is somehow perfect even though rarely anybody even actually works 8 hours these days - how long is your commute? Do you get work related alerts on your phone? Coworkers/bosses messaging you? That's all time wasted thinking about work. This small group of people - probably what, no more than 5000 out of 7bn people? Are hoarding and stealing obscene amounts of ill gotten gains, killing the planet in the process and ruining probably billions of lives, while we sit here and argue about whether or not we "deserve" to work less or whatever.
> while we sit here and argue about whether or not we "deserve" to work less or whatever.
Among the results of this increasing productivity is increased consumer choice. Consumer choice is almost always considered a good thing. As consumers, we don’t just argue about whether we all ought to buy X brand of bread or Y brand. Instead, we get a plethora of choices and the individual decides. Shouldn’t we expect this same ballooning of choice for producers? At a glance, it seems asymmetric, and it doesn’t seem like the present consolidation of production towards fewer but larger companies is going to help this.
What's the harm in it? The amount of urine is negligible in relation to the water, and unless you're sick with a UTI or something urine is sterile anyways.
I don't get it the other way around - why do people freak out about it? I don't care one way or the other whatever or not people piss in the pool next to me - its like somebody splashing you with water in the middle of a rainstorm.
It's still pretty much the most sterile thing that comes off or out of a human. If you really want your pool to be clean, you should make it avoid skin contact.
> It reacts with Chlorine to produce an irritant that irritates your eyes and nose.
So does pretty much everything related to your body, including the stuff usually present on your skin, the outside of your eyes, and the inside of your nose, throat, and lungs.
Which is part of why chlorine itself is noted to be “irritating to the nose, throat, and lungs” and “[a] severe irritant of the eyes”, without any qualifications of “if first combined with urine.” [0]
And why, when chlorine was used as a chemical weapon in warfare, it wasn't as a chlorine-urine binary agent.
"This is enough money" generally not being a thing is an inherent issue and contradiction of capitalism. Hopefully more people will realize the absolute ridiculousness and damage the idea of infinite growth the system has baked into it causes to people and nature.
The average person doesn't have the ability to do that because the average person doesn't really have agency.
>the average person has never had a good life, and probably never will
Because our society doesn't care about people, only capital. There's nothing wrong with the average person, its that the average person is born into an environment where everything is working against them.
And I think it's pretty clear that as we reach unprecedented levels of income inequality - especially with climate change being a thing - that the inherent contradictions of the system are becoming more and more obvious. The yellow vest protests are a clear example of this. If we're lucky it'll end well, but whether or not the ruling class will take control of the situation and steer us towards fascism remains to be seen.
I agree, to an extent. But it's not "our society". It's physics.
A person (singular) can grab as much as they can (and wish to) hold. An individual in good health in a country like the USA has a hell of a lot of agency.
But the people (plural) cannot. The economy relies on it, sure, but so too does the health of the environment, the physical amount of space available, energy limitations, and the hierarchical nature of status.
What works against them is the fact that we simply cannot have 300 million wealthy folk in big houses with cars (in the US) as a physical impossibility. Add on to that the societal aspect of the fact no-one is the binman/waiter/whatever in this scenario and it becomes even more obviously nonsense, yes, but it's not the largest problem by a long shot.
Oh, and then there's the other 6.5+ billion.
If you wish to work in charitable endeavours; there is nothing wrong with that, at all. Admirable, in fact.
But it must be recognised; and I don't think a lot of article writers, or indeed people in general, realise that this is what they are doing when they obsess over 'averages'. They are tying their success to that of society as a whole, which does indeed reduce their agency; because they are powerless to affect society as a whole in more than a trivial sense unless they rise to a position of great power.
Support those around you. Be a good citizen. But focus on yourself first.
1) "it's physics"
- Texas alone receives more solar energy than our daily planet-wide power consumption, like hundreds of times more. Given a plant-based building material, basic needs for all humans, including "large" homes, could be reduced to just an energy supply problem. There's enough resources for all people be live well, if we would work together to use them effectively.
2) "focus on yourself first"
- I believe this is what got us into this mess of global inequality (not just USA, consider difference between average American and average African) and global warming. We need not to focus on ourselves, but work together to elect leaders that will align economic incentives with the good of all humans, not just the owners of capital.
The problem is, the entire system we have is pretty much the opposite of this right now. I get that what I'm saying amounts to little more than saying "let's have a wand and pray," but I believe there is a path out of the next 100 years that leaves us all better off than where we are now. I just haven't figured out exactly what that path is yet.
Your answer is about "how to improve the average". It might even be right. I don't know.
But I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about how an individual improves their own situation.
Double the median salary in the UK, and any individual would still be way better off just ignoring the advice of "what an average person should do" and doing well for themselves.
Trivially provable - the median income is ~3x the minimum, incomes of 10x the minimum are eminently achievable, and obviously billionaires exist (of course, any individual has a low likelihood of making that happen even with extreme effort).
Again, you're always better off trying to improve your own situation _even if_ you have charitable goals. Especially if you have charitable goals... it's generally easier to make an impact if you're not poor.
Society does not work in this sort of averaged collective way because individuals exist. It's pretty much that simple. Things aren't equally distributed. If you produce a model for society that is based on equal distribution of resources - you've created a wonderful work of art, but it's abstract, not real.
Nah, it won't be the 'ruling class' who'll steer us towards fascism. For better or worse (probably worse right now), their philosophy seems to come down to 'don't rock the boat, don't change anything', regardless of it changing anything would benefit anyone else.
What will potentially steer us that way is the frustration felt by everyone else, and the folks waiting in the wings to take advantage of a bad situation to push various extremist philosophies and ideas. That may be fascism (which in turn may or may not be Nazi like), it may be communism, it may be religious theocracy esque beliefs or something else. Whatever it is, crazy extremists are usually outside of the system, and thrive in chaos.
The western World has been sliding deeper and deeper into corporatism and crony capitalism. It has happened so gradually that many think it's just the status quo, but it really isn't.
It's a natural consequence of the death spiral capitalism has put us into, of uncontrolled consumerism and an insane instence on ever-increasibg growth and "productivity".
Instead of loading up every language with stupid keywords that are meant to simplify monadic code (but only for one domain), language designers should really take a page out of Haskell or Scala's book and think seriously about unifying on a do notation/for comprehension type construct.
That way regardless of if you're working with promises or not, you don't have to worry about hacking it with && or nesting 10 layers deep with if/else.
Suckless is at best satire and if we're being honest just plain idiotic.
Without fail every suckless person I've talked to either has no idea what they're talking about, or in the off chance they do they're incredibly shitty far right wing types who gripe on about women/minorities/CoCs ruining tech.
Yikes, that sounds like a horrible experience. Never got that from hanging around at the Arch linux forum back in the days where their products were moderately popular.
Having said that, my general impression was that there was an inordinate amount of Plan9 cargo-culting (with some DJB fanboys mixed in). Young, idealistic people without much experience but lots of admiration for the more Bauhaus part of their elders.
Frankly I hope they ramp it up, because maybe it'll at least open up peoples eyes to all the other insane sorts of injustices that go on.