It’s almost difficult to believe Kant wasn’t just pulling a Schrödinger and proposing a ridiculous thought experiment to illustrate the absurdity of genuinely holding those views.
The idea that morality exists only as an intrinsic quality of an action, regardless of context or consequence, is more theology than philosophy. It’s useless to the point of harm to anyone faced with a world beyond a university or a monastery.
Seems incredibly irresponsible of them to include it in a blue chip fund.
In my limited understanding of California property taxes, I believe property values are only reassessed on the sale of the property, so if he was living in a house deeded to him by his parents, he might have been paying taxes on a decades-old appraisal. So even if they bought his exact house back for him, he’d still be stuck with significantly higher taxes, which he’d have to fight to be compensated for as well.
Not that it changes your point about representation in this case, but I’m pretty sure that photo is at least 20 years old. This is the current, equally diverse Oklahoma Supreme Court:
The more solid red states there are, the easier it is for them to enact their bullshit at a federal level. Then it’s your problem, too.
Texas has been trending bluer in the last decade and the fact that these laws also get blue voters to leave is not by accident.
Are you in the US? I wouldn’t dissuade anyone from being an organ donor, it’s obviously a great necessity and saves thousands of lives, but I’m always amazed that the bottomless skepticism of our for-profit healthcare system dries up on certain topics.
We all love to moan about greedy health insurance companies and hospital administrations putting profit above the actual health of patients and outcomes of procedures, so why is it taken for granted that, when faced with a decision to go to extraordinary lengths to save a badly injured, uninsured person, or get expensive organs for 3 or 4 insured people at the top of the recipient list, that the responsible parties will make the right decision? Hell, even without a profit motive, that can be a difficult decision that can be influenced by personal beliefs and biases.
I certainly don’t know enough about exactly how these decisions are made to have a strong opinion, but I don’t think it’s fair to characterize potentially warranted skepticism as moronic.
From the bottom of the graphic: “Total tax burden based on property tax, individual income tax, and sales & excise tax.“
Several states have no state income tax at all, so it wouldn’t make sense to only look at that.
What does make this a bit of an unfair comparison is that it doesn’t break it down by income. Compare tax burdens for the bottom quartile earners and it tells a different story.
There’s absolutely no shortage of shitty, authoritarian millennials. I don’t think there will be any “sigh of relief” moment when millennials are in majority of control.
Hell, back in high school my boomer Government teacher was telling us how US politics would move to the left once the Silent Generation died off. It just never happens that way.
Unfortunately, I think he knows what he’s doing. He’s counting on being able to make all his troubles go away if he’s elected and he knows that maintaining the premise that these are unfounded, politically-motivated attacks by the deep state is exactly what his devotees want to hear. He just has to keep them living in his version of reality long enough to take the throne.
You’re right. The alternative is much better:
Trump Backs Israel Bombarding Gaza: ‘Gotta Finish the Problem’
A perfectly fair point. My only concern there is that reliance on “sure things” in 2016 is part of why Hillary lost. There were, after all, more votes for Trump in California than any other state, simply down to population size. I’d just hate to see us all get shot in the foot again due to complacency.
-> You’ll be shot in the head if you don’t eat your Brussels sprouts.
-> No, cookies and ice cream or nothing!
Life and especially politics is full of compromises. Everybody compromises on something on every vote. You know what the stakes are, and you know what the consequences of inaction are.
Unfortunately, “not Trump” IS a good enough reason, and you have the choice to come to terms with that fact before November, or during a Trump presidency/dictatorship.
Dems need to target the people on the fence between voting Dem and not voting at all.
Believe it or not, I’d say that’s who this message is targeted at. It’s for the people saying “Biden isn’t the exact candidate I want, so I’m not going to vote this time to teach Dems a lesson. Then they’ll have to run the exact candidate I want next time.” The message is that you should know that strategy will get you Trump, and you should know by now how that will go.
Yeah, this is exactly what’s wrong with constantly demonizing boomers and attributing every shitty thing they’ve ever done to leaded gas and paint chips. Populations tend more conservative as they get older and they have for centuries. Even if a minority of individuals actually change their minds, people who were politically apathetic when they were younger tend to be more conservative when they do start voting when they’re older, skewing the whole generation more conservative. There’s already plenty of conservative millennials out there, and even more of them among the ranks of the non-voters.
Remember, boomers are the generation of hippies. Actual, literal hippies who, despite whatever imperfect motives you may ascribe to their movement, achieved greater social revolution in their time than any attitude shifts that have occurred during millennials’ peak social years. And that was only with ~30% of boomers participating in the movement. The rest of them went on to vote for Reagan and kick off helicopter parenting and satanic panic and music censorship and the whole bit.
Anyone who thinks millennials will be somehow immune to this pattern is in for a rough next few decades.
Unwavering support for whatever Israel wants has been status quo for the US for decades. There’s plenty of people who don’t like it, but the unfortunate truth is that we are too broken and divided to fix it right now.
Trump is a literal existential threat to democracy. Assuming he becomes the republican nominee next year, our only chance of ever having a voice in US foreign policy in the future is through a second Biden term.
No candidate will ever be perfect and no vote will ever be without moral baggage, but when you consider all of the issues together and look at what Trump has already said he would do if reelected, there’s really no other choice on the table anymore.
doesn’t care one bit if she wins re-election
= Fuck you
“I can go on any board I want to.”
= I got mine
What a lovely sentiment from a public servant.
economic systems dependent on reliable growth will collapse
Huh, maybe that’s the actual problem.
I would also emphasize that nuclear reactor =/= nuclear bomb. Power reactors cannot under any circumstances cause a nuclear explosion.
This is the correct answer. All of the replies saying to use Firefox/support FOSS are missing the point. Once Google rolls this out and promotes it as higher security and guaranteed ad impressions, it will become the standard because all of the websites you want to use will opt in. It won’t do you much good to keep using Firefox when your bank, your employer/school, and every news/weather/sports site you try to use require a Google-verified, ad-displaying browser. It’s not our choice to make, and that’s the point of doing it this way.
I’d go one cynical step further to say that once they have complete control over how pages are displayed on your end, they’ll roll out a subscription for ad-free* browsing, which will eventually include ads anyway a couple years down the road.
And if they force the applicants to fill out the salary requirements portion of the application, they get data they can use to argue against raises as well.