The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
No bio...
User ID: 174
Not co-operation. Subordination. Because when you're supposed to ask what you can do for your community and not what your community can do for you, you're just a slave.
His vision was awful. He only cared about the non-existent afterlife.
Even in the west, with people sympathetic to wokeness, the amount of in your face symbolism would go down by 10x, if it wasn't artificially propped up, simply because people have better shit to do.
In fact, this already happened, between when the Floydening ended and the "Kamala is for they/them" ad hit home.
Essentially none of these "influencers" have a solid community, wife and family.
Survivalship bias.
The usual excuse for "we will bury you" is that Khruschev mean the Communist system was so great that the Soviet Union would move ahead by leaps and bounds. That's a plausible interpretation of the English also, especially preceded with "Whether you like it or not, history is on our side."
It's still bombastic and hostile, but not a threat of nuclear attack.
(Again, to be fair, I heard "chickens coming home to roost" from Anericans.)
Noem Chomsky would be the type specimen there. There's a substantial group of people, mostly intellectuals or those who would think of themselves as intellectual, who dislike America and consider it always in the wrong.
Who said anything about someone else's vision? If your vision isn't shared, then it's not going to happen.
It will never actually be shared. The leaders might be able to fool you into thinking it is, but it won't be.
You'd really rather have the future look like... nothing you're a part of than have someone else call the shots?
As I said, I'll never be able to show it to you.
What's wrong with living, working, and existing for the benefit of someone else's vision? If you don't see it, I'll never be able to show it to you.
Nothing, if you're the leader. Otherwise, you're just a tool.
It's damnation both ways. Hold to individualism and forfeit the field to nothing. Discard it and forfeit it to whoever the leaders are. Only actual winning move is to become the leader, and there's precious few slots available.
There's no methodology on that map, and it comes from a completely different part of the Department of Labor (the Women's Bureau) than the official LFPR.
But without proper planning or strategy. Trump apparently didn't consider that Iran might close the straits of Hormuz
Iran didn't. Lloyds did. Dynacom (Greek shipping company) has been sending tankers through... not sure if self-insured or what.
now is there bleating about insuring vessels
Which, given that the problem is insurance, makes perfect sense.
THAAD getting wrecked by Iran's missile and drone arsenal is also pretty alarming. THAAD is what's supposed to defend Guam and other US bases necessary for this war.
One AN/TPY-2 radar was hit. I don't know about Trump, but I'm sure everyone below him in the DoD and military knows the enemy does sometimes take out your stuff. This does not take out all of THAAD. As for Guam, Iran has nothing that can reach it anyway.
There's a lot of shipping that isn't oil shipping, and a lot of oil shipping that doesn't go through Hormuz; the biggest impact on shipping as a whole is probably fuel costs.
Before we can go any further, there are two things we need to get out of the way. The first is that approximately 900,000 prime-age men are currently incarcerated, accounting for about 1/8 of the total.
The denominator of the labor force participation rate is "Civilian noninstitutional population", which excludes the incarcerated. So these have no effect.
You can live in the NYC metro area, just not Short Hills or Essex Fells or Alpine or whatever other hyper-expensive example you can find.
There is an excess of single men under 40 essentially everywhere in the US, including New York.
There are only two kinds of objects in a relationship, a sex object or a resource object, and I can't stand being the latter one.
You shouldn't have been born male, then.
My first role out of undergrad, the TC was about twice the US median household income at the time. It was on the high-paying side but unremarkably so.
Making twice the US median HHI straight out of undergrad 30 years ago would in fact have been quite remarkable. It's pretty remarkable now, in fact. Sure, there's a few roles where you can do it; big tech (at least if they start hiring again), some of finance, biglaw. But very few.
In many places, starter single family homes run about $2M. You're not going to be able to afford that with a single half decent job.
Many? I live in an expensive area of the country, northern New Jersey. It looks like that's true for Millburn, NJ -- one of the most expensive places in the area. It's not true for a lot of adjacent similar places. You don't have to go to to rural Iowa to get cheaper housing than that.
Historically there were multiple types of colleges -- the rounding-out kind were only one. Polytechnics, engineering schools, normal schools (teacher's colleges), mining colleges, and agricultural/A&M colleges were all about improving the students. The distinctions are vestigal nowadays, though.
Trumps previous military interventions have all been short and sweet, and mostly successful. The evidence that this one will not be is ???
-
Iran is clearly a much bigger nut to crack
-
The administration has already said it won't be that short -- September is what I heard yesterday
-
Any requirement for action now due to nuclear progress (which the administration has claimed) demonstrates the previous intervention was not very successful. I don't really believe this intervention was necessary to keep Iran from getting the bomb in the immediate future, but obviously I have no access to the data on that; I just assume if a government official's lips are moving he's probably lying.
-
There doesn't seem to be a useful exit. Unlike Venezuela, there's no lower-down officials more willing to play ball. Nor any rebels -- the protestors turned out to be the equivalent of right-wing militias and the Minneapolis people, all noise and no ability for real action when push comes to shove. Reza Palahvi, unsuprisingly, has nothing. Everyone who can fight is aligned with the Islamic regime. The normal way to handle such a situation (which is a typical one in war) is a land invasion, but the US claims it won't do that. And certainly it would be quite messy if it happened.
The other thing you need is an environment where it's acceptable to keep only one eye on the kids rather than both, and if the kids do escape supervision and get into trouble, it's considered normal and not neglect.
I bet many women would accept a poorer and more boring lifestyle if it meant a handsome, kind-natured and faithful husband who was good around the house and yard, knew how to repair everything (and did it without being asked) and who devoted themselves fully to providing for and looking after their family (and not drinking or being abusive or cheating).
I'd bet against. They'd find the guy boring and want more. You've basically described the stereotypical 1950s situation, which is usually considered to be "stultifying" by women.
My point is that your numbers are unrealistic for the past 30 years. Making enough to save $10,000/year 30 years ago (when median household income before taxes was $35,492, top quintile was $78,324) would have been quite difficult, especially when you consider the person would be no later than early-mid career. Making enough to save $200,000 takes a phenomenal salary -- top 20% in 2024 was $219,281.
Realistically, if you want to get to $10M you need to do better with investments, or have an extremely high salary early on.

That's OK, they did arrest the REAL perpetrator, Ian McGinnis of the right-wing "The Surge", who used pepper spray on some antifa who took violent exception to his filming them. They also confiscated his footage (you'd think he'd know to record live to a remote server by now)
More options
Context Copy link