site banner
Advanced search parameters (with examples): "author:quadnarca", "domain:reddit.com", "over18:true"

Showing 25 of 237329 results for

domain:youtu.be

Israel has been engaged in a decades-long violent campaign, with periodic mass-casualty events on both sides, against a hostile ethnic group within its own borders. This is your example of a happy country?

Way ahead of you. I've got a 24 pack of five hour energy sitting in my trunk.

So yes, you have correctly noticed that Israel is not in fact a homogeneous country.

Cool, sounds like we agree that at best the homogeneity /happiness relationship is not entirely straightforward.

No, I get that.

Its just every epicycle they have to add makes it less credible to me.

It is one thing to point to some guy who inherited wealth built on the backs of actual slaves or exploitation, and say that maybe he doesn't deserve everything he has.

Quite another to point at somebody who just happened to be born into a civilization that was built in part on the back of slaves and through exploitation of weaker neighbors, and claim that just because his ancestors bled, died, and labored to build a nation so nice that everybody wants to move there he doesn't get to be proud of himself... and he also should feel guilt for all the people that were exploited to build the nation (which includes his ancestors, mind!).

I've said it elsewhere, the lesson of politics since about 2010 is "identity politics and racial grievances are a great way to get others to do what you want and give you their stuff."

Of course the end state of this is leftists revolting against nature. It always is. Some nations were bequeathed huge stores of natural bounty, some were not, and this determined their future courses to some huge degree. The only way to correct for this is to move that natural bounty around until every place on earth can obtain some kind of parity.

As stated, be really nice if there was a sound case for why this won't change in the near future.

The jump to where we are was sudden and surprising, the next one could be as well.

yes there are other measures of unemployment, no they don't show a crisis of unemployment

Gig economy

https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2021/12/08/the-state-of-gig-work-in-2021/

4% are currently doing these types of jobs, while an additional 5% are not currently doing this but have done so in the past year. In total, 9% of U.S. adults are current or recent gig workers, meaning they have earned money through an online gig platform in the past 12 months.

I don't consider this to hugely move the needle.

Working Amazon

There's always been jobs that people look down on but still need doing.

I wish you would at least have read the parenthetical intended to head off criticisms of this type and engaged more substantively rather than gesturing at two things you don't like.

American unemployment is at something like 4%

Only due to the way we collect these statistics, which is suspect at best in order to make the party in power look good. Working Amazon or gig economy is often considered "employed", but it's not really living, either. Might as well be a slave.

The TFR data shows what we (sadly) expect:

Total Fertility Rates, by Maternal Educational Attainment and Race and Hispanic Origin: United States, 2019

https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/105234/cdc_105234_DS1.pdf

Non diploma women have high TFR of 2.7
high school diploma have 2.05
Then it sinks further with lowest the bachelor degree holders having 1.2 TFR
And then a little bump up again for master degree 1.4 and doctorate degree 1.5 (still brutally below replacement)

I saw the argument that TFR is artificially a bit worse than in real life, because TFR is not catching yet that women are moving their child bearing years up. Similar bachelor degrees having lowest TFR does not mean that women with a bachelor are (in the end) worse than master women in family formation (eg because they earn less money), but can also be explained by that students who are doing their master now are avoiding getting pregnant while still in University.

Update. Got 34. My left hand is a traitor. Did it essentially to near failure left to start, then run out the right, get to 17 left, finish right. My right hand didn't let me down. Painful and stupid, but done.

I’d be more then down for a chick asking me out for a change. I wouldn’t feel emasculated either but rather flattered. I’d also feel relieved that for once, I don’t have to do a hard-carry through the entire process (only most of it).

I don’t think it’s happened a single time to me after high school, though. Even when it did (seldomly) happen back in those days, it was in the form of “teehee we should hang out some time 😊”, where I’d then have to take the reins and drive the interaction forward to make any actual hanging out occur.

I can see the defense if it were along the lines of, 'the initiator pays' and since the man is the initiator most of the time, the man pays de facto.

“The initiator pays” is but some retconned excuse for women to justify why men should pay while trying to preserve their Wonderfulness under a lipstick feminist framework, since almost always the initiator is the man. The rule might as well be “the taller one pays.”

That being said, especially nowadays I generally pay for women on dates. Usually for first dates, this just consists of sending her a taxi or rideshare to pick her up to bring her to my place, and one to send her back after or the next day. If we order food later, it’d be through a delivery account of mine and I’m not exactly going to send her an invoice for her half.

If we do go out later to a bar or club or something, I’ll pay as it makes for a better, smoother experience. Having to pause to split a check interrupts the momentum and her feeling of “omg one thing led to another and it just like happened.” Even beyond the first date, it risks offending her princess complex and/or triggering the ick.

Doing the asking out and/or proposing takes a level of agency, courage, and initiative that women generally lack. Bumble requiring women to message first just mostly resulted in women messaging “hi” or “hi :)” such that the men would need to take the wheel and lead the conversation. And even that was too much for women, hence Bumble exploring other avenues beyond women messaging first.

Getting proposed to indulges the aforementioned princess complexes of women. It’s her special moment where her man bends the knee to present her with a shiny expensive trinket that she can wear and showoff around acquaintances, friends, family. In contrast, the thought of doing the asking out or proposing is insulting. She is the prize, why should she need to grovel? Ugh, gross. Romance and courtship should be something that just happens to her.

It’s always funny to see threads in the AIO, AITA, relationship advice type subreddits that involve a female OP complaining about her boyfriend not proposing. Sometimes, buried in Controversial, someone asks “Sounds like you want to get married more than he does; why don’t you propose?” The way female Redditors try to square this circle is by saying that women are Socialized to be proposed to rather than doing the proposing, thus the boyfriend should do the Bare Minimum and propose to her if he cares about her. If not for the oppressive effects of the patriarchy, of course, women would be just as agentic as men.

It worked for me.

Well, I met my wife online and she initiated contact. So that means waiting for women to ask you out is a winning strategy, right? ;)

My point wasn't that it's impossible to find a good man following your heuristic. My point was that a) many people ruled out by your heuristic are in fact good men, and b) your heuristic is more likely to rule in bad men. You're right that you can compensate for point B in other ways. And point A doesn't mean all good men are ruled out. But it's still a very flawed heuristic even if you can succeed while following it.

Seconded. Just keep it as is, and let mods, if they think it suitable, approve users on a per-user instead of a per-post basis.

So, first off, I don’t believe I have ever heard a single person describe Israel as homogenous. Any country where a full one in four of its citizens is from an ethnolinguistically and religiously different group from the other three is, by definition, not homogenous.

And yes, you note that even within the Jewish Israeli population there are significant divisions. That’s also true, and also a source of political and cultural tension within Israeli society! My understanding is that the tensions between the Ashkenazi founding stock and the later waves of Sephardic and especially Mizrahi Jews produced massive friction in Israel for the first decades of its existence. Israel is also still to this day having major issues with the differences between its Ultra-Orthodox/Haredi population versus the other strains of Judaism.

So yes, you have correctly noticed that Israel is not in fact a homogeneous country.

Yes, and id wager those salaries go farther too.

Part of the pitch i use when recruiting from blue states is; What's the point of making 100 - 200k a year if you're going to end up spending 90% of that to live in a filing cabinet and take the bus or subway to work? Come to [redacted], buy a 5 year old luxury car, and enjoy driving to work on clean well-maintained streets and living in an actual house.

  1. declare that I only care about the suffering of myself, those close to me, and my descendants, which might be more manageable

This is what I did. when Effective Altruism made it clear that spending a thousand dollars on myself was the equivalent of letting a random African child die of malaria, I had a choice of either becoming an EA and donating 10% of my income towards mosquito nets or admitting that I did not actually care about Africans; I shrugged and chose the latter. I have enough on my plate just trying to care about the suffering of me and mine, anyway.

I admit I put my foot in it re: Afghanistan but I don't think Lebanon is a slam dunk. We're talking about ethnic differences here, so we have to look beyond "well Israel is 75% Jewish so it's homogenous". Those Jews come from all kinds of places with all kinds of ethnic backgrounds.

Today, you would end up with a system where you can't fill your gas tank by yourself

See: Oregon, New Jersey

It should be the federal government collecting tariffs on those imports, not the union.

It also increases the expense of exports.

since the foundation of the NLRB.

As we discussed below, the 5th Circuit is working on that problem.

What is homogeneity if not ethnic cohesion? Everyone is their own group of one and human divisions are fractal. Boundaries exist because we decide they do.

Ethnic groups only exist insofar as they are willing to exclude. Which is why Anglos, Saxons and Normans no longer exist, but English do. Fusions and splits are common methods of ethnogenesis.

It's not a bias, it's the phenomenal definition of ethnic groups.

Part of homogeneity is common ethnic consciousness, commonality in language, religion, ancestry, insufficient history of remaining grudges and bad blood, etc. The later element, if it existed in the past, has declined today. The English are one ethnic group, even with some heterogeneous elements and diversity in their history.

Ethnic groups have some heterogeneity in them. As with most things, the amount matters. Increase substantially differences, and you get a nation comprising of different groups. This is a genuine difference that relates to accurately separating ethnic groups.

This doesn't bias things, since you still got a homogeneous situation if the divisions are sufficiently irrelevant and have a robustly common identity. Conversely you get heterogeneity when divisions are significant and ethnic groups don't get along. You are getting an accurate message that proves the advantages of a homogeneous country and of small enough differences among the people, so much so that they can be identified as a common ethnic group.

It worked for me.

because jerks are more likely to not care about the woman's intent and just go for it.

That's one good reason to avoid being alone with a guy for the first several dates and to save sex for marriage. Helps weed out the jerks.

All the traditions work together, we can't just throw away one and expect it to work.

The distinctions between Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Britons, Normans, etc. washed out hundreds of years ago, though. Nobody in England has spoken Norman French in over 500 years. Back when these groups were still linguistically and culturally distinct, they absolutely did not get along - see the wars between the various Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, and then famously the conquest and subsequent violent subjugation of the Anglo-Saxons by the Normans. It’s only in hindsight, after a centuries-long process of mixing and integration, that we consider these to be constituent ancestries of a unified population. (And of course the existence of Wales as a separate entity, and the revival of the Welsh language, are testaments to the fact that the pre-Anglo-Saxon Britonic people were in fact never fully integrated, despite centuries of effort.)

Meanwhile, in Lebanon and Afghanistan these groups are still very distinct, generally geographically segregated, and - again, most importantly - have been in open violent conflict at various times even within your and my lifetimes.

It's hard to say, but the article seems to be about other PMC professionals he went to high school with in Connecticut, not robber barons. Depending on lifestyle, a nutmegger lawyer or consultant can't stop and grow beets in upstate NY any more than Freddie can.

No, you still need to traverse the Volga-Don canal to get to the Volga and those other canals (and eventually the Baltic or Arctic) because the Don empties into the Sea of Azov/Black Sea, while the Volga empties into the Caspian.