Or maybe we could have a system where the people that actually need it are given food, in order for there to be no excuse for stealing food.
Stealing food is still stealing, when you do it you indirectly increase the price of it for everyone else.
If everyone else just puts aside a bit of money to pay for food for those that actually need it, we can have both no starving and no excuse for stealing. Which would result in food being cheaper for everyone.
Or what if you’re a lazy asshole that decided it’s easier to just steal food than do anything for society in exchange for food?
Since you seem to be way more intelligent than me (it’s a miracle I managed to write this post comment, being illiterate). Could you explain the lie to me? Please be direct and use simple phrases, as if I were a 5 year old. Otherwise I might get lost in the full display of your intellect.
It’s not meaningless. It’s saying “if you vote for us, we will make this happen”.
If you don’t fail to pass laws/resolutions because you’re the minority, you won’t win votes over.
That’s the whole point of this post.
There never was a time when feminazis didn’t exist. The amount of them might have changed over the years. But there have always been.
EDIT: I meant feminist in the sense of “people that call themselves feminist but just want to kill all men or similar”.
You have still not answered the question: what’s the lie?
Taxes are not as simple as “X% of your income goes to the government”. You cannot just calculate it at payment time, only estimate it
Could be the third parameter that causes both leftism and big IQ.
Someone would need to do the study on that to be sure though.
Headline: says something. (That is obviously not true and just clickbaiting)
Instant disclaimer: the headline is not good, it should be instead “don’t do this other thing”.
Later in the article: how do we avoid doing the thing I told you not to do? By doing what I told you not to do.
The dude may be correct (idk, haven’t bothered reading the rest of the article), but he doesn’t know how to write/communicate. I don’t believe he’s respecting my time. Just tell in the title what you actually want to talk about.
Don’t worry. Let a non dumb dumb explain.
There are many causality relationship kinds.
In case 1, all leftists have big IQ. But NOT all big IQ ppl are leftist.
In case 2, all big IQ ppl are leftist. But NOT all leftists have big IQ.
In case 3, all big IQ ppl are leftist, and all leftists have big IQ.
In case 4, some NOT all leftist have big IQ. And NOT all big IQ ppl are leftist. But some are.
Assuming having big IQ is desirable, leftists would want either case 1 or 3. Since that would mean they have a big IQ.
However, the headline seems to suggest case 2. And in reality. And it could still be case 4.
Of course, in reality there is an uncountable number of parameters, not just 3, so don’t take the “all” in my comment as literally “all”. Reality probably resembles more case 4.
If this were a feel-good article for leftists, the headline would suggest case 1 or 3. Since that is what leftists want.
Even assuming the best case scenario of case 2 where all big IQ people are leftists. If you define big IQ as “top 10%” and low IQ as “not big IQ”: it is technically possible for 90% of leftists to be low IQ. And if low IQ is 50-50 leftist-conservative, 78% of leftists would be low IQ.
5 seconds at every boot and shutdown is important.
The reason you shouldn’t blindly benchmark an init system is because most of the time is not caused by the init system itself being slow, but the processes it manages being slow.
As the other commenter says, it is very easy to make the system “faster” by just configuring the timeouts to be lower. If you just set the timeout to 0 it will be very fast, but it won’t be a very good system.
You can count em. Another comment said there were 8 workers.
Tax the tractors and put the money towards public transit. The tractors can enjoy the roads they ruined, while the rest of us go in fast lanes of well-maintained infrastructure.
It’s even worse than that. They increase the price right after they increase the ad length. As in “well, now that ads are longer, this subscription has more value. Therefore we should increase the price”.
It was a dream when it wasn’t available. Once it existed, we saw the many flaws it had. That’s why statically strong typed languages still exist. And even new ones are being created.
If parenting were easy and there were cheat codes, there wouldn’t be so many assholes in the world. Since the primary source of assholes is bad parenting.
Convincing someone of something using reason and logic requires that someone to understand how reasoning and logic work. Children have underdeveloped brains, so it’s very hard to convince them with reasons and logic every time.
I’m not a parent, so I can’t assure you this. But probably each kid needs a different approach, and you probably have to try a lot of different approaches until (hopefully) one of them sticks. That’s what I try to do when encountering someone that don’t know how to use logic and reason.
He has gotten away with everything. He will get away from diddling kids.
Idk what the fuzz is about, he should just tell everything and move on. He’s not going to be held accountable.
Yes. All of those aim to solve the yellow paint problem, so they serve the same purpose as yellow paint. The difference between yellow paint and other solutions is that those other solutions have some game design thought behind it.
You don’t have to have an npc walking slower than you. You can make it run faster, and just wait for you if you get too behind, like any human would. You don’t have to have the villain stop in the chase scene. If the enemy gets too far, you lose and restart in the last checkpoint, like it always has been.
You don’t have to have low-poly art for this to work. Not everything in assassin’s creed was climbable. But you know when it was and when it wasn’t, do you didn’t even try to climb what wasn’t. You could climb vertical walls of mountain rock. You couldn’t climb up flat walls either, you had to have bricks sticking out. Granted, most buildings had something to grab onto. But you saw which elements you grabbed onto, if those weren’t there you would know why you can’t climb.
If your level design is clear and consistent, you don’t need yellow paint.
You have the most important part flipped.
The authority we give the government is not to provide services. The authority is to collect taxes, which are used to provide services.
Anyone can provide services, but not anyone can collect taxes. The government can only collect taxes because we gave them the power to do so.
Without taxes, the government cannot provide the services. A lazy asshole that avoids paying taxes is preventing the government from providing more services, even if he “gave them power”.
The case of the “lazy asshole” is not one in which he needs to steal food to survive. The case is of a perfectly capable person that could be doing literally anything to earn an income, but chooses not to, since stealing is easier. Even if he has an income, he may prefer spending his money on more expensive luxury goods, since he can save a lot of money by just stealing the food.
By doing so, he’s being incredibly antisocial in multiple ways:
I could go on. But I believe this is more than enough to get the point across.
When something is stolen, society doesn’t just lose the value of the item. A 1€ item being stolen might be a loss of 10€ for society.
There’s 2 choices:
Both cases should remove hunger as a problem. Only in case 2 would the lazy assholes be hungry. But being hungry should be motivation enough to work at least the bare minimum. Which means nobody would be.
What both cases have in common is: nobody has the need to steal food. Therefore, it should not be allowed, neither legally nor morally, due to it being incredibly antisocial and expensive.
The solution to hunger is not “let them steal”. It is “give them food”.