purebred sheeran
Looks at litterally half the population: "This is a minority".
thebestaquaman
joined 2 years ago
Exactly: I can understand that an open layout makes life harder for people in an already oppressive environment. This applies regardless of why the environment is oppressive any individual.
Claiming that "open environments are sexist" implies that they're somehow inherently oppressive towards one gender. That's absolute bullshit in my opinion: Open environments are just generally crap for productivity.
"Beaches that allow X" sounds like some dystopian shit, where people are regulating and controlling what you can and cannot bring into some semi-obscure public place.
Any beach I go to is literally a spot by the water you walk to if you want to hang out and cool down. I can understand regulations if we're talking about some inner-city "beach", but luckily most beaches is the world are places you can be pretty alone.
I think we'll see either a back line (political) collapse, that causes a massive retreat/treaty, or: Gradual degradation to the point where a small breach in the russian position causes a massive route like what we saw in Kharkiv. Unmechanised forces stretched so thin and with so low morale that just a small crack causes a massive collapse and the subsequent capture and/or elimination of massive amounts of equipment and personnel, which makes russia unable to continue the war.
Sorry, but what?
I hate open-plan layouts as much as the next guy, but how on earth are they sexist?
No. I definitely do not want to fuck all that nasty shit.
As a side note, I prefer not to fuck feet either.
I had fantasies about women initiating affection, taking active roles during intimacy, and expressing a primal hunger to take the reins
In my personal experience, this is pretty much the norm. Women can have just as much sex drive as men, and can express it just as "aggressively". In every relationship I've had, there are times where I'll initiate, times where she'll initiate, and times where we'll both look at each other with a "Yes. Right now." look. Note that I've never been into any BDSM or other "exciting" kink stuff, I'm just talking about initiative and passionately expressing that "I want you" feeling.
Of course, this is a side of women you won't see until you get with someone that both wants you and feels comfortable enough you to express it.
So long story short: What you're looking for is pretty much the norm as far as I can tell.
Now it actually seems like we agree on some stuff! I largely agree with what you're saying here, and it seems much more nuanced and less extreme than "loans bad, go back to monke", which was kind of my initial impression.
I guess we just differ on the base idea of how to finance what you could rightly call "gambles" on the future (buying equipment or property to start a business, funding an education, etc.). I think that with proper regulation, which prevents both banks and individuals from taking too much risk, and prevents exploitation, loans are a sustainable and reasonable way to do this. You seem to disagree that it's possible to regulate a debt-system to the point where it becomes sustainable, and therefore think we should try very hard to change the premise that debt is required to run our economy.
Again, I can agree that the government being solely responsible for construction of housing could be a decent idea, but then we're no longer operating under any kind of free housing market.
You could argue that the housing market should be 100 % regulated (I'm not necessarily opposed to this idea), but that again breaks the premise of not drastically changing the society. We're talking about whether loans are a necessity (or even a positive thing) in our society as it exists now.
Further,
Come on. Just try to think of ways things could work differently.
Honestly: Why? In a decently regulated market where exploitation is largely prevented (e.g. what we have in the Nordics) seems to work pretty well. I can acquire resources now through a loan, and use those resources to be better off in the future. Private companies can take out loans to build housing and industry, and pay them back later. This benefits everyone, because we end up having decent housing, industry that otherwise could never be built, and more companies paying taxes.
I just don't see where in this picture the idea of loans becomes a "big bad wolf" that is inherently negative.
Beijing denounces the sanctions as a threat to economic cooperation.
.... yes. That's exactly the point.
I'm not at all sure about this, but isn't there decent reason to believe that the gas giants have solid cores? I mean, earth generates plenty of heat in its core (largely from nuclear decay I believe), I don't see why the same thing couldn't be going on in Uranus?
I don't really know if this fits in this community, if not just take it down. The map is from the BlackBird group.
Regarding the recent strikes on the Seim river crossings, I've been speculating what Ukraines plans are. Not too long ago, the Ukranian advance around Korenevo slowed a bit. Then they started systematically hitting the Seim river crossings, of which ISW assesses there is only one left.
If the goal was to encircle and trap Russian units, I would assume that Ukraine would make a hard push through Korenevo to the river. As it looks now, it seems like they are leaving a small corridor open. Whether that is due to Russian resistance or Ukrainian planning I have no idea.
This makes me wonder whether they are intentionally leaving a small opening (See: Sun Tzu) to try to make Russian forces low on resources funnel through the opening where they can inflict heavy casualties, or whether they are trying to force the Russians to expend resources trying to prevent being cut off before they close the net.
In any case, I can see Ukraine wanting to secure another major road towards Korenevo that they can use to supply the offensive.
Of course, I don't want anyone to reveal anything that could violate OPSEC, everything I read is based on OSINT. I'm just interested and would like to hear other peoples speculations.
In a sub like this, we cannot exclude the possibly best attempt at taxidermy, made by some poor soul that had likely never seen a lion.
view more: next ›
I agree with the sentiment that this isn't directly bad as long as they're fighting the russians. However, if their motivation to fight is just to learn how to use UAV's for a cartel, they're likely to desert at the moment shit hits the fan. This hurts morale badly.
Secondly, the countries in which the cartels operate will be more inclined to actively take Ukraines side if they take this seriously.
Finally,
To be frank: Yes you can (in a sense). Planning a crime (robbery, murder, etc.) can often be prosecuted as a crime in itself, often under the condition that the person in question appears capable or near-capable of doing whatever they were planning to do.