mechoman444

No it isn’t. NO IT ISN’T. The overwhelming majority of people do not work salaried jobs.

In the industry I work in, I would end up on the street if I only worked four days a week.

Entire trades such as appliance repair, construction, and especially manufacturing would struggle under a four-day work week.

Every time I see this argument, it boils my blood.

What about teachers? Are students only supposed to attend school four days a week? There are not enough teachers to run multiple overlapping schedules throughout the week.

What about competition? Are we going to prohibit companies from operating five days a week? If one company switches to four days, another will simply step in and say, “We’ll work five.”

As long as our economy remains based on scarcity, there will be no universal four-day work week.

Now go ahead and downvote me and tell me how great socialism is.

I just pooped three times in a row from over eating.

Other than that. Shitty.

Because they’re basically land shrimp that can survive nuclear fallout.

You should be afraid.

We don’t. We come home around 7 and start doing the bare minimum to keep up the household letting daycares and schools raise our kids.

We clean and cook and pay our bills then we go to sleep irritated and tired and sick of the rat race.

We have sex once or twice a month and go to fucking florida once a year. That’s it.

I encourage you to read through my common history.

There has been a major uptick in people supporting socialism under the guise of social programs. Many will claim to support socialism because they favor things like universal healthcare, fair wages, unions, and similar policies. In reality, however, these things have nothing to do with socialism itself. They are social welfare programs that can be implemented under virtually any form of government.

What many of these people are actually advocating for is social democracy, not socialism. The fact that both terms contain the word “social” does not make them the same thing. Socialism, traditionally defined, involves some form of collective or public ownership of the means of production. Universal healthcare, labor protections, welfare programs, and unions do not inherently require that.

The most frustrating part is that many people simply redefine words to fit their preferred narrative. They make declarative statements that are objectively incorrect, then dismiss the actual definitions when challenged. At that point, it becomes nearly impossible to have a productive conversation because you’re no longer debating ideas, you’re debating the meanings of the words themselves.

Right okay.

I hear what you’re saying.

And I’m still saying that it’s probably the most important qualification the president can have.

I guess I’m just not connecting what I’m saying in correlation to what you’re saying… 🤷

O… kay…

So there are other countries on this planet aside from America. In fact, there’s an entire department of the U.S. government, headed by the person fourth in line for the presidency, whose sole purpose is handling foreign policy and relations with other nations.

Foreign policy is arguably the single most important qualification a president can have.

I’m 40 years old, and I’ve been saying this since I was a teenager because I’m not short-sighted enough to think the world ends at America’s borders.

And moreover, I literally said in my original comment that we may need somebody inexperienced like AOC at this point. Did you somehow miss that part?

I know man… I know… America is so fucked.

No? I’m going with a no. 🤷👍

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is young and lacks experience, especially in foreign policy. But that may be exactly the kind of person we need as president: someone relatively untainted by both the DNC and the GOP, and someone who has not spent decades being shaped by corporate lobbying and the protection of profit margins.

We need leadership that is still capable of idealism, somebody willing to push for the kind of social programs this country increasingly needs if we want to reverse the direction things are heading right now.

AOC absolutely could be elected. A 2028 presidential run is not some impossible fantasy. The deciding factor is simple: younger voters would actually need to show up and vote in meaningful numbers.

Trump: we will bomb you until peace is achieved.

Totally agree. The stock market is a massive web of nepotism and institutional favoritism benefiting a very specific class of people.

It is overwhelmingly weighted toward those who already possess wealth, access, and insider connections. The fact that it exists in its current form says a great deal about our society and its priorities.

Thousands of years from now, if humanity ever resolves scarcity and reaches a more rational economic system, historians will likely look back at this era with disbelief wondering how civilizations tolerated such a fundamentally unequal structure for so long, and how we managed to emerge from what may eventually be viewed as an economic dark age.

It absolutely needs a balance pass that is for sure. And the problem is it would put the bigger players at a disadvantage and really don’t want that.

I never really understood why insider trading is considered such a serious offense, especially when compared to everything else that happens in the American stock market.

At its core, the stock market already feels like a massive game dominated by extremely wealthy people. Some accounts probably have trillions in buying power. We allow advanced trading algorithms, automated stop-loss systems, high-frequency trading, and all kinds of software advantages. On top of that, literally anyone can jump into the market now, which floods it with emotional and inexperienced traders. That volatility itself creates opportunities for people with more capital and better tools.

So I do not know. Compared to the broader structure of the market and the level of manipulation and imbalance that already exists, insider trading feels like one of the least offensive things happening.

Insider trading! Say it ain’t so!

Dang. You’re right. You can always count on idiots to do idiotic things.

It’s also funny because there’s no way to understand the Bible better or worse.

What a weird world we live in.

In the world of politics governed by nepotism greed and optics, I am absolutely positive that the political world is anything but speechless about this particular statement.

I’d like to point out that Obama is responsible for the most amount of deportations in the history of this country. And he bombed more of the middle east that bush. He’s still one of the greatest presidents in our history, but…

Edit: I mean I’m sorry you don’t like established facts. He’s not Homelander but he’s not mother Theresa either.