Not enough innuendo, a lot of missed opportunities. I mean you have cookies and milk, totally unused. Like “fill my stocking with a duplex” could easily have been “fill my stocking with gifts from your sack”. Is she even trying?
Not enough innuendo, a lot of missed opportunities. I mean you have cookies and milk, totally unused. Like “fill my stocking with a duplex” could easily have been “fill my stocking with gifts from your sack”. Is she even trying?
And if there was a disagreement about whose property was who’s? With no laws to settle it, it would just be determined by who grabs said property and runs off with it first. That’s indistinguishable from a free-for-all.
Home grown food from urban gardens. Your soil is probably completely untested, and the idea of “maybe I shouldn’t just pour chemical waste out of the window” is barely 4 decades old.
And let’s not forget that any soil near a road had a ton of lead released nearby throughout much of the last century, and that just stays there. As well as lead paint chips from buildings.
If paying a CEO $200k more makes the charity $2 million more, it’s a no-brainer. Billionaires love to give to animal-related causes, so that’s easily plausible.
In reality of course, predicting the amounts of money a CEO will bring in is virtually impossible, so it becomes a nepo-baby-fest like everything else. People with rich connections are in high demand at pretty much every entity that has a need to raise money, so they cost a lot.
Then of course you have the problem that in the wider scope, this reality creates an arms-race between charities for fundraising potential that diverts from the causes themselves. The only real solution to that problem is to punish charities that pay their officers too much by not giving them money.
If the law said my car is no longer my property, then driving away with it would cease to be stealing, correct. What is property without legal, government-backed title? There’s no way to formulate a definition, because without government and laws property has no meaning.
All property is a social construct and is defined by law. So if the law says debt is no longer valid, then the loan agreements cease to be property and there is no stealing it.
As someone with an NPD “friend” - I have to look beyond the insults and threats and see the insecurities and vulnerabilities behind them. Most people just can’t or don’t want to do that and will be insulted if not scared away by the things my friend says to them. There’s also a stigma associated with being friends with someone who is abusive - I keep the friendship secret from all but my closest friends, who have a hard time understanding it themselves.
Most people just do not think entirely rationally. Take anything that most people believe - obviously religion, but also their favorite sports team, car brand, dare I say linux distro - it’s probably irrational on some level. Instead people believe what they want to believe.
But why would someone want to see their own life as miserable? Perhaps part of it is who we want to be. Most people want to see themselves as having overcome some sort of adversity to earn whatever they have in life, and that creates a bias to see one’s own life as unlucky and miserable. I definitely went through a phase of seeing my life this way as a kid. Now I try, when I remember, to focus on what’s been lucky and not adverse in my life. And there’s definitely plenty in that regard.