sandbox

if you fully own your own home and your household has two people fully employed how in the hell does someone with €1600 a month have a living standard remotely close to yours? none of what you’re saying is adding up at all

If you’re struggling to make ends meet, you’re not middle class. You’re the exact same class as your neighbour. If you want to improve your conditions then you need to learn some solidarity instead of blaming them for your problems. They’re not the ones taking advantage. It’s the fucking rich and powerful that are lazy, do zero valuable work, and leech off the rest of society. Working class people scamming the tax system is a good thing, really - all those taxes would otherwise go to other rich twats anyways, so I’d much rather it went to your neighbour.

thanks for making my point for me! It’s totally understandable, you’ve been subjected to that propaganda for your whole life, but it’s completely untrue.

definitionally, the middle class literally cannot be in the bottom 10%. I’d really suggest you learn about those “handouts” you mention and look into how much they are, what the conditions for receiving it are, how hard they are to get, etc. and consider whether you’d be able to live on them.

Would be way better off giving it to the people in the bottom 10% of wealth.

Americans have been brainwashed into believing they can only achieve political change by voting for one of two candidates

Yes, ACAB. Any actions taken by the police are for either protecting the interests of the wealthy and powerful, enforcing traditional/societal norms, or they’re basically a PR stunt. A terrorist attack in New York would potentially harm wealthy people, not to mention Wall Street and the larger economy. so it had to be stopped.

It should be illegal to profit from the sale of a living being. It’s slavery, pure and simple.

Your point was that we judge the harm of a procedure proportional to its benefits, basically. I don’t really get why you felt the need. Do you support the use of these procedures such as tail/ear docking?

I don’t think that is a fully-satisfying conclusion. If it held up to scrutiny, then we would also curtail the rights of the elderly in the same way, which in the overwhelming majority of cases we do not. We would do the same for people with relevant disabilities, which again in the majority of cases, we do not.

If someone proposed removing the right to vote from people with mental disabilities to “protect the mentally weak from the strong”, I’d like to think that we’d all see the problems with that. Why do we not feel the same way about the disenfranchisement of younger people?

We put arbitrary age limitations on seemingly everything, from voting to watching a movie. When we have no age limits on something, stories always come up about a young kid who is capable and competent.

So why do we even have those age limits? We have adults of 30+ who are way more immature than some 12 year olds. Just seems like needless limitation on the rights of kids.

The real exception to this I suppose are things like age limits on joining the military or giving consent.

Yeah that’s one of those excuses I was talking about. Everyone always consumes animal products from their uncle’s farm. They never, ever buy animal products from the store, or from a restaurant, or fast food, or whatever. Nope. All the animal products you consume are 100% from your uncle’s farm and they’re all mega happy, and you know them all by name!

lol