The point about a county not being able to be pacifist the way that an individual can be is the same reason that the requirements proposed would require universal adoption. The aim of pacifism is irrelevant when it's the target.
slackassassin
joined 2 years ago
I understand what you're saying and I'm not certain either.
But, given that the context is a response to concern, it makes it sound like they're suggesting that she's gunning for the outcome. Like "don't worry about them they're all setup now." A nobody who is now a champion of liberalism.
It just reads weird. Maybe they are just an ernest doomer who believes nobody is employable, but also thinks that everything will work out here. Stranger things have happened. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Right? The framing of that comment is very strange. Suspicious even.
That's also weird, though. "Like the rest of us" means nothing, plenty are employable, a vast majority are actually.
So, to assume they "probably went from unemployable" to winning the job lottery with a nonprofit is certainly a take.
Fury road.
Dear diary,
I met mad max today, great driver, very aggressive.
I agreed with this up until the 'and'.
Ya, everyone supports workers until the bill arrives.
3 seems to contradict 1 otherwise it wouldn't be a moral duty.
My kids bring me great joy. I share my hobbies with them and adopt theirs. Spending time with them is not a loss or hindrance. Having kids is not for everyone and that's fine, but the negativity online it outright toxic.
The criticism is about your gross exaggeration of every day commuting from an individual perspective. Because that shit is not daily unless you are the common denominator.
Nice appeal to emotion though, but everyone already knows bad things happen. I could post thousands of days of a 15 year, 30 mile, commute too and it would be just as relevant that you need to drive better.