“Lmao no sympathy for anyone who buys expensive shoes”
^this you?
“Lmao no sympathy for anyone who buys expensive shoes”
^this you?
When you mature as a human being, whatever age that may be, you develop kindness through a willingness to understand and empathize with perspectives that conflict with your own. That doesn’t necessarily mean you have to accept it for yourself. For many people, clothing is not simply a means of pragmatic function. It’s also a source of self-expression, joy, and beauty. Now for me, $600 for a pair of sneakers is exorbitant and ridiculous no matter who designed it. But it’s not a product for me. And if someone with the means feels great buying and wearing them, I don’t see the harm. I don’t usually pay more than I have to for footwear, but I would pay a premium for certain kitchen tools I use all the time if I like the design, enjoy looking at it, and feel good using it. What I do sympathize with and would like to see reduced in harm is the consumerist culture that pressures people with less means into feeling like they have to have such things for fulfillment.
Don’t you mean appreciating the beauty in imperfections?
This framing makes it seem like Biden is going against the majority congressional sentiment, but he is not. The US congress, overall, is supportive of sending military support to Israel, as evidenced by their passing bills other aid bills, which is a slower process.
How would you describe the media is treating it and how should the media be treating presidents who share such imagery regardless of party?
I mean there you go, Toyota’s are appliances. They have to look bland because their style has to remain inoffensive after decades on the road.
That being said, I’m impressed with how much style they’ve managed to put on the new Prius while still aiming for long-term fleet vehicle role. I also like what they’re trying to do with the BZ4 styling wise, even if it’s a compromised first gen product.
There’s also always the Supra and LC500 :3
I think it’s one thing for a private citizen to do this, but it would be another thing for a sitting/former president running for election to do the same
People get butthurt over things others do that don’t affect them all the time.
People also get buttgurt over things others do that indirectly affect them or violate their ethical principles.
Sometimes it’s hard to tell them apart and sometimes there’s a bit of overlap when worldviews conflict.
We live in a society.
I think people get too hung up on the question of genocidal intent in this conflict. That’s not to dismiss the importance of the word and legal implications. I came across this opinion that expresses what I mean much better: https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/columnists/iowa-view/2023/12/14/israel-palestinian-gaza-war-genocide-definitions-discussions/71904125007/
You forgot, corporations are people too. And who are the most important people in the world??
It’s official, the Pope identifies as ideofluid
If they set a 10 year goal it may take 20 years to hit 80% of goals, if they set a 20 year goal it’ll take 40 years to hit 50%, if they set a 50 year goal…
Nobody thinks this is a realistic goal, but the target gives a concrete number to set a mandate on which actually pragmatic policies, funding projects, and incentives can hang their hat on to keep the ball rolling.
With big infrastructure developments, nobody wants to buy into realistic goals, it’s too costly, and there’s never enough political will. You set overly ambitious goals so you can get people to buy in and then the project is too big to fail, so you end up paying what it actually costs, and you try to mitigate waste, unanticipated problems, corruption, and poor management along the way.
I would too. Unfortunately I’m pretty sure most places that check even half those boxes still fail in the market. You often have to drag consumers kicking and screaming towards something more equitable and less exploitative, even when they’re the ones being exploited.
You probably have, pehaps even felt a musical tickle or nodded along absentmindedly. She’s pretty ubiquitous, and her music does what pop does best.
Because they are reacting to living under the oppressive structures of late capitalism. Having been raised in a capitalist world, they naturally overemphasize economic systems and their alternatives and make assumptions about government.
So when they communism theyusually mean communism + some equitable government or just they mean socialist democracy.
Funnily enough, you live pretty well in China these days if you’re a good little capitalist.
Yeah well there’s cooking as in purely functional preparation of nutrients, and then there’s cooking as in a process of caring for others by creating a worthwhile experience of food that is needed, engaging, and delicious. The downside is this experience usually has a time limit dependent on time and others’ availability (eating hot food together). It’s sad for such effort to go to waste. The alternative extreme to this kind of nurturing is abandoning the idea that family time over meals is worthwhile and just shitting out nutrient bricks so the children don’t starve. I don’t think anyone really wins in the long run with that.
That’s not an insult, it’s a specific form of trolling/harassment called sealioning.
Is this a shitpost because blue actually represents the Quebecois who view themselves as oppressed the way they oppressed Indigenous People, for whom orange/yellow/black/red/white are more representative colours?
Yeah that’s a bit of a strawman. The only people “putting politics on a pedestal” are human characatures, like people who’s whole identity is worshipping Trump are to conservatives or “alpha males” to men.
Anyway I already gave my take on politics being a property more than a lens.
2048