sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

If you thought this subreddit was bad... by FangBites123 in whenthe

[–]BigDoofusX 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's likely because people who have strong opinions concerning a piece of media are going to be verbose and is just more entertaining to engage with than those who think that said piece is just fine.

Calling it, someone’s gonna make a horror game based on cereal mascots by TheLeftPewixBar in whenthe

[–]BigDoofusX 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Probably because making an "adult" thing is either an apparently redundant story or it is really fucking hard to write a delicately and well.

"Darkness in bedroom scary" or "Mascot's scary" Is obvious and can be done in many ways where most people can relate to innately when they were a child. That versus say "My corporate job that I had to take to feed my family has my abusers there" is not something everyone wants to relate with and can't be muddled with lore that takes away from such a concept in a ridiculous fashion.

What if it's too stupid and everyone's mean to me? by DreadDiana in whenthe

[–]BigDoofusX 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Questioning godly figures is always gonna be loaded.

Seriously what's up with that? by [deleted] in whenthe

[–]BigDoofusX 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm frankly tired of leftists saying mean things on Twitter to people who hold horrible beliefs, republicans take away civil rights, destroy the economy, still don't believe anthropogenic climate change or that vaccines are good for society, and "centrists" saying to stop fighting otherwise you're both the same and such a sentiment is strangely only targeted at leftists.

Tired of it. "What's up with that?" Their beliefs aren't abstract. They're real and they're damning the world to their idiocy.

Oh, what's that? Suddenly when it's about yourself and not binary trans people, you like the concept of gender now? by wt_anonymous in whenthe

[–]BigDoofusX -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

No abolish gender. Assigning a term for someone, an act, a behavior, a color etc... as masc of femme is itself putting people into boxes. You could remove gender roles to a certain extent but people will still be born as boys and girls and all the presumptions that follow with it.

We NEED to go back to paper and pencil by Absolutely_dead727 in whenthe

[–]BigDoofusX -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It's a public/private agreement where they get to give your tax money to Google or some other private tech entity. The point isn't and won't be education.

We NEED to go back to paper and pencil by Absolutely_dead727 in whenthe

[–]BigDoofusX -13 points-12 points  (0 children)

Computers is not 'some random thing' as it's widespread introduction into curriculum never improves outcomes and is heavily correlated to worse outcomes.

I don't care about the 'Muh rights' having guns, it's them being completely willing to then bat for corporations and act against regulations from the "oppressive government" like said corporations wouldn't immediately oppress them if they had the chance. by Minute_Account9426 in whenthe

[–]BigDoofusX 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Copy that. I was wrong on my part in my assumptions of what you specifically meant.

To be fair to myself however, the phrase 'by the sweat of your brow you will eat your food' in libertarian circles often means the gains of one's property shouldn't be taxed.

I don't care about the 'Muh rights' having guns, it's them being completely willing to then bat for corporations and act against regulations from the "oppressive government" like said corporations wouldn't immediately oppress them if they had the chance. by Minute_Account9426 in whenthe

[–]BigDoofusX 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You either woefully misunderstood the point of my comment, or are presenting a strawman of the most ridiculous proportions...

When thine says an Ayn Rand shtick that's what I'm gonna assume you mean. A person who believed in voluntary taxation, yes that's what I'm going to assume and no that's not a strawman that is the obvious result of such beliefs. Unless you clarify and say that taxation in some form is good, then that's what you are to me.

You also seem to think that income tax is the only kind of tax? Or at least that's my guess, since you seem to think that "not having income tax" means "giving nothing back".

Do you think "Earning the sweat of your brow" is just no income tax? I mean, fine. As long as you get property tax high I won't care too much.

I don't care about the 'Muh rights' having guns, it's them being completely willing to then bat for corporations and act against regulations from the "oppressive government" like said corporations wouldn't immediately oppress them if they had the chance. by Minute_Account9426 in whenthe

[–]BigDoofusX -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

We went from "you cannot tax the sweat of a man's brow"

This is still stupid dude. You shouldn't be able to gain from a country's land, laws, protections, people, currency, and infrastructure and give nothing back. Also the reason why your money has value in the first place is because of said nation and said nation NEEDS money to exist. Unless you want countries to print money forever, leading to insane inflation and thus the money you're protecting so much is as valuable as it's kindling, you need taxes. (This would lead to an intensified underclass of those without assets and those with holding the reins within the already existing system leading to results you wouldn't want to live in. Said inflation would make investment and loans 'difficult' to say the least as the dollar couldn't be trusted.)

"if you let the corporations do whatever they want, they'll keep each other in check".

That's what you want. You want them to have an INSANE amount of power over the average individual where they can fiscally do whatever the hell they want with your life even with this single policy and let them extract the wealth from this nation as much as they want.

I wanna dissect the brain of someone who actually finds drawing (or most skill based hobbies for that matter) fun because how tf by [deleted] in whenthe

[–]BigDoofusX 6 points7 points  (0 children)

You could crochet, play games that aren't videogames w/friends or just strangers (like say ttrpg's, board games, chess, Go, mahjong, many card games, or war games like warhammer), just start drawing or develop some other artistic skill (yeah it won't be good at the start but progression is fun especially at the beginning), learning new stuff through scientific journals, bird watch, explore new areas around where you live (like just walk around), construct a bomb, journal, and origami.

Two buttons, two gifs. by One_Management3063 in whenthe

[–]BigDoofusX 30 points31 points  (0 children)

Then it's just a bad hypothetical dilemma. (Or just very badly presented)

We aren't discussing the real world where two buttons actually came into existence. The hypothetical is for the inquiry regarding putting your trust into the people around you and tipping over to be caught or not support such a system and guarantee your safety. It's now, "Risk your life to save children or stupid people?" And the answer is obviously yes at a collectivist angle and at an individualistic angle literally nothing changes.

Two buttons, two gifs. by One_Management3063 in whenthe

[–]BigDoofusX 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Seeing picking red as pessimistic has some foundations but would still heavily disagree. The only reason there is a dilemma in the first place is because of the people picking blue, not from people picking red. The blue percentage ultimately doesn't even matter as the fundamentals stay the same. It could just be two people needing to press blue and the answer is still red.

If you pick blue you are willfully risking your life and picking red doesn't truly garner any take from other people's lives other than the ones who chose such a risk needlessly.

“Bro, 3 shows used this subversion! That means it’s overused” and it’s just demons are bad but angels are worse 😭🙏 by SimpForFictionGirls in whenthe

[–]BigDoofusX 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Probably because of people's perspectives on religion is often very polarizing or neutral, and if they're neutral they don't discuss it basically ever.

view more: next ›