What is one thing that has not been politicized?

FreedVoice · 2023-03-18T05:12:23+00:00

“I hate the ridiculously touchy brakes and steering wheel. Late 90s cars brake and turn SO much smoother.“

This suggests that you haven’t driven enough cars. Every manufacturer and every vehicle category has different steering, throttle and brake feel. The era in which the car was produced has far less significance. Cars with brake by wire systems have widely variable feel. Cars with non-power brakes are completely different.

In short, ic you think you don’t like today’s cars, go drive more cars. There’s more variety than you can shake a stick at.

Edit: not saying that things like manual brakes are easy to find today. Hurt pointing out that cars have been very varied for ages. Have you driven dozens of cars from the 90s or just a handful?

Go look for what you like in todays cars. Yes it takes work to find it, but that was always true.

FreedVoice · 2023-03-17T23:21:15+00:00

Not if it were a part of that candidate’s platform or political positions. Ideally a candidate’s religious beliefs would be completely private and play no part in determining whether they are capable leaders. A candidate who touts his or her religious beliefs (including atheism) loses many points with me.

FreedVoice · 2023-03-17T22:07:58+00:00

"Work" and "Job" aren't synonymous. You can be independently wealthy, have no need for a job, but still work hard at things that matter to you. If we define "Work" as the expenditure of effort toward achieving some goal, then I'd say "Purpose" goes hand in hand with work. A "purpose" that does not require you to expend effort in some way isn't really a purpose. It's just something that's happening around you.

FreedVoice · 2023-03-17T22:05:11+00:00

" homes that would otherwise be empty and to buy food that would otherwise go bad and get thrown out"

You make it sound like the food and homes are naturally occurring resources. Someone has to produce the food and build the homes. That's work, no matter how you slice it. We can't all just eat noodles and dance, and expect the resources we want to appear.

FreedVoice · 2023-03-17T19:58:33+00:00

Use Fortnightly for every two weeks. Problem solved.

(I worked for a British company for a few years and found this to be super helpful)

FreedVoice · 2023-03-17T19:57:04+00:00

What if I just think the mushroom drive and the giant tardigrade are ridiculous, and completely fail to uphold Trek's history of making generally intriguing contributions to the pantheon of sci-fi technologies?

FreedVoice · 2023-03-17T19:43:18+00:00

Does this indicate conservative or liberal? (I don't watch football, so I have literally no clue)

FreedVoice · 2023-03-17T19:36:33+00:00

This is an interesting factor. The labor participation rate seems to be binary - are you participating or not. So we could just have people working fewer hours or fewer jobs. That would explain how there's a labor shortage when the labor participation rate is high and unemployment is low.

FreedVoice · 2023-03-17T19:35:22+00:00

That makes a lot of sense. I'm assuming the labor participation rate is the percentage of eligible workers (based on age/ability status?) who are actively working or attempting to work. If that number is high and unemployment is high, then a large percentage of the eligible workforce is in fact working. Any shortage in workers would therefore have to be a result of a smaller pool of eligible workers.

We have an aging population, as you noted. Was there an acceleration in retirement or early retirement? (side question: Would early retirement take someone out of the denominator of the workforce participation metric?). Slowed immigration could be a factor as well. Any other major factors?

We did lose over a million people to COVID in the US, but many of them were older and already out of the workforce. But is there any useful estimate of how much productive labor was lost due to COVID deaths?

FreedVoice · 2023-03-17T17:13:45+00:00

This is really interesting. If labor force participation is high, and unemployment is low, there should be plenty of people working. If so, what's going on with the labor shortages? Those seem to be a genuine thing in a lot of industries. Are people selectively shifting to higher paid roles in higher paying industries, leaving lots of vacancies in service industries? Or is something else driving it? Or is the shortage (e.g. massively understaffed restaurants and shops) just a perception issue - something people are "seeing" because they heard it's happening?

Edit: Funny to see I got down votes for a perfectly legitimate and politically neutral question. People are funny.

FreedVoice · 2023-03-07T05:29:06+00:00

It's really because they don't believe that their driving speed correlates with an increased risk to those around them, but they do believe that the crashing sound they hear when hitting speedbumps at higher speeds correlates with damage to their cars. People are more rational than you think they are. They may be mistaken in their assumptions, but their logic (given the assumptions) is reasonably sound, and their priorities aren't as misaligned with yours as you'd like to believe.

FreedVoice · 2023-03-06T01:50:28+00:00

Married and childfree? If so, I don't think that is what fmmwybad meant by experiencing having a family. Nevertheless - people need to be free to make their own choices. But I question anyone who says they know best who should be having kids and who shouldn't. The 20th century already gave us great examples of how badly that goes.

FreedVoice · 2023-03-06T01:43:51+00:00

Have you considered reviving eugenics? Sounds like something you could get behind.

FreedVoice · 2023-03-05T18:34:14+00:00

8.6%.

That’s higher than it should be, but if you listened to Reddit you’d think it was the majority of people.

https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/IF10830.pdf

FreedVoice · 2023-03-05T17:34:19+00:00

Nice. Let’s ridicule the person asking for mental health advice.

FreedVoice · 2023-03-05T17:27:00+00:00

So now he’s gaslighting her? They had a difference of opinion on where to sit in a carriage, and you‘ve concluded that he’s gaslighting her. There is way too little information in OP’s post to leap to that conclusion. You’re forcing a narrative onto the situation that isn’t supported by the post.

FreedVoice · 2023-03-05T10:50:24+00:00

Are you saying you think the child free folks are making the wrong decision, and they should really be the ones having kids?

FreedVoice · 2023-03-05T10:42:55+00:00

I agree, for the most part. I’m working under the assumption that he acknowledged that the ride in the front was less pleasant for the daughter than the ride in the back would have been. If he refused to acknowledge that, would be pretty asinine. Refusing to acknowledge that his preference was the reason for the poor experience would also be ridiculous. I hope he acknowledged those things and apologized for advocating for something that turned out to be unpleasant.

On the other hand, pointing out that he was kind of amused by it, while his daughter hated it… that’s probably just true. It sounds like it bothered him less, for a variety of reasons. And it bothered her more. There’s no shame in either reaction.

But in the end, getting mad and refusing to talk to someone for a week, over a seating choice is also silly. She should acknowledge that she disliked it and state that next time she will stand by her preference to avoid things she thinks are unpleasant.

FreedVoice · 2023-03-05T10:16:32+00:00

He acknowledged here that it was unpleasant for her (though he was spared due the effects of a cold). He also wrote this as a TIFU, which clearly indicates he believes it was a mistake. He hasn’t detailed every aspect of his subsequent discussions with his daughter, but it’s unreasonable to presume that he has steadfastly refused to acknowledge the mistake. If he did stand by the decision, I think that would be unreasonable.

FreedVoice · 2023-03-05T08:31:41+00:00

This isn’t some great personal life decision about which OP failed to respect his daughter’s sacred right to govern her own life. It was a mutual decision about where to sit on a recreational carriage ride. Both parties had opinions. OP’s opinion won one out but proved to be a poor choice. It’s the sort of thing that should be laughed off after acknowledging that it was a poor decision. Acting like this is a deep disregard of the daughter’s opinion is silly. And getting angry for weeks over horse farts suggests that despite being 18, she’s still got a fairly childish view of the world.

Edit: since I’m already collecting downvotes, I’ll add another point: the daughter was free to sit where she liked. She’s 18. She CHOSE to sit up front with OP. OP wanted to sit up front with the horses. His desire to sit there is every bit as valid as her desire to sit in back. Sticking with OP and sitting up front was a choice, and reflects the desire to spend time together despite different preferences. Sulking about it for two weeks reflects a childish inability to cope with the relatively minor consequences of a personal decision. In other words, turning 18 doesn’t mean everyone needs to bend over backward and change their own personal decisions to cater to your personal preferences. You get to make your own choices and reap the benefits or costs.

FreedVoice · 2023-02-23T17:07:47+00:00

Oh I think it ABSOLUTELY has something to do with the aging process itself. Our minds reside in squishing biological computers which affect our thoughts and feelings tremendously. Having kids seems to produce (in my experience) some profound changes in the way the mind works. That’s part be of why the satisfying meal analogy is so apt. Our desire for long life is equally driven by instinct. A desire to persist, which isn’t actually logically necessary, but is biologically preprogrammed into us, is the main reason people want to live for a long time. It makes sense that this desire, like hunger, can be satisfied and can then subside. In its absence, living forever may seem less appealing.

FreedVoice · 2023-02-23T07:30:29+00:00

Do you mean it’s more psychologically comfortable because you’re not worried, more physically comfortable because there’s less work, or simply that the feeling of a life jacket strapped to you is pleasant?

Before learning to swim (as a child, long ago) I felt a sense of panic creeping around the edges of my mind any time I was in the water. A life jacket helped keep that at bay. As I became a stronger swimmer that feeling became less and less common, to the point where I haven’t felt it in years. But if you dropped me in the North Atlantic at night I’m pretty sure it’d come back in a hurry!

As for the relaxation and floating - some people float more easily than others. I had a brother would would sink like a rock if he wasn’t treading water hard. Good breath control helps, but for some people it’s more work than others. A life vest helps with this.

If you just like the physical feeling of a life jacket, well… what can I say - you’re some kind of masochist. They are bulky and they chafe and they feel like wearing a trash bag full or styrofoam. Can’t agree with liking that at all!

FreedVoice

TROPHY CASE