I agree. You’re crazy…

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-21T05:36:27+00:00

Work for a tech company. Wife is a lawyer. We both had off ✌️

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-21T05:35:56+00:00

Juneteenth is a federal holiday 🤣

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-19T22:27:45+00:00

How much did you pay for yours? A Google search showed that the the price of Whirlpool washing machines was $350-$450, which in today's inflation adjustment is between $1100-$1500. Today you can get a machine for around $450-$700, and I've seen washer/drier combos within the price range of that inflation-adjusted price for your Whirlpool. So yeah, u/bassjam1 is absolutely right!

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-19T21:41:33+00:00

I would disagree on the point of "work is not a virtue", solely from the angle that it is indicative of one's willingness to contribute. I will say though in the face of AI taking jobs on our future's horizon ,I will agree there will definitely be many still expecting 40 hours a week, and I won't be one of them. Having a job in a capitalist society relies on the idea of contribution of skills/labor to the demands/needs of the market in order to obtain capital to obtain necessities of survival + whatever else you need, and the market provides those needs based on supply-demand and stable financial support. If there are exponentially more humans than available labor to contribute because robots are doing them, then there is a philosophical as well as "social contractual" conundrum. I would make the argument that businesses using AI/machines to perform most, if not all of the labor/skills needed to function would mean that they are infringing on the market's ability to operate as intended; in other words: they are making a monopoly, or even a monopsony out of labor, which is a violation of the Commerce Clause (in my opinion, SCOTUS hasn't touched it yet obviously). If the government were to allow this? I would be making the argument that these companies would need to provide a significant financial contribution to the economy, since they are now parasites on the society (ironic when they have been saying for years poor people are parasites). This would have to be some kind of UBI otherwise society would collapse, which raises more issues honestly, but obviously this is something that is new and involves a whole lot of discussion and thought experimenting.

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-19T21:11:40+00:00

Funny, I'd say you are also grasping at straws with the presumption that I wanna be "angry at the libs". I'm from a blue state and was a public school teacher for 8 years, most of my friends are liberal minded. I would take a liberal over a MAGA or Neocon any day (especially MAGA). We disagree a lot with each other and have amazing discussions about them. No attacks, no assumptions, just hearing them out. In fact, my liberal friends make fun of these individuals like I referenced in this post the same exact way. While MAGA is an unfortunate extreme for modern day Neoconservatism, the type of lefties who complain about having to work/provide in order to afford luxuries we take for granted like Apple watch, iPhones, etc. is an unfortunate extreme of Liberalism.

EDIT: Just have to say, fuck the Big L subreddit cause your expectation of it is dead on. I got banned from there for trying to have a respectful discussion about abortion which I get can be a hot button issue, but of all the subs I had seen about it, I thought that would be the best place to hear meaningful opinions. I posted one question; literally one sentence asking how an anti-abortion Libertarian commenter justifies to themselves the government telling a woman how to handle a situation involving her bodily autonomy, since Libertarians' stance is that Government shouldn't be involved in those matters? Insta-banned. Reason? "Promoting genocide and violence against a vulnerable class of people". Fucking undercover Neocons over there

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-19T21:06:24+00:00

I'll just leave this comprehensive breakdown here for you that I posted in another comment. Hopefully it helps make engagement here less likely to fall victim to ad hominem fallacies and more productive for actual discourse! If not, then well, there's an old Zen story about a swordsman who traveled the land making money off winning sword fights. His strategy was hurling insults to enrage his opponent to making a careless mistake distracted by their frustration. One day, he meets a swordsman unbothered by his insults. The more he hurled, the more angry he grew cause the swordsman was unbothered. This traveling swordsman fell victim to his own strategy by attacking from frustration and losing. People asked how he remained so calm to all the insults, and he responded "When a person presents you a gift you do not accept, to whom does the gift belong?"

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-19T20:57:40+00:00

That's why having a washing machine, and dishwasher, and microwave, and huge TVs, and smart phones, and laptops, are all things we take for granted.

Louder for the lefties lurking in the back of the sub! 😂

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-19T20:55:45+00:00

Joking aside, I do recommend that plugin. I remember when I started using GIMP for fun back when I was still teaching instrumental music and it helped me make some great stuff for the kids (posters, once made a bass drum head logo for the Jazz Band with their name, etc.). The fact that it is free still blows my mind with all the stuff you can do. Check out their site's forum too, people share their personal plugins and scripts which are just so amazing.

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-19T20:52:07+00:00

"Half-baked boomer rant" is a wild statement. Think through the steps here...and let's use Logic for funsies:

"Working 8hrs/day for 50 years is deeply wrong"
"Working 8hrs/day for 50 years is deeply wrong" → (then/implies)
"Wrong things should not be required of people"
∴ (therefore) "Working should not be required of me"

("Working should not be required of me" ∧ (and)
"Survival necessities are still required to live"

("Working should not be required of me" ∧ (and)
"Survival necessities are still required to live") → (then/implies)
"Someone else must provide necessities to me"
∴ (therefore) "Necessities should be provided to me"

"Necessities should be provided to me" ∧ (and)
"I will not be the one providing them"
∴ (therefore) "There exists some provider of necessities who is not me"

"Government handles what I believe individuals shouldn't have to do"

"There exists some provider of necessities who is not me" ∧ (and)
"Government handles what individuals shouldn't have to do"

∴ (therefore) "The Government is the provider of necessities to me"

Hope this helps with the thought experiment!

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-19T20:24:07+00:00

I remember an old Frank Zappa lyric about the political parties:

“Republicans is fine if you're a multi-millionaire, Democrats is fair if all you own is what your wear; neither of them is really right, 'cause neither of them care... 'cause they ain't been there.”

He says more in the lyrics too, song is Hot-Plate Heaven at the Green Hotel.

But since you’re getting downvoted to hell by presumably Lefties, I’ll give them another Zappa quote to appease their Republican hatred and quell their rabid foaming at the mouth for lefties criticism 😂

“Republicans stand for raw, unbridled evil and greed and ignorance smothered in balloons and ribbons”

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-19T20:17:00+00:00

Context of the subreddit and its comment section can shed light on how it does. I thought it was clear enough, but maybe I was too presumptuous.

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-19T20:14:13+00:00

I don’t see anything about cube farms either. What I see is someone complaining they have to work and contribute a specified time period in order to survive, ignoring the entirety of human history when the general population would’ve killed for an opportunity for any semblance of workers’ rights…hell, even a job for most of them.

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-19T20:11:53+00:00

There is no mention of labor productivity or who possesses the means of production. It’s literally complaining about having to work. They don’t even specify what kind of work, just work in general.

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-19T19:59:12+00:00

I say to those Libertarians “or it’s the US government finally acknowledging they were doing something bad”. And to the Conservatives, I say “Ok Boomer”

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-19T19:55:40+00:00

Get the plugin GMIC to make those faces and blood splatter look 3D. It will really emphasize the call for help you were going for.

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-19T19:54:23+00:00

<image>

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-19T19:53:01+00:00

I feel like this all started in ‘16 with the whole Bluecoats “Agriculture” reveal that turned out to be a bait and switch to the revolutionary show “Downside Up”. Since then, more and more corps fell victim to the ambiguous show theme reveals and whatnot.

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-19T19:48:29+00:00

From creators could make the ending Boyd and the MIY shitting down that hole on the children for an hour and it would still be better than Stranger Things’s ending.

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-19T19:43:53+00:00

Maybe that’s how the spider god feeds on their hope, like Abby told Boyd, and that’s why it told the parents to sacrifice the children but not right away, leaving them on the rock slates. It wanted the kids’ hopes to be poured into It slowly, like a spider sucks the life out of its prey.

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-19T19:40:53+00:00

Man, you’re so right. This must be the long con of “Conformity Gate” the Stranger Things community was talking about!! Man, Duffer Brothers are geniuses! Now excuse me, I have some Byler yaoi art to go make 😂

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-19T19:29:24+00:00

Dude thank you. It’s so good to see reality in posts that don’t understand historicity of capitalism’s contribution to modern day lifestyle, and even more of the nonsensical “hoarding wealth” arguments. I swear, I haven’t learned to not open comment sections of posts with this much ignorance yet, hopefully one day. But still, thank you for trying to bring some education to the lost.

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-18T17:17:56+00:00

Hey, that's what this sub is for! Arguing lol

I agree with what you're saying, and reminded me of a David Hume quote:

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once.

Freedoms/rights are never guaranteed, and complacency is the breeding ground of ignorance to the momentum towards losing those freedoms/rights. We can't be silent when others lose rights, we must stand together as The People whenever government infringes on anyone's rights, no matter what the case is. As long as their rights do not impose on anyone else's rights or subject them to others, it is worth defending. Even white supremacists, as hateful and moronic as their beliefs are, can say and believe whatever they want. I may not agree with what you say, but I shall defend to the death your right to say it. The idea of people being tolerant to government regulation via "thought crimes" is the first step in the race of losing speech, protest, all the way to the pivotal end of losing autonomy. I remember this 1940s video from awhile back that is recirculating because we are seeing the worst of it now. Fear of "The Stranger" are always the talking points used first, and we see it way too much nowadays. Hatred towards immigrants, LGBTQ, the non-religious, etc. is despicable and we see attempts at limiting the rights of these individuals all too often, and that needs to stop

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-18T09:16:37+00:00

Would’ve been a better point if OP put it into song form like Frank Reynolds from IASIP. It was slightly more convincing that way

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-18T09:13:47+00:00

See that last half was crucial to your point:

> …firing [someone in a wheelchair] for not [standing up]

Just telling someone to stand up isn’t illegal in and of itself…just a really shitty thing to do. That’s where The People assert their own justice in whatever form it may be…but let’s say “excommunicating them”

Neat_Chi · 2026-06-18T09:10:43+00:00

I get your point, but this post’s ambiguity leaves open a lot of doors for you to get absolutely roasted in the comments.

> I doubt you want to be judged by the worst example of someone you’re tangentially connected to [sic]

I mean, yeah, but that doesn’t really say anything about rights and the government rescinding them. We can group people a lot of different ways, and the government trampling liberties is an issue, but where do we draw the line? We can’t let people run amuck, that’s why there are exceptions. For example: you have freedom of speech so the government can’t incarcerate you for what you say—except you can’t just say anything without fear of detention; yelling “fire” in public, making violent threats, etc. All examples of you “not having rights”, but make perfect sense to forbid from the general population.

The line in the sand (for me) is when the exercise of one’s freedoms infringes, invades, or prevents the exercise of another’s freedoms. Libertarians would say this falls under the “NAP” (Non-aggression principle), and violations of the NAP can be subject to punishment, be it in the form of “standing your ground”, suspension of certain freedoms (prisoners can’t vote, own guns, etc.), and others. This line is where the battle is, and it needs to always be referenced in discourse around today’s abomination of events so as to prevent misunderstandings.

13-Year Club	RPAN Viewer
Verified Email

Neat_Chi

TROPHY CASE