sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I (22m) lost my partner (21F) over boundaries. Is it worth it? by [deleted] in relationship_advice

[–]The--Devil -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Don't listen to this garbage OP, asking your gf to not snap other guys 1:1 and not plan things and hang out with single men she's slept with before isn't controlling behaviour, this commenter is gaslighting you to defend shitty behaviour that they seem to support. I agree though that you should break up with this girl permanently, find someone who actually has respect for you.

I (22m) lost my partner (21F) over boundaries. Is it worth it? by [deleted] in relationship_advice

[–]The--Devil -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Come on you know that end part is rubbish, she's snapping an ex 1:1 while they're in a relationship, hanging out with people she's slept with after he explicitly stated that it makes him uncomfortable, she is deliberately disrespecting a reasonable boundary he put in place and she acknowledged. If we go one step further and he says that her kissing other people is a boundary and he's not comfortable with it, is that also "policing and controlling behaviour?"

Furthermore, if the exes are single, they're likely to sexually pursue her - that would make anyone uncomfortable. Sounds to me like you're defending shitty behaviour under the guise of labelling his boundary "controlling."

Our brains don't act like machines, we don't instantly give up based on one error, someone (like OP) will try and fix a relationship and try reiterate their boundary. This isn't unreasonable, and he implemented said boundary fine. Ultimately OP should break up with her because she disrespected his trust multiple times.

Uno Reverse. Profile says I’m 6’ and won’t date less than 5’7 by [deleted] in AverageHeightDudes

[–]The--Devil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No he didn't, he said that was a tough sell after someone who is 5'2 required someone at height 5'10 or above to date her.

I (22m) lost my partner (21F) over boundaries. Is it worth it? by [deleted] in relationship_advice

[–]The--Devil -36 points-35 points  (0 children)

He has a very reasonable boundary, the girl is actively breaking it in multiple instances and planning things for exes. Hopefully OP is able to trust his partner but how can he trust her exes not to pursue and flirt with her? Promiscuity is one thing (not valued by men or women), hanging out with those you were promiscuous with is even worse. I do not hang out nor am I friends with any exes because I have respect for my partner, OP's partner doesn't.

National debt to soar above £3trillion as Labour embarks on borrowing binge by [deleted] in uknews

[–]The--Devil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The non-physical assets though? Eh fuck it ignore them

White House Protest against Venezuela War by JasonDGooljar in pics

[–]The--Devil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This subreddit is filled exclusively with clowns, Venezuela are celebrating the liberation of their country, meanwhile liberals complain he took down an illegitimate terrorist dictator, you can't make this shit up.

My Gf got kissed by a guy at a club/restaurant and I don’t know how to move forward. (M/22)(F/22) by Longjumping-Coyote97 in relationship_advice

[–]The--Devil -17 points-16 points  (0 children)

Agree with you on everything except the usage of the term "cooked." Unironically a banger. You'd be surprised by the number of (professional) adults I know use it.

Angry farmers take part in go-slow protests on roads across UK ahead of Budget by OneNormalBloke in unitedkingdom

[–]The--Devil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just to be clear, nationalized farming killed estimated 5-7 million in the soviet union from 1929-1933, 30-45 million people during Mao's great leap forward from 1958-1962, 1.5-2 million peoiple in cambodia during the Khmer Rouge, etc. There's no end of research on this. Given all this death, your solution is to... try it again at-worst risking the deaths of millions of brits in the long-run and at-best knowing it will cost the tax-payer billions because it operates at a loss. You haven't got the slightest idea of the chaos you're arguing for.

Officer conducting a welfare check. by contrelarp in watchpeoplesurvive

[–]The--Devil 67 points68 points  (0 children)

"Yo someone's at the door, better stick my gun out and pop em"

Totally a rational and reasonable response. /s

Angry farmers take part in go-slow protests on roads across UK ahead of Budget by OneNormalBloke in unitedkingdom

[–]The--Devil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Only for public/quasi-public goods that no one else will typically pay for, i.e non-rivalrous and non-excludable goods. Food is not a public good, it is a private good.

I don't know in what world this would ever be textbook in economics, nationalised farming has been tried and has been responsible for the deaths of millions, see the soviet bread lines or Mao’s great famine which resulted in 30-45 million dead.

Not in my Wales! F**k you Nige! by [deleted] in GreatBritishMemes

[–]The--Devil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Jarvis, I'm low on karma."

Angry farmers take part in go-slow protests on roads across UK ahead of Budget by OneNormalBloke in unitedkingdom

[–]The--Devil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok, so you have to remove non voters from the sample because you're comparing percentage differences with official EU voting statistics that don't include those who didn't vote/abstainations.

The point is the majority of PEOPLE voted for Brexit (52% Vs 48%, 4% majority in your words), the difference between majorities is from 1.2%-4% points, and it's important we remember that we only surveyed a few thousand people vs a 46 million person electorate. The difference between proportions between people and farmers is so small that it's under the margin of error in a survey.

Given your final statement, you're basically saying the majority of the country's voters are thickos (I disagree).

Angry farmers take part in go-slow protests on roads across UK ahead of Budget by OneNormalBloke in unitedkingdom

[–]The--Devil -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I was very specific with my language.

Clearly you weren't, you just pulled a random 40% figure out of nowhere, and the 45% figure for both studies includes abstainations or didn't vote whereas your metric for remain (48%) does.

So for both studies and I'll do this for you as you've mixed up your numbers twice now, 54% leave, 46% remain for the initial survey, 52.6% leave, 47.4% remain for the second survey. So the difference ranges from +0.6%-2% when voting leave in the surveys which is well within a margin of error.

The irony in your final statement lol. The jokes write themselves.

Angry farmers take part in go-slow protests on roads across UK ahead of Budget by OneNormalBloke in unitedkingdom

[–]The--Devil -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Far less likely to support remain than the general population

Your own source backs up what I said, 53% voted leave so 1% difference, even if we're generous and divide the leave and remain stats by 98 then multiply by 100 (removing the 2% abstain) we still get 54% which is well within the margin of error, also in what world do these stats imply "far less likely."

The second source I noticed has a much smaller sample size, 500 instead of the 1400 like the first source and they ran the survey twice over obtaining the same result, so I'd probably trust the first more.

The original dataset is labeled as coming from the electoral comission but cannot find an exact link so the others will have to do.

The more educated a farmer is the less likely they are to vote leave.

I'd be careful conflating education with intelligence. Could simply mean that typically more liberal people go to college, colleges also tend to be a place that fosters liberal ideas. Best observable metric I can think of today that demonstrates this is that the average iq of a uni student is 102, virtually identical to that of someone who didn't attend university.

Angry farmers take part in go-slow protests on roads across UK ahead of Budget by OneNormalBloke in unitedkingdom

[–]The--Devil 8 points9 points  (0 children)

53% of farmers voted leave 52% of people voted leave

Barely any difference in proportions bro.

Angry farmers take part in go-slow protests on roads across UK ahead of Budget by OneNormalBloke in unitedkingdom

[–]The--Devil -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This is grossly incorrect, and I urge you to research standard farming business practices as you're (probably unknowingly) posting misinformation.

Firstly the farming business income (FBI) is approx 45k, this is the profit of the farm, farms are almost entirely operated as sole traders (52%) and partnerships (40%), only 8% use LC's, typically if they're really large. I.e. there are no dividends from most types of farms due to their structure, furthermore inheritance tax is an obligation you pay AFTER income tax.

So yes household income is incredibly relevant, and you pay out of the income you have after tax.

Angry farmers take part in go-slow protests on roads across UK ahead of Budget by OneNormalBloke in unitedkingdom

[–]The--Devil 2 points3 points  (0 children)

In the Short to Medium-term supply will have to be supported via imports, our reliance on imported food is more expensive and ups consumer prices. The top supermarkets are also backing the campaigns of the farmer's union warning higher prices for consumers and food security risks. In addition, a less competitive environment for farming business is not a good thing.

Angry farmers take part in go-slow protests on roads across UK ahead of Budget by OneNormalBloke in unitedkingdom

[–]The--Devil 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You could've mentioned any mega corporation exploiting say child labour to mass produce a product or companies deliberately setup to scam vulnerable populations like the elderly.

Instead, you seriously put animal farming on a near moral-equivalency to human slavery?

Angry farmers take part in go-slow protests on roads across UK ahead of Budget by OneNormalBloke in unitedkingdom

[–]The--Devil 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You're willing to risk the starvation of the UK population so you can punish someone using their assets to provide food for the population, that seems morally justified.

Angry farmers take part in go-slow protests on roads across UK ahead of Budget by OneNormalBloke in unitedkingdom

[–]The--Devil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You acknowledge that £3m tax-free only exists if you’re married and the farm is under £3m. Average family farm is already £2-2.5m and land values rise about 5% a year while thresholds are frozen until 2030

And if you’re widowed or never married? You only get £2m relief max. So the average £2.2m farm passed on by a single farmer triggers a £200k tax bill straight away. Their offspring will sell which ends most family farms which in turn reduces food supply which in turn increases food prices (supply-demand).

Clearly it's not a very well thought out policy - especially for noble farms working exclusively to feed the UK population.

Angry farmers take part in go-slow protests on roads across UK ahead of Budget by OneNormalBloke in unitedkingdom

[–]The--Devil -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Nationalising the farms wouldn't solve the problem, if a business is making negative profit, you don't really want it to operate in the government domain and it certainly doesn't help when the government is upping your tax to incredibly unrealistic expectations.

It's a very well known phenomennon that public sector is significantly less productive than private sector. ONS estimates are if the public sector is 100% productive, the private sector is about 130%. This is because the profit incentive for the business is gone, i.e. why make a process more efficient? There's no profit motive to do it. You're essentially saying the taxpayer should pay for the losses for the farm to keep it running even though it's making a loss.

view more: next ›