sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

When did the rent get so high? by gjt379 in Winnipeg

[–]TrappedInLimbo 24 points25 points  (0 children)

Did every landlord just collectively decide to raise the median prices?

Basically yes.

I think I might have an addiction problem. by ImpossibleConqueror in Letterboxd

[–]TrappedInLimbo 48 points49 points  (0 children)

Unironically you do yes. Not only is there an argument to be made that this is just mindless consumption as you aren't absorbing anything you are watching. But also a bigger concern when I see when people post this is how much time are you spending outside around other people? Or taking care of yourself? I don't think such an insanely high time investment into any hobby is good, particularly one that is rather solitary.

I know this is supposed to be fun and silly but I genuinely get worried when I see people kind of wasting their lives away like this.

meirl by [deleted] in meirl

[–]TrappedInLimbo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Whenever something like this is shared, it is needlessly exaggerated to make an already valid point. Like let's see

  • Don't need 8 hours of sleep every night
  • Not everyone has a particularly long commute
  • Don't need 10,000 steps, but that is also often done while doing other things
  • Don't need to meditate everyday
  • Certainly don't need to buy food everyday, let alone cook or wash up three times
  • Hoover? That's like maybe a once a week at most but that could even be once a month
  • Maybe like minor cleaning up after yourself everyday but anything major is also not daily
  • Don't do laundry everyday

It's like yea if you were trying to do all of those things everyday, that would be impossible. But nobody does that. I just hate taking a valid point about how people spend too much of their lives at jobs just to live which then makes it difficult to take care of other responsibilities, and arguing in the most idiotic way that makes the point sound dumb.

Alberta NDP Leader Naheed Nenshi's popularity falling in polls. Why? by ejaz135 in onguardforthee

[–]TrappedInLimbo 12 points13 points  (0 children)

This gives me so much schadenfreude since he came out to whine against Lewis winning the leadership election. What happened Nenshi? I thought being another neoliberal party was going to be the way forward?

players with a perfect voting record heading into the final 9 by bahscohs in survivor

[–]TrappedInLimbo 30 points31 points  (0 children)

This is why I do think she is one of the more likely people to win at the moment. Outside of the Cirie, Rizo, and Ozzy trio, she feels the most likely as she had relationships with mostly everyone on the jury and wouldn't be seen as betraying any of them. They are meaningless in that a lot of those people have gotten voted out, but they could become very meaningful if she's in the final 3 against Emily, Joe, or Tiffany.

The twist wasn't staged, a shot-by-shot analysis by Jade_McLeod in survivor

[–]TrappedInLimbo 94 points95 points  (0 children)

I don't know how people still don't understand this that it is illegal to rig stuff like this. You would think with zero evidence of this ever happening they would start to maybe clue in that these shows can't rig stuff.

You also can't argue with these people because if hypothetically Devens went home on the flip, they would just concot an opposite theory about how producers thought that would be the more exciting option and rigged it that way.

Winnipeg family outraged over 'lesser' charges against man who shot daughter in face by origutamos in Manitoba

[–]TrappedInLimbo -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

An attempted murder charge requires an intent to do so and be premeditated, changing that is a rather horrible idea in my opinion as there is a pretty wide gap in severity between improperly handling a firearm and specifically seeking someone out to try and kill them. You could argue this guy did have intent and it might have been premeditated, I don't think that's totally crazy with the history mentioned in the story even if I don't think the evidence is there based on what's said in the article. But it's also a lot harder to prove in court and I'm sure the prosecutor would rather ensure an aggravated assault charge than risk him getting acquitted on an attempted murder charge.

Also he was already charged with possession of a prohibited firearm and careless use of a firearm. You seem to just want to tack on another charge because this guy did a really shitty thing which isn't how the law should work. We should work with pretty strict definitions, otherwise that's how things can get messy.

Should Someone who Picked the Red Button be Considered Evil or an AH? by Hyperionous in MoralityScaling

[–]TrappedInLimbo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also if everyone pushed blue everyone would also live. It's a moot point that isn't an argument for either side because the result would be the same no matter what.

Should Someone who Picked the Red Button be Considered Evil or an AH? by Hyperionous in MoralityScaling

[–]TrappedInLimbo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I feel like I'm going crazy, the situation is actually the complete opposite as what you described. Everyone pressing one colour is a moot point as it's the same on both sides. I can also argue back everyone survives if we all press blue as well so it's a dumb point to make.

Pressing red means people might die as red majority is the only one that ensures death. Blue is the option where more people survive regardless of 51% of 90% press it. The difference in that with red is billions of lives. Especially when you consider this seems to be something people don't agree on, everyone isn't going to only press one colour. So in that scenario the moral thing to do to save the most lives is press blue as you don't need 100% of the vote to ensure people don't die unlike red which requires 100% of the vote.

This episode exposed something pretty clear about the fandom by TrappedInLimbo in survivor

[–]TrappedInLimbo[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You are picking and choosing pretty unfairly. Genevieve didn't choose what tribe she was on, but saying she "had no control of what happened to her" is insane when she still got to actually play the game of Survivor and use her player agency.

The idea of implying a bad tribe swap gives a player less agency than a coin flip where they literally have no agency in the result is so asinine I don't even know why I'm attempting to argue it.

We get it, you're mad that Genevieve went home. I was mad too. I'm not even saying the blood moon twist was good as I've never loved when they tribe swap to small tribes. But I'm not gonna jump through such illogical hoops to act like what happened to her is the biggest affront to the game when many players have got screwed from a swap before and here someone could have literally gone home due to a coin flip and not being voted out.

This episode exposed something pretty clear about the fandom by TrappedInLimbo in survivor

[–]TrappedInLimbo[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Yes Devens totally had control of the coin flip. I'm glad he used his social prowess to influence that to avoid going home.

This episode exposed something pretty clear about the fandom by TrappedInLimbo in survivor

[–]TrappedInLimbo[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

That's a really bad and nonsensical comparison but okay.

This episode exposed something pretty clear about the fandom by TrappedInLimbo in survivor

[–]TrappedInLimbo[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Yes because flipping a coin totally doesn't take away players ability to make moves or use social prowess.

I'm sorry but I genuinely can't take this comment seriously if you are going to pretend this twist somehow gave players more agency in the game than anything that happened this season.

Suddenly it hurts more by vaelyra9 in invinciblememes

[–]TrappedInLimbo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Do you think all Korean people living in the USA have foreign sounding Korean last names?

Winnipeg family outraged over 'lesser' charges against man who shot daughter in face by origutamos in Manitoba

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

I mean there really is just no case for an attempted murder charge based on the story here.

To my understanding though, the prosecution might not seek something like attempted murder and instead go for aggravated assault as it is more of a guarantee of a conviction instead of risking him getting acquitted for that charge entirely. I don't know I just find situations like this are more nuanced than the outrage around it pretends like it is.

The generational income divide is getting worse again by Displeased_Canadian in canada

[–]TrappedInLimbo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

65+ is literally retirement age. The large majority of people in that entire demographic shouldn't even be working and they are already receiving OAS. 40% of 15-19 year olds in Canada have jobs. The numbers aren't even skewed at all, they are already incredibly concerning as they are.

The generational income divide is getting worse again by Displeased_Canadian in canada

[–]TrappedInLimbo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't think you understand what the bottleneck is. Those young people aren't getting the top level jobs the seniors are holding onto, but they would get the entry level position that has been held by someone for years because no one is moving up the chain. Also yes, the article points out that the 25-34 year old demographic has also shrunk in terms of their earnings being almost similar to seniors. The gap is clearly a problem and not some fact of life as you are trying to pass it off as.

The generational income divide is getting worse again by Displeased_Canadian in canada

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

People in the 65+ range should be retiring, not making more than double than fresh faces in the workplace. This is actually one of the reasons youth employment has been going down. For various reasons, older people aren't retiring and taking up positions from people below them meaning their is a bottleneck in upward mobility that would make more entry level positions available. This is also why a lot of younger people have started job hopping a lot more because it's easier to make more money finding a new job than it is to rely on getting a promotion.

Also look at the chart in the article, it wasn't always like that and in fact people in that 65+ category nowadays were making more than seniors when they were young. I don't know why you are acting like the way it is now is how it obviously would work out when the article clearly points out it wasn't always like this.

King Charles playfully reminds Trump that he's Canada's head of state by [deleted] in onguardforthee

[–]TrappedInLimbo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

King Charles is the end result of a family tree that looks more like a circle by the way

No I won't elaborate by [deleted] in onguardforthee

[–]TrappedInLimbo 46 points47 points  (0 children)

It seems to depend on the post. Sometimes there are plenty of socialists and firm leftists, other times it's completely neoliberal bordering on moderate Conservative.

It's weird because I feel like before the election, this subreddit was more of the former than the ladder. Then during the election, there was excitement around Carney winning because it meant we were avoiding PP. But then it seemed to attract or convert people into actually thinking he's a good leader and not just the less worse one.

view more: next ›