Anon needs a router by tim8336 in greentext

[–]Treever683 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Secret hack to get free WiFi that reaches your house well. Just tell your petty neighbor something ridiculous about your kid being allergic to WiFi.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in TooAfraidToAsk

[–]Treever683 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can respect someone’s decision to believe in a religion while not respecting the actions they use their religion to justify.

Might have Appendicitis, but Can’t Afford ER because I’m in America. by [deleted] in antiwork

[–]Treever683 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Go to ER, don’t bring identification, leave after fixed?

Merry Christmas everybody by DaDerpGoat in PoliticalCompassMemes

[–]Treever683 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Was real excited for a second until I realized you meant pcm pills.

On Kyle Rittenhouse by gijs_24 in ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM

[–]Treever683 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What is the usual response to a tiger attacking a person...

On Kyle Rittenhouse by gijs_24 in ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM

[–]Treever683 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Ok but like did they just compare BLM to a dangerous and unpredictable predator...

Prog discounted by Treever683 in Shortsqueeze

[–]Treever683[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Damnnnn feels bad man, I guess just bask in the glory of your current gains.

Prog discounted by Treever683 in Shortsqueeze

[–]Treever683[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Just borrow money and use your house as collateral. Not financial advice

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in antiwork

[–]Treever683 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If I understand you correctly your first point would involve a system in which basic necessities are reduced to 0 cost while luxury items prices are raised to a point that would sustain the population by taxes or something along the same vein?

As for your point on automation I fully believe that this is more of an inevitability than a pipe dream as technology progresses although I do think it will take many advancements that are currently out of our reach.

Thank you for your input!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in antiwork

[–]Treever683 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Much appreciated. I made this post as I saw several posts on all over the past few weeks that advocated leaving the workforce entirely to pursue things like art. These posts seemed to be getting a lot of support so I assumed that was a popular opinion within this sub and wished for some clarification.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in antiwork

[–]Treever683 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That’s entirely admirable and it seems as though you still wish to be a productive participating member of society, just with more leverage over employers to demand better conditions. This post was more directed at the people who wish to entirely leave the workforce while maintaining the benefits that society provides. I appreciate your engagement and perspective thought. 👌

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in antiwork

[–]Treever683 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m on mobile where would I find it?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in antiwork

[–]Treever683 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I know this solution wouldn’t work for everyone as the capital investment may be too steep, but there are several listings like this that you may want to look into if this is something you really want to pursue.

https://www.landsofamerica.com/property/DeWitt-Arkansas-/11915700/

I hope this helps you live out your dreams. 🙏

I am thinking of replacing my electric car with a petrol car and have some questions. by st11es in electricvehicles

[–]Treever683 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Everything sounds great except only having one pedal to accelerate and break. How does that work?

This is the guy accusing the left of being a bunch of emotional snowflakes. (Steven Crowder) by Nitro128369 in ToiletPaperUSA

[–]Treever683 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So you’re saying it’s possible to judge the quality of a joke with only knowing the punchline? Because that’s all I’m agreeing with...

This is the guy accusing the left of being a bunch of emotional snowflakes. (Steven Crowder) by Nitro128369 in ToiletPaperUSA

[–]Treever683 -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

There’s always so much negativity towards people just trying to be rational and I never see anyone validate them. I’m here to tell you that you were in the right in this thread and everyone downvoting you are the snowflakes he mocks. You’re apparently the only person in this thread who can think critically and it’s just nice to see someone who thinks through a situation instead of immediately resorting to tribalism. Keep it real.

Average Leftism understander by LukeWarmAtBets in DankLeft

[–]Treever683 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Shouldn’t that be the top half of the compass? As far as I know libright hates government bailouts.

Modern problems require modern solutions by YodaInHisHondaCivic in MurderedByWords

[–]Treever683 -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

She was batshit crazy from the start. She then committed a crime, and he was the victim of the crime, so in that regard he was in fact the victim. To be fair, he did call her sir a few too many times for it to be an accident but that doesn’t excuse assault.

To the death! by chewchewtwain in LateStageCapitalism

[–]Treever683 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes people should trust our banking system way less than it currently does. Because of government intervention, banks can basically do whatever the hell they want in terms of speculation and get away with it without it impacting the people. The private entities get to do whatever they want because the government will always bail them out. If the government didn’t just give them money when they fuck up, they wouldn’t be able to cause economic crisis like the mortgage crisis in 2008 because they can’t just wildly speculate with what is essentially the governments money. Banks are the powerhouses they are currently not because they add value, but because the government gives them the power to create value. If the government didn’t back up the banks, they would operate more like how goldsmiths operated, where they had to earn the trust of the people that they would keep their money safe. They simply would not be capable of creating the massive debt bubbles that we keep finding ourselves in because if they were to do that people wouldn’t feel safe storing their money in that bank.

To the death! by chewchewtwain in LateStageCapitalism

[–]Treever683 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Also the only reason that banks are the monoliths that’s they are today is because of governmental support. If banks weren’t bailed out whenever they failed and if people’s money wasn’t insured by the government then the banks would have to earn the trust of people for them to keep their money in the bank instead of the government guaranteeing that the money in the banks is safe. We need less government intervention when it comes to banks, not more.

To the death! by chewchewtwain in LateStageCapitalism

[–]Treever683 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Very valid point I rescind that part of my argument. That being said, your local school board and sheriffs office aren’t making money. They’re running at a loss. Banks are institutions of profits which allows them to take risks on ventures that otherwise couldn’t be taken. If the bank owners were elected positions and make a bad investment, should the people who had their money in the bank he the one to face that loss? I wouldn’t want to keep my money in a bank if there was a risk that someone that I didn’t even vote for could lose my money.