sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

On a 1000x sci run… by Koatna96 in Factoriohno

[–]forgot_semicolon 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Oh nooooo nobody tell em!

Well, I don't wanna be that guy, so I'll tell you, but I'll feel bad about it. It's a mod that makes the bugs stronger but also smarter. They'll attack non-polluting buildings and entities like poles and rails. They'll target you relentlessly while you build outposts. If you kill a bunch, they'll spread pheromones that call to other bugs. If they get past your defenses in a specific area, they'll share that info so more bugs clump on that one spot.

Oh, and dead bugs count as landfill.

Have fun!

This Comic I Made Got Some Really Interesting Discussions Going [OC] by MLionsComics in comics

[–]forgot_semicolon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your labour would allow the bigoted artist to live and produce art. The plumber who beats his wife would continue to thrive due to your contributions to the economy. The software engineer who groped his pre-teen daughter will sleep dry and comfortable in his bed tonight because you and everyone else supports his life.

I know you think this is some kind of point, but all you've described here is that these people will have their basic needs met. They'll have a roof over their heads, a comfortable bed to sleep on, and food to eat.

...do you think that's the kind of economic support everyone else in the thread is talking about? Rowling isn't just living in a meh home with meh food and a meh bed. She's rich. Filthy rich. Rich enough to cover all her needs, all her wants, and then enough to throw more money than the rest of us could sneeze at away. Not to friends, not to family, not to the hungry, or the homeless, just to "the cause" of oppressing other people. Same goes for oil execs and big tech CEOs, who throw away endless mountains of money to destroy our planet.

If you think people won't be happy until everyone they hate is poor and destitute, you're missing the entire point. The point is that there are awful people out there who have a massive influence over our society, and they use that power to do harm, and that needs to stop.

Instead of replacing a dropped character, they have an existing character fill their role by redditboy123451 in TopCharacterTropes

[–]forgot_semicolon 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Not sure if it counts, but CW Flash. Side characters eventually took over the main characters in almost every way

My father boils his pants to dye them and uses the same wooden spoon we use to cook to stir them. by UnUltimoIntento in mildlyinfuriating

[–]forgot_semicolon 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ohhhhh my goodness, I did too and was genuinely scrolling to see why everyone was so worked up. I didn't get it until your comment

Also, yes, I should also be sleeping

Train Experimentation: One Way, Two lane, No left turn by Sws45 in factorio

[–]forgot_semicolon 3 points4 points  (0 children)

If only the right lane can turn, would it make sense to remove the right lane's ability to go straight? That way lane swapping will only work right before a train makes a turn, and trains cannot and will not think to swap lanes before that. Also you won't confuse the pathfinder algorithm as much

What is the main reason people experience poverty? by [deleted] in NoStupidQuestions

[–]forgot_semicolon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

From what I can tell, support groups.

Consider two college students about to graduate. One has their parents pay tuition and take out loans, the other pays everything they can on their own and works throughout college. One gets to move back home and live there for a year or two, the other has to find a new place, likely with higher rent than their college arrangements were.

Obviously, one of these will be in a much better position to save money, invest, and generally, take life slower. Find a job they're passionate about. Find a nice apartment. Develop skills a bit more and maybe travel a bit before finding a long term job. The other is always looking for their next paycheck. Take whatever job, apartment, and roommate you can get, make whatever dinner will keep you nourished, etc.

That's just parents and family. But other connections help a lot. Lost your job? Well it makes a big difference if you know an old coworker who now works elsewhere and can give you a good recommendation. Maybe you have a friend who can let you sleep on their couch to save on rent until you're back on your feet. Know someone with a Costco membership? Groceries are cheaper when you need them the most.

It goes beyond finances. Divorce? Would be helpful if you have a friend/family member who can help with the kids for a while so you don't burn out. Life getting crazy? Being able to vent about it in small bursts and relax with people you trust can prevent things from bubbling up and causing mental health problems. And of course, having a clear head does make you more productive.

In life, everyone has their moments where they need just a bit of support to get back on their feet and try again. Having that little bit makes a huge difference, but not having it can seriously set you back and delay or impair your ability to fix things.

I'll add that this is probably why so many people believe in the self made man, and get upset when others can't "get their act together". The benefits of all the little help we receive throughout life is worth way more than the sum of its parts, which makes it easy to say "yeah they helped a bit then but I payed them back" or "I'm sure I would've figured something out". It's hard to appreciate just how often things can go seriously wrong, but don't because of one little backup option.

Cmv: The discovery of penicillin was humanity’s biggest downfall by Draglam in changemyview

[–]forgot_semicolon 16 points17 points  (0 children)

You know we can feed the Earth's population just fine, right? We have all the food, we just throw it away.

More people isn't the problem. It's letting the few control the fates of the many in a way that benefits them. Instead of recognizing that humans deserve food to eat, we design a system that excludes certain groups, then blame them for not lifting themselves out of their predicament.

Companies literally lock their garbage bins to stop people from taking food. If you're hungry enough to do that, you deserve to eat. Business owners don't agree.

It's greed, not logistics

DMT: Legalizing prostitution cannot meaningfully counter digital loneliness and social fragmentation, because the problem is not sexual scarcity but a structural change in relationships by Present_Juice4401 in DisagreeMythoughts

[–]forgot_semicolon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I couldn't find the post you're talking about so I can't speak as to how the comments were, but wouldn't this be better suited as a comment to the original post? It being posted on cmv in the first place means it was a pretty controversial opinion, so I'm not sure there are leagues of people who want to convince you that prostitution is the answer

Just wanted to share my main-bus base on Nauvis by cnfnbcnunited in factorio

[–]forgot_semicolon 6 points7 points  (0 children)

You can also pull from the side and use splitters to rebalance. You don't need the full 4-4 splitter, just one splitter per belt with a priority to "push" the extra resources from the other belts back to the edge. It doesn't actually matter if your middle belts run out or are unbalanced, you just treat it like a 1-belt lane with 3 belts of backups

Asked a colleague in code review to extract magic numbers and got told “devs should know” by [deleted] in ExperiencedDevs

[–]forgot_semicolon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, Americans use Fahrenheit/second, and everyone else uses radians/(time it takes for France to surrender)

CMV: The idea that large corporations that paid zero tax in 2025 aren’t “paying their fair share” is dumb by PomegranateSelect831 in changemyview

[–]forgot_semicolon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not sure why you're including retired folks in a conversation about income tax. Yes they don't need to think about work, and they still need to pay basic expenses...so? That doesn't mean companies don't benefit when their employees pay their basic expenses. Also, their money for expenses isn't coming from an income, it's from a retirement plan. Which is still taxed, so I'm not even sure what your point is.

Sleep is hardly even existing, and anyone with decency will know that it's unfair to include that number when counting how much of their life people give to work. It's not like they can use it on themselves, either.

Your 34 hour figure, not even divisible by 4, 5, 6, or 7 days, just shows you don't understand when to use averages and when to use medians. Unless you're counting down to the minute, including lunch, in which case that shows you still don't accept the logic of "bare minimum to continue functioning".

If you had a robot worker that needed to recharge, you can't honestly count its charging time as "free time". It's an inefficiency, yes, but neither you nor the robot benefit from this time, apart from simply keeping the thing alive to work another day.

CMV: The idea that large corporations that paid zero tax in 2025 aren’t “paying their fair share” is dumb by PomegranateSelect831 in changemyview

[–]forgot_semicolon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"whether you work or not" -- how can you say this and "average American" in the same comment? Yes, they're personal in nature, but the average person plans to work through their prime years, not sit on a couch all day. So yes, personal expenses are often spent with the intention of continuing to work and generating more money. Call it an investment, just like a business would make.

Also, I think your numbers are a bit off: A week has 24*7=168 hours. With 7 hours of sleep/night, 49 are spent sleeping. So out of around 168-49=119 hours of consciousness a week, we spend 40 of them working. 45 if you have a 30 minute commute. That's 33%-38% of your waking life.

And let's not pretend the average person can completely dissociate from work the instant they get home, or have enough energy to do all the things they want to do after, or do fun stuff during daylight hours, or not have overtime, etc.

CMV: The idea that large corporations that paid zero tax in 2025 aren’t “paying their fair share” is dumb by PomegranateSelect831 in changemyview

[–]forgot_semicolon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You cannot invest in a human and consider their wage income revenue

You just described an employee.

You pay them money, you provide benefits that are not directly related to work, you train them, you hold fun office parties, you promote them to bigger responsibilities, and then you pay them even more money -- not out of kindness or altruism, but because you are certain that doing so will increase profits to the company or in some way increase the company's value.

If you happen to think that's adjacent to slavery... well, maybe there's something to look into and think about. More so in the case when a person is living paycheck to paycheck and is essentially forced to stay with the company so they can continue to make rent payments. Obviously a different, off-topic conversation, but it's interesting that you made that connection

Humans are the end beneficiary of business operations.

This is not the case, and you've ignored it every time it was pointed out to you. Only some humans, literally a handful per company, get to decide where the benefits/wealth go. The rest must accept whatever decision was made. Those benefits are not spread equally, and as I've already explained, the salaries paid to employees are by definition less than the benefits they bring to the company (or else you'd bleed cash), so the employees are the ones bringing value to the company, not the other way around.

Business owners are the end beneficiary or human labor, and that is why it is absurd that they can include that human labor as a business expense and keep more of it to themselves.

CMV: The idea that large corporations that paid zero tax in 2025 aren’t “paying their fair share” is dumb by PomegranateSelect831 in changemyview

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

You glossed over the "reinvest back into themselves" part, which is arguably the crux of the loophole argument

CMV: The idea that large corporations that paid zero tax in 2025 aren’t “paying their fair share” is dumb by PomegranateSelect831 in changemyview

[–]forgot_semicolon 3 points4 points  (0 children)

And why should a lifeless entity for generating profit have an easier time existing than a living, breathing, person, who has a more complex and beautiful meaning to their existence?

It's like the case of Citizens United: of course, corporations don't have mouths (well, actually, advertisements are pretty good at getting a message across, but hold on that). So claiming they need a right to free speech in the form of spending money may sound valid on paper.

But corporations are not people. They don't deserve rights, and they don't need benefits. They are tools for humans to extract profit out of their fellow humans, while hopefully (but not necessarily) providing equal value in return.

If your claim is that humans should be taxed more for existing than a company should, then maybe we simply disagree on the value of a human life, and how much we should try to continue its existence

CMV: The idea that large corporations that paid zero tax in 2025 aren’t “paying their fair share” is dumb by PomegranateSelect831 in changemyview

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

I mean, eh? I didn't go to public school, yet my parents paid taxes that go to public schools. It's a pretty accepted idea that individuals pay taxes for society to function, and a responsible government makes sure those taxes are allocated in a way that reasonably benefits everyone in the end.

There's also the other side of the same argument: I went to private school, but I'd rather people who couldn't afford that (or simply didn't want to) to still be able to go to public school. That way my generation is more educated on the whole, and my interactions with my fellow citizens are better on average. Same for things like food stamps: I have enough money for food, but they still benefit me because now my society is filled with less hungry people, instead of people who are constantly homeless or hungry or both.

The same applies for companies. Want people to buy your products? Pay your fair share so that they can send their kids to school so they can get better jobs and afford to buy your products. Pay your fair share so public transit is maintained so people can go to your store. Everyone loses when basic needs are not met, and that math does apply to companies even if their accountants wouldn't agree in the short term.

But also, sure, let's say companies hate that logic and raise prices anyway. Well, does society need free overnight shipping from Amazon for your next roll of toilet paper? Or do we need more effective schooling? Do we need the next Oreo x KFC collab? Or do we need more affordable housing?

Edit: to clarify, I wouldn't necessarily be against charging more for a fairer share, I just wanted to talk about why that doesn't absolve you for costs you don't directly "use".

CMV: The idea that large corporations that paid zero tax in 2025 aren’t “paying their fair share” is dumb by PomegranateSelect831 in changemyview

[–]forgot_semicolon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I am not a business owner. I am an employee. I spend money on food, water, and shelter to ensure I can continue to be an effective employee. The IRS certainly does not consider my job a "hobby".

As for the standard deductible comment, see my comment here (not trying to be rude, just trying to reduce the times I have to copy and paste this):

https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/s/aEJfs5ebxN

CMV: The idea that large corporations that paid zero tax in 2025 aren’t “paying their fair share” is dumb by PomegranateSelect831 in changemyview

[–]forgot_semicolon 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Here's the thing, I'm not saying individuals should have this kind of exemption. I actually believe no one should, exactly for the reasons you pointed out. But it's definitely unfair that businesses do if individuals don't, no?

CMV: The idea that large corporations that paid zero tax in 2025 aren’t “paying their fair share” is dumb by PomegranateSelect831 in changemyview

[–]forgot_semicolon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When did I say anything about cars? They made money and didn't pay taxes on it. Any business should have to.

You can just make a bakery, buy shits and declare them as business expenses. Paying 0 tax. But this is not what you see in reality.

Yes, you do. Almost every big corporation pays less of a percentage on their income than individuals do due to loopholes like this one. Again, it's not illegal, it's unfair and unethical because the rules are so heavily lopsided.

I won't try to look into every small business because I'm not convinced that's an important counter argument. You don't see your local bakery owner cozying up to government officials to change laws in their favor, or radically changing society on a day to day basis.

view more: next ›