The reality is the seller bears part of the tariff so the consumer doesn’t pay the entire increase. That’s why tariffs have reciprocal tariffs in response. No one wants to admit it because it means Trump might be half right about something.

Tariffs increase prices but not necessarily by the same percentage as the tariff itself.

Context: Just so no one gets confused— The scenario in this post is that the woman presumably who does not want to go to work, possibly because she wants to stay at home and be a domestic worker, is forced to by the state. There is no mysoginy here. Just a comment on what a woman is being forced to do against her will when she may, instead, want to be a mother which is totally fine and normal.

Comment: You can ignore my point if you want. This post is about women being forced to enter the workforce when they want to stay at home. The cope for this disempowerment is that “the state” (e.g. some other person) will raise her kids while she does whatever she is ordered to do. If you don’t see this as anti-human and dystopian I can’t do anything for you.

Commentary: The banning on this instance is a sign of weakness and intellectual dishonesty. My point is valid and actually in support of a woman’s choice in how she wants to live her life. Engage with the idea or accept your sickness as a shill/grievance monger. Lord have mercy.

Stunning and brave.

Wah wah ad hominem. By your logic the state could just pay her to be a Mom.

Removed by mod

Yeah exactly. Mom is going to work to pay for someone to watch her kids when she could just do it herself.

You don’t need all of these communal things if a family simply raises their kids in a traditional way. What you’re describing is the commoditization of the nuclear family. It’s roundabout and worse overall. No one will love your kids and care for them like you will. Also the state pays for nothing because the state makes no money. It comes from the labor of the people. So really the mom is forced into the workforce to pay for childcare. Lol.

There are many people, like OP, that see things like the paradox of tolerance as some nouveau morality. It presents itself under the guise of being peaceful and tolerant when it is really a moral subjectivists justification for violence. It is dishonest and so are it’s proponents.

Here’s the link. She’s a spokeshole and only says what she’s told to say. Fact check the claim if you want but I reject your genetic fallacy.

Whitehouse Press Secretary confirmed today that the error was clerical and the prisoner was an El Salvadoran national with confirmed membership in MS13 who illegally entered the country and isn’t coming back to the states.

Lol. The Paradox of Tolerance is on par with the Libertarian Non-aggression Principle. Purely academic, purely subjective and, ironically, a moral imposition.

Ergodox EZ checking in…

Ween is on the Z axis

You said it first. The irony of OPs comment lol.

TL;DR - Make money or don’t. I don’t care.

If you have enough money to insignificantly invest you might eventually have enough to significantly invest assuming you take advantage of buying opportunities. I feel like I’m talking with an early generation AI model.

I have some ancient desktop that accesses media on my NAS. I run Plex on the same PC no problem. Stopped running Jellyfin because of the above-mentioned issues.

If you are experiencing food insecurity don’t give your money to someone else.

“Every bit helps”

Not if it defeats the purpose of whatever you’re doing in the first place.

Jellyfin always irrecoverably crashes for me over time. It also suffers from permissions issues where videos won’t play sometimes due to a a transcode folder being full or something like that.

I want to use it but it always breaks.