Moontan

No they say "Your choice to move away from your family or their choice to move away from you shouldn’t adversely affect all of the other children in your child’s class because the teacher has limited time and is now spending it catching up your child who missed foundational concepts for the stuff that is being taught when they get back.

You are not entitled to cheap travel. I never got to travel all over the world as a child because, spoiler, we couldn’t afford it, but people also didn’t feel so entitled to cheap travel that they were taking their kids out of school for cheaper flights. You just didn’t fly.

That’s nuts!!

As others have said, the response is to ask where in the bible it states you should not have sex with roadkill.

When they point to a passage about something they think is related (but obviously cannot be explicitly about roadkill) ask them if they think that having sex with roadkill is morally equivalent to the passage they cited. I would be surprised if they say yes…

If they do say yes, ask if the only reason they do not do these things is because the Bible told them so. If they say no, ask them what the extra moral information they are drawing from is.

Also ask them why atheists are not caught doing this (at a rate higher than religious groups).

Reflecting…

I like to think this isn’t the product of someone being weird, but someone being funny, knowing that centuries later we’d be looking at it going wtf. Master trolling…

Seriously, it took you 2 weeks to come up with that burn? I mean it really made me reflect on my life, just like your first punishing reply so you can feel good that you’ve changed the world for the better…but I’ll be going on with my life and forgetting you exist now.

Means a lot coming from you.

Maybe not, but that is democracy. We all choose one person to trust to make decisions for us.

Also unfairness and theft are not the same thing.

To be clear. I don’t support the existence of billionaires, but I might be more forgiving if the contributed to society in big ways. Instead their only interest seems to be getting richer.

What I mean is that if I ever amassed 1 billion, I would spend everything over the billion on social projects, dog shelters, medical research that is considered by for profits to be unprofitable. I would never have more than 1 billion as I would use the interest to fund things that would help as many people and animals as possible. If billionaires voluntarily did such things I would mind them less. Instead I support 100% tax on anything over 1 billion. As for the burning question do any of these billionaires contribute as much as they are rewarded? Hell no

But you can be damn sure Company income increased…

Thing is, you wouldn’t mind if he used his vast wealth for the betterment of humanity. You know, like how he used to market himself before the pedoguy event.

Instead he uses it to promote right wing politics, marginalised vulnerable groups and trying to get richer for the betterment of Elon.

I like to think that if I was ever lucky enough to have a billion, anything over it would be used to support causes I believe in… Oh wait that’s what he’s doing, it’s just his beliefs are messed up.

I don’t think they think there will be a next administration, but that doesn’t mean they wouldn’t want to spy on their own disloyal staffers…

https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/2c61fde2-8355-4eae-8fec-0ed5f12a0ea2

Reminds me of this… https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/yes-prime-minister-questionnaire-design-matters

They are asking the questions in a way that gets the answers they want just like in yes prime minister.

Sounds like a pathway to security vulnerabilities. Instead of just code you could now also physically alter a circuit to change it’s behaviour.

It is insane that simply by being a big company you automatically get the benefit of the doubt from the police and that it becomes a matter for the courts while everyone is free.

Stealing $200,000 as an individual would get you in serious shit, locked up before trial, and ruin the rest off your life financially, but doing it as a company at worst gets you bad publicity apparently and if it ever goes to court, there is a presumption that everyone involved is respectable and meant no harm - it was all just poor decision making but no malice.

I hope nobody who hears this story shops in any of those franchises and I hope the story travels far and wide. The CEO’s behavior on camera was very informative about the intentions behind the act.

The most infuriating thing is that they could walk away from the stock and be materially no worse off. Its not like they go 200,000 into debt, but for the person it belongs to, it is devastating.

He should just go. It’s become a distraction and it always ends the same way. Clinging on damages politics and pushes people towards populists who offer you the opportunity to have your cake and eat it while but actually just making things worse. If Nigel Farage gets in we will end up like America. High time we had proportional representation so people stop strategic voting or voting to make a point. Reform mostly did well just because they are not Labour or Conservative, not because they are actually a good choice.

“What benefit does the Internet connection offer?”

“You can make toast remotely.”

“but don’t I have to put bread in?”

“…”

“don’t I need to be there to eat it?”

“…”