I feel like the wealthy people you see are the ones who either get excitement from flaunting it or from lying about it (for example, mtv cribs was all fake). There are plenty of stories (yes i know they’re just stories) about multi millionaires who drive the same old truck, wear regular blue jeans, and have a nice quiet (albeit larger than average) home.

It’s not crazy at all. I just think we see the outliers more frequently than not because they want us to see them.

Ha, i am somewhat familiar with the genre, i just wanted to contribute :) studied ancient rome, so that is legit what i typically think of when i hear goth.

To me, goths are the people who sacked Rome in 410. None of this makes sense to me.

Looks like the label says blueberry

I think they’re referencing the manga/anime death note. So they’re just writing in the names of countries hoping they will die.

Did a light google search, looks like the individual is the former prime minister of poland (between ww1 and ww2), and a fairly prominent statesman, who I’m guessing hated those other countries.

Right, i think he’s asking if there’s some culture where the inconsistency is designed based on unit. So, for example, period for years, comma for weight.

I think it’s simply an error. Maybe AI generated?

I don’t think this is a particularly fair take. Some people bought at high prices because it seemed like the right move (in 2008, for example), market crashes, you’re stuck with your investment even if you’re underwater (upside down).

It’s definitely not fair to assume what his costs are compared to the cost to rent. It isn’t necessary to have the example above to reside in an area where mortgages far exceed rent. Northern Virginia in the USA is a good example, where townhomes can easily exceed 1 million USD, which would typically require a 30-50k+ down payment plus closing costs, and would then be 5k+ in a mortgage. Rent that place for 4500 and that’s a loss on monthly costs, but of course the landlord is earning long term equity (and that is the value, but they may not be turning a profit).

Edit: I’m simply stating that it’s unfair to assume the original commenter is lying about not making a profit. I’m not suggesting they aren’t experiencing a net gain in equity.

I don’t think it’s fair to flatly posit that since the CDC has been wrong at some point in the past, they can’t ever be trusted. While i understand the concept of don’t blindly follow words regardless of who said it, the sheer amount of research and dedication from an organization such as the CDC should count quite a bit more than the folks who have done none.

I don’t have the means to do such research, and as such i will more heavily weigh the words of the applicable research team than i will the words of someone who has no knowledge on the topic.

I think the question really should be not “have they ever been wrong,” but instead, “do i think they’re wrong on purpose.” A lot of research teams are funded by one side of an argument, which is cause for concern. The CDC is most likely not, and it would be fair to say they could be wrong, but likely not on purpose. Therefore i would say in this instance they are the more qualified experts who are also trying their best to be objective, and therefore, they likely have the more reasonable statement on this topic.

I’m not having a glass of wine, I’m having six. It’s called a tasting and it’s classy!

i think it could be a reference to saying no to plastic clothes hangers, since clothes hangers are an enormous source of plastic waste.

Edit: yes i understand the anti dangerous abortion symbolism, but here are some sources to explain the environmental impacts that are starting to gain some press.

https://torrancerecycles.org/guide/coat-hangers-plastic/#:~:text=Plastic hangers typically wind up,and BPA into the environment.

https://www.commonobjective.co/article/are-sustainable-hangers-all-they-re-cracked-up-to-be#:~:text=Made predominantly from expanded polystyrene,800-1%2C000 years to breakdown.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/plastic-hanger-fun-fact-20-billion-landfills-every-year-gary-barker

I don’t think it’s fair to assume, at best, an accident is negligence. There are numerous things that can lead to an accident that wouldn’t be negligence, such as normal wear and tear causing problems with something such as brakes or steering (perhaps not caught during routine maintenance as they weren’t issues at the time), something falling into the road (weather related, wildlife, erosion), a glitch of some kind (two green lights, not negligence necessarily) , or visibility issues (even cautious and solid drivers can be at risk during poor conditions). These are just some examples, but in the cases nobody involved would be at fault.

I believe the comparison to a gun is woefully inaccurate and invalid. Both are machines with the capacity to cause harm, but the similarities end there.

I can totally understand, and that makes a lot of sense. I think the sheer volume of accidents in the post are what’s so shocking. I’ve only been in a vehicle with an obviously reckless driver two times (so far. And to clarify, two people, once each), and from my perspective, some people really shouldn’t drive. Heck, one of those two times was supposed to be a casual date (she was picking me up, we were in college), and i asked her to drop me off immediately. Big nope.

That’s why i added not high volume times, so what i meant was regarding specifically driving when you aren’t stuck in traffic. I’m suggesting that the act of driving itself isn’t normally a horrific experience, though yes, sitting in traffic is awful.

Edited for some clarity

I can agree with some of your response to what was said by the other commenter, but my impression is that person was shocked that someone at a young age has been involved in double digit accidents that mostly sound like their fault. Some people really just are incapable of driving, though that shouldn’t diminish that small lapses or true accidents do happen.

I would disagree that driving in general is miserable, though I’m sure this can vary by location. While i would prefer better access to efficient public transit (live in the USA), being able to get in a car and go anywhere is pretty freeing, provided it isn’t during high volume times, especially on a freeway.

I’m not entirely sure this is a fair take. Although i can understand where you’re coming from, i think it’s reasonable to consider that a decent number teachers (although certainly not all) are both passionate about their profession and also underpaid. This almost forces teachers to have a second job (side hustle) to enable them to continue teaching. The teacher in the article chose a less socially acceptable side hustle, but not an illegal one, and once found out, her employer activated a morality clause to fire her.

From a purely monetary standpoint, she’s probably fine (assuming she continues her other job), but I’m not sure it’s reasonable to say that money is the only thing she cares about. Being fired from her (probable) passion of teaching sucks.

Also, being unemployed sucks. It isn’t really about being bored so much as not feeling like you’re part of society. And for many, of course, it’s a financial hardship, but it can definitely be mentally taxing when feel like you don’t have a meaningful role in life or your community.

There is also added social connotation. For example, meeting people, you often ask what you do. “I’m a teacher” will elicit significantly different responses than “i used to be a teacher” or “I’m an onlyfans model.” Whether or not any of us agree that it’s “ok” has no bearing on her future interactions and life. Labels like these matter to a lot of people, so i could definitely see how this would be mentally and emotionally taxing.

I’m not the other commenter, but I’m fairly certain they’re making a play on the title of this post, which just ends with “They.”

While everything you said is valid, sometimes that question is pure curiosity. “Because i want to” is completely valid, though I’d love to know what the inspiration for that desire was. Did you hear a really cool battle song? Some orchestral piece that sounded great? A friend recommended it? Couldn’t find an ocarina? Jamming to some folk metal?

I swear I’m inquisitive!

While i can agree that this encounter needs some work (would’ve been cool if the dragon could try to persuade you to mess with the required NPC), but i don’t know if it’s significant enough of an interaction to call a true fumble. Larian also isn’t above going in and fixing things or making things better, as they’re continuously adding and improving content.

Also, from my perspective, this game is supposed to be a baldurs gate storyline, not D&D 5e, the motion picture the video game. So for me, i was really glad to see them going hard into the lore, and this one felt pretty good to me.

Yeah man i don’t think you’re following me at all. I’ll give my bottom line up front: I’m not criticizing food culture in the US, I’m retelling the perspective about American food identity that was reflected in the docuseries. I agree that there is a wide diversity of good food in the US. That’s not the discussion here.

I’m completely aware that foreign cuisine in the USA is culinarily distinct from their home countries. Legitimate Chinese restaurants don’t serve general tsos chicken, and legitimate Mexican restaurants don’t serve tex mex.

But they’re also not identifiably “American cuisine.” Your additional point doesn’t seem relevant. New imported items? So like how tomatoes are ubiquitous in italian cuisine but come from the new world? I’m not sure what the messaging is here.

I understand there are regional differences. Not arguing that point either. It’s also not MY point at all, i was, again, retelling the point in the episode of the documentary chef’s table that i found very interesting. Besides, most regional differences are a specific dish (philly cheese steak, chicago style pizza, etc). Those aren’t entire cuisines, they’re a single dish. I don’t think chili in and of itself defines an entire culinary experience, even though various regions of the US are extremely particular about what even constitutes chili.

Speaking of regional differences, look at india for an example. It’s 1/3 the size of the US, but has multiple identifiable regional cuisines, while also having an overall “indian” cuisine. Goa in particular has a pretty distinct cuisine compared to northern India. But we’re not discussing chinese food or Mexican food in india, because that’s not really relevant.

Respectfully, i believe i understand your point, but you’re not understanding mine. I like to think that i understand food culture better than the credit you’re giving me. I am in no way suggesting that the US has no food culture. I’m trying to state that the documentary episode made has a chef who shared the perspective that there’s no such thing as authentic “American” cuisine.

Hope you have a great day.

Right, but that was the point of the episode of the documentary. At a basic level, American cuisine is based on plentiful food sources, and we get things like burgers and hotdogs. I recommend watching it, it was quite interesting. I’m not trying to suggest that this is the only explanation, but it was an interesting theory nonetheless.

Sure, some regions have some variety (as you mention, a casserole). Size is a factor, but similarly maybe countries have some form of culinary identity (russian, chinese, brazilian). They have sub cultures as well. I’m not well versed in them, to be honest, but i know they exist.

It was an interesting point that i found to be somewhat profound especially as i explored other cuisines, which are typically developed during hardship.