Well firstly, I appreciate your earnest reply.
If you are not familiar, I highly recommend checking out "egoism," and Max Stirner.
Your perspective sounds like a place of self and economic -awareness I was in, where I then was able to recognize that the "free market" is actually predicated on "might makes right," and that the Darwinian "survival of the fittest" has been, and continues to be, artificially forced as the salient concept of human evolution, and used to perpetuate domination of the "weak" by the "strong" as a natural, even moral, eventuality.
If you are not familiar with "Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution," I highly suggest it, and Kropotkin.
I believe that you are wary of abuse by people claiming to operate in your best interest. I am, too. I also believe there are people and forces who do not have our best interests in mind, and it is in their best interest to make us think that working together is bad for us, individually, and that competing with one another is natural and good.
The truth, as I see it, is that working together is natural, and that when there are forces of domination - hierarchy, oppression - fundamentally opposed to our individually thriving, working together is safer, too. I would really appreciate it if you would look into anarchism (not anarchy), with the level head you brought to this discussion.
I am firmly anti-capitalism, but I don't believe in any of the conceptual alternatives of "taking away economic consent" etc. that you mentioned. Capitalism, including "free-market," is a system of control regardless of nomenclature. I encourage broadly looking into "anticapitalism" while trying to leave biases about "failed states" that occurred in history (crushed by capitalism) at the door; again, the identity politics is a wedge keeping us from sharing perspectives.
Can't write more now, feel free to message me.
Have you taken a critical look at why you feel so compelled to defend capitalism? I'm honestly curious, because unless you're trolling for lols (which would also be sad), it's similar to excuses from a victim in an abusive relationship; you are a victim of capitalism and are apologizing for it.
Let's break landlord's appliances and strike when they want them fixed
Just because you're not wrong doesn't mean you're right. "Spray and pray" is the lowest form of divine intervention. - Laws of Murphy, 69:420
How a gun "works" is that a thick-walled chamber houses the cartridge, so that as the powder ignited within rapidly expands (deflagration) there is nowhere for it to go besides violently propelling the projectile into the barrel. If there is no chamber, the thin walls of the cartidge are the path of least resistence, and the bullet likely stays put as the gases escape from cracks in the casing.
So no, while this wouldn't be "safe" (eye damage comes to mind), there would not be enough energy to significantly wound a human by striking a round's primer without a chamber.
I'm just saying that unless unfurling it would rotate it horizontally, the "kick" will remain on the right and looks like it would be meant to be viewed by those up "there," behind the sign.
No barrel makes the whole round detonate. The bullet is ineffective, the "gun" explode :(
Also, unless the image is flipped, the text is meant for viewers on the opposite side from the camera.
autististic
Repeating patterns, checks out
Not to mention her luxury room and board, the shopping sprees, and the jewelry gifts.
I'm familiar with every large "delivery app" service, and none involve a situation where the driver fronts their personal money. That's ridiculous. The app service gives the driver a credit card for situations where in-person payment is required.
Animals raised for consumption generate 32 percent of the world’s methane emissions, and agriculture is the largest source of anthropogenic methane pollution. Methane is the second most abundant greenhouse gas after carbon, and it’s 80 to 90 percent more powerful than carbon in its first 20 years in the atmosphere. This is why many scientists believe that aggressively curbing humanity’s methane pollution would be the fastest way to slow planetary warming. And methane isn’t the only environmental problem associated with meat and dairy. Even though animal agriculture provides 17 percent of the world’s calories, it accounts for 80 percent of global agricultural land use and 41 percent of global agricultural water use, which translates into an outsize impact on biodiversity.
Reminds me of "The Persuaders." Great book. This comes from a Guardian review on it:
By far the most fascinating and potentially useful case study is that of Anat Shenker-Osorio, the communications strategist for progressive causes, whose tactics, pegged to the data, have exposed a lot of shortfalls in leftwing political campaigning. Shenker-Osorio points out that when people get frightened, they skew right; when they feel compassion and common cause with their fellow humans, they skew left.
Similar words, both would work. Look them up if you're interested. Exponent connotes more of a "believer" to me, whereas the proponent is an advocate.
A person who believes in and promotes the truth or benefits of an idea or theory.
I'm going to relentlessly spam your podcast with spelling and grammar corrections so the ridiculous and unfeasible crimes pale in comparison to the word crimes I've exposed.
Everything you're quoting is from the link I posted, saying things I've already said in other comments. I'm proud of you for reading the information.
Based on a 100-gram comparison, the Impossible Burger has more favorable stats for protein (17.2 g compared with beef’s 16.8 g), fiber (4.4 g to beef’s 0 g), and iron (3.7 mg to beef’s 2 mg) than traditional beef. It’s also lower in calories with fewer grams of total fat (11.5 g vs beef’s 19.9 g) and saturated fat (5.3 g vs beef’s 7.3 g)