Doesn't surprise me. Even when you pay labor a fair, living wage for high-end apparel and fashion items--which Dior is definitely not doing--the cost of labor is still a pretty small fraction of the final price. The cost of materials and findings on those bags is likely more than the labor costs.

Most of what you're paying for in high-end goods is very careful design, attention to materials and the construction process, and very good QC. Those are largely intangibles.

So why don't they pay workers reasonably then, since it's such a small fraction of the final cost? Because the company has no soul.

How would it "look bad"? The people that are paying for Reddit wouldn't give a shit, and the people that aren't making the site profitable would be outraged for 15 minutes, and then get over it.

Lagavulin 12y, double, neat.

Laphroig or Ardbeg will do in a pinch.

If they don't have any islay single malt whiskys, then usually cheap bourbon.

The people Oliver and Noah are making fun of aren't the centrist conservatives; they're not shitting all over the ones that can be reached and could be expected to learn and grow as humans.

Some bad things take a very long time to show up though; the idea of putting the brakes on any new development until we had complete knowledge of potential bad things resulting simply isn't practical.

Lets take a really basic example: chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). Ammonia was--and is--used a refrigerant. It was the first one that really worked, and many large-scale industrial systems still use it. It's cheap, it's very effective, and it's environmentally friendly. Unfortunately, ammonia has two problems: first, it's highly reactive with copper, so you can't have any copper in your system, and second, a leak in a refrigeration system can kill you because ammonia gas is toxic. A number of industrial accidents in the 1920s that resulted in a lot of deaths led to the search for non-toxic refrigerants. Enter CFCs; unlike ammonia, sulfur dioxide, and other early refrigerants, they're non-toxic, so a leak in your refrigerator (or the air conditioner in your car!) does risk killing you.

...Except that CFCs absolutely wreak hell on the ozone layer. They were eventually banned. HCFCs were used for a while, because those tend to break down before they get to the ozone layer, but it turns out that if they do get up there, they do more damage than the CFCs they replaced.

But we didn't know that in the 1920s. Hell, I don't think we realized that was a significant problem for 40-50 years after CFCs were in common usage. In that time, food had gotten considerably safer, because refrigerators had become common, and were now in ever home. Without CFCs, we might have never gotten to the point of refrigeration being in common usage in homes. (For reference, the house I had in Chicago was built in the 20s, and had a bricked-over window that went into the pantry. That window used to be where blocks of ice were delivered daily or weekly to an ice box.)

We're still looking for alternative refrigerants--and insulating blowing agents--that are both non-toxic, environmentally friendly, and are can be made cheaply enough to realistically replace the current generation of refrigerants.

Birth rates in less developed countries are considerably higher than in developed countries.

That depends on whether you value your own life more than you value the principles that we were led to believe America was founded on.

The discontent that led to the American Revolution didn't start overnight, but someone fired the first shot when the British were coming to confiscate the cannon that the colonists had collected.

Don't forget Warren and the rest of The Squad.

Can't be an American breakfast; that's not a 1911.

TWO WORLD WARS!!1!

I would suggest that you reconsider TST in light of recent actions. At the very least, look into all of the people that have been summarily kicked out solely by Doug Mesner AKA Lucien Greaves, been stripped of their ministerial titles, and how many chapters/congregations have separated from the org. If you use Reddit at all, you can find some of it there. I'm friends on Facebook with some of the higher-up people that either left or were kicked out, and... It ain't pretty.

The long and short of it is that Doug Mesner and Cevin Soling (AKA Malcom Jarry) entirely own all of the intellectual property that is The Satanic Temple, and so they have complete control over everything that goes on. It's fundamentally authoritarian, even though they officially espouse more anarchistic, freedom-loving principles. The most recent schism is because Doug is exercising his authoritarian tendencies and throwing people out that disagree with him.

I've actually put a lot of thought into this lately, what with the most recent schism in The Satanic Temple.

The seven tenets are great. I'd keep those.

I would start with the understanding that it was an atheistic religion, and I would treat it as such. I would write a constitution, and a charter, and any group that agrees with and meets the requirements laid out in the constitution should be allowed to affiliate themselves. It should be organized as a non-profit.

I like the way that TST's ministry program worked before Doug threw most of the ministers out. I'd steal that. I would amend the process slightly though; I'd say that any person with a diagnosed personality disorder would not be eligible for ministerial positions, as narcissists, people with borderline personality disorder, etc., should not ever be in leadership positions. I would say that any person that successfully completes the ministerial program should be eligible to be a leader of a congregation, and people that have not passed would not be.

I would propose that the congregations send representatives to a national (or international) convention where they decide what the organization's position should be on issues--I believe that it takes two majority votes in the SBC over a period of four (?) years for major doctrinal changes, or changes to the constitution--and those representatives would also select board members, who would in turn select a president. (I'd have terms of board members be offset so that there was never a period where a large percentage of the board was turning over.) Fundamentally, the church should be run by the people, and should be serving the congregants, rather than the congregants serving the organization.

I believe that yes, members and congregations should be paying in to the national organization, but no person within the organization should be getting paid for their work. I don't care if it's a collection, a set amount per person per week, or what; operating a religion requires funding. That said, the only compensation to anyone within the org should be minimal travel expenses for people that need to travel for their position; otherwise, it should be entirely a lay ministry. (Yes, that would be a financial hardship for some ministers, but I'd rather see that than have people seeking leadership for the financial benefit.) Finances should be fully transparent, and visible to all members, so that everyone can see where money is coming in from, and where money is going.

I also like the Mormon model of fully engaging all members. As long as it's not onerous, I think that this can help individuals feel seen and heard, and also keep them feeling like a part of community. I would do things like have each members selected in turn to deliver brief biweekly sermons, with sources, and then have members in each congregation engage in a roundtable discussion about the sermon. You would want to have the possibility of sub-groups within each congregation so that different needs of individual members could be taken care of.

I made some notes somewhere, but I'm not sure where they are right now.

EDITS:

Members should have to pay, because the operations of a religion cost money. You have to have a (stable) place to meet, you need to pay for power, and yes, you need to pay for attorneys and accountants. It should definitely be strictly a lay ministry though, with leaders only being compensated for their expenses, not time.

The issue with The Satanic Temple now is that Doug Mesner (aka Lucien Greaves) and Cevin Soling (aka Malcolm Jarry) outright own all the legal entities that make up TST. There is no process that can replace them; they can remove any person or group that they don't like. They have the ultimate power to make all the rules, and they are entirely above them. That means that, despite TST claiming to believe in freedom from tyranny, it's fundamentally an authoritarian organization rather than a democratic one. For all of it's many, MANY other faults, the Southern Baptist Convention is democratic, and I think that's a quality worth emulating.

After seeing all the shit that Barack had to go through, is it really surprising that Michelle wants nothing to do with it? I wish she would, but she's simply not been interested in politics in that way.

It looks like most Ipsos polls are a little over 1000, and most of them seem to use likely voters rather than registered voters.

I have edited my comment to reflect that I'm wrong.

You are correct, and I am not. I've edited my comment to reflect that.

The PUA-types and this alpha/beta/sigma nonsense really appeals to the incel crowd. They believe that they can somehow game relationships in order to get sex. Like, they do steps a, b, c--which is the kind of systems PUAs are/were pushing--and you get laid.

The whole thing is a constellation; I don't think any of those groups exists in a vacuum, and there's lots of points where they cross over.

My ex-wife wasn't even conservative, so IDK.

EDIT: I am wrong about the sample size. Yes, the sample is a little small, but not too far off. They're registered voters rather than likely voters, which is not quite as good, but, again, no terrible.

The poll surveyed 892 registered voters and has a margin of error of 3.2%.

As FiveThirtyEight would say, that's a bad use of polling. That's a very small sample size, and there's no indication that it's representative in any meaningful way.

Even more important, Obama has said she has no interest in being the president; she's not willing to run.

I'm going to add a choice here:

In honor of the late, great Steve Albini, Kerosene, by his band Big Black. It's been covered by a few bands, but no one has managed the harsh, nihilistic electro-punk feel of the original.

Ramsey has been a shitbag for a long time. This is no surprise.

My parents gave me a subscription to his financial university program a number of years ago. Some of the basic concepts are great, like the debt snowball. On the other hand, he places the blame for insufficient income on the people; if you simply can't cut enough expenses, then you need to earn more money, so get a better job you lazy schmuck. ...As if that actually worked for most people. It entirely ignores economic realities, where a large number of people have to lose so that a very few people can win.

Blood and Wine was especially tragic; I sympathized with Dettlaff and his pain, and Syanna was a terrible person. But preventing Detlaff from killing Syanna for using him leads to him attacking Geralt, who has to defend himself. Regis understands why you had to kill Dettlaff, but he still loved him like a brother; the death of Dettlaff leaves him feeling terribly alone. There isn't any way to end the bloodshed; everyone is hell-bent on destroying themselves.