Hacksaw

joined 1 year ago
[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 39 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Yeah, that's true, but super fucked that women get the innocence of children and men are assumed to be not innocent in any situation.

Life is harsh when you're a guy.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 days ago

They're mad at you because you made jokes of a serious issue that only exists because the US is a dumb pace where guns have more rights than kids. If it were anywhere else it would just be an edgy joke. In the US it's like dressing up in an SS uniform to a Holocaust convention.... A little too edgy...

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 days ago

I think the owners assume that no one has been a dick in the last 5 years, and hope it means no one will be a dick for the next 5 either. It seems like you're getting close though so maybe take a different road so you avoid the temptation of stealing a cat since it seems unusually strong in you.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 16 points 5 days ago (2 children)

If you already know the answer you can tell the AI the answer as part of the question and it'll give you the right answer.

That's what you sound like.

AI people are as annoying as the Musk crowd.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 week ago

Yeah. I had a dad that didn't get laid too. Sex is in the bottom layers of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, then intimacy is up higher as well. If you're not getting these things you're not going to be able to hide them. Your kids won't know why until they're much older WHY your not happy, but that is a sadness of the soul that nothing can hide.

You ever see one of your friends the day after they get laid and you just know. That's a kind of joy from having your needs met that you can't fake.

You're teaching your kids it's OK with someone who doesn't meet your needs. It's not.

Be with someone who makes you happy. Let your wife do the same. Show your kids what a happy marriage and happy parents look like so they can model their relationships that way. Don't continue the cycle.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 week ago (32 children)

It's better to show your kids what is like to be happy and have your needs met than to show them being miserable and setling. Especially on their behalf.

Which would you rather for your kids?

Which are you showing your kids by example?

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago (5 children)

I'm not sure there are people so unrecoverable that they need a lifetime in solitary. I'm fact I'm not sure how you pass the cruel and unusual criteria with that. Even in super max prisons for people who WANT to go out and kill strangers for example, they are able to regularly socialize and exercise and have mental stimulation. So no I don't think there are a lot of people where spending extra money to kill them would be "more humane". Seems more like a straw man/hypothetical than a practical reality.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 week ago (11 children)

Well it always costs more, in the US Justice system, to execute someone than to keep them in prison for life. So that alone throws out the utilitarian approach. We're all paying extra just to kill him now than if we just kept him locked up for life because he might be a direct threat to everyone and not be rehabilitated.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Jury nullification isn't a real thing. It's not a law in any country, it's a "loophole" that springs out from some simple concepts.

  1. You have a right to a trial by a jury of your peers, jurors are protected from consequences related to their deliberation and decisions.
  2. If found "not guilty" the state cannot retry you for the same crime.

Both of those things are important to avoid tyranny in the judicial system.

What that means is that if, for any reason, the jury decides to find you "not guilty" even against their "jury instructions" or the law itself, you're off the hook forever. This concept is called "jury nullification" but it's not a law or "feature" of the justice system. In fact most of the time it's been used for very unjust outcomes, for example juries often refused to find people who perpetrated lynchings guilty because a "jury of your peers" in many states was racist AF!

That being said I LOVE to see it used to refuse unjust laws!

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 weeks ago

That's when he realised he liked the buzzing!

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)
[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 weeks ago

I'm feeling a sudden urge to vote Harris Walz right now

 

I saw a convoy of about 30 cars on the highway back in October. I looked it up and found nothing. Then I see a Reddit post in /r/vexillollogy with the same flag and no useful answers.

It's so weird that people bought like 100 of these flags and there is no info on them at all!

I flipped the picture to make the flag the right way.

 

The laughable Bank of Canada report even includes the line

Why did this increase in markups not contribute significantly to inflation? We show that markup growth reached its highest level because of a contraction in firms’ costs [...] during the pandemic-related public health interventions

So when their costs go down they keep the prices the same and pocket the difference, BoC report verdict "profit growth without inflation". So what happens when costs go back up?

We observe a mild contribution of markup growth to inflation in 2021, partially explained by demand rebounding faster than costs. However, the fact that markup growth fell to zero the following year indicates that firms were likely smoothing out their price increases [...] rather than leveraging increases in market power.

So when the costs go back up, they pass 100% of the cost to the consumer and keep their new higher profit margins (no change in markup). BoC verdict "the inflation has nothing to do with profit growth". Amazing!

If industry follows this "price ratchet" mechanism profit margins can go to infinity "without causing inflation" according to BoC. Absolutely galaxy brain levels of economic genius.

They really think we're idiots.

view more: next ›