It's common in states that have a lower population center, geographically. I'm in Minnesota, and our Twin Cities are in the southern third of the state.

"Going up north (to the cabin)" is our spin on "upstate", because (for most people) there isn't much of a reason to go much more north than we already do.

The IPO announcement w/ shares being offered to Reddit users. Also, the deal with AI training off of user data without consent. Hard to keep track these days lol.

Tenets breaking rules and being shitty mean that landlords lose on their investments (which inherently carry risk).

Landlords breaking rules and being shitty means that people go homeless, live in awful conditions, or cannot afford basic necessities.

Sure, both sides have the capacity to be bad, but trying to "both sides" basic shelter is fucking wild.

No, they just need to be kept in that context. We trusted science on chlorofluorocarbons impacting the ozone layer, and chose to fix it rather than let it keep going. Was the projection "wrong" because CFCs were regulated, or did we just interact with it in a practical way?

The same applies here. There's a population issue that (as you mentioned in another comment) without other factors, will come into effect. China can fix it, or let things play out and see if the "unknowns" can fix it for them.

"AI isn't good enough to replace workers yet, but it's good enough to convince CEOs it can."

That's what the [sic] is for. It's showing "here's what the person literally said, to make sure we're not misquoting them."

It's standard practice, as "stepping up and taking charge" would mean substituting someone else's words for your own, which is a slippery slope. "Oh he said X, but meant Y, so I'll write that instead" can very easily be abused by people actively looking to misrepresent other's words.

Source: BA Journalism, who had to use [sic] when quoting non-native English speakers (was part of an immigration story). Whenever possible, I'd try to clarify/ correct mid-interview: "oh, you said A, but I think you might've meant B. Is that correct?" That way, you know for a fact it's still their words.

2001 + 19 = 2020. Typos can be overcome using context clues.

"That's your problem" is a terrible way to get people to support policy. These are real, valid concerns that many people simply can't deal with without other systems in place that currently don't exist.

This type of "fuck any gradual change, revolution now" is just armchair anarchy pushed by kids who don't face financial pressure.

The more time that passes between each repost is more time for the premise to be less "2005 dude-bros can't fathom being unmasculine for a second" and more "when did Troye Sivan write this?"

Washing clothes by hand is so ass that some Amish communities allow machines lmao

Yeah bro let me just

get a new car during a time of rising car prices and cost-of-living expenses

while also

not being able to sell my car for a good price for both economic and moral reasons. No one wants to buy an easily-stealable car, and no one should SELL an easily-stealable car.

Lots of tech companies saw huge growth during covid thanks to everyone having extra money to spend (see crypto and NFTs if you want clear examples that we just had too much laying around).

Many of these companies then saw their revenue and userbase increase month-after-month and thought the growth was going to continue forever (or, more cynically, they knew it was going to crash but acted like it was going to continue). This led to a bunch of hires to "drive growth."

But obviously, pandemic spending habits have mostly stopped, and the money faucet is being turned off. Companies can't afford all the workers they hired, so they're "let go due to market downturns."

TL;DR Companies either thought they were going to have unrealistic growth and made dumb hiring decisions, or knew the growth was going to end and thus made cruel hiring decisions.