notch656c

No my suggestion was for you to solicit your reps to delist these groups frustrating tyrannical efforts of the CCP from the DTO lists, so that someone else without toddlers may have the option.

When I wanted ISIS gone I flew to Iraq and joined the YPG. I don't think any amount of not buying oil would have solved the problem.

It's fine if you want to box things into consumption, but don't ask for some kind of solution and just shit on it and think you're not a hypocrite for doing the exact thing you accuse me of, which is critiquing with no solution.

It's probably only available in some locations because every state has rapidly different scope of practice and prescribing rights for PAs / NPs.

If you asked me the solution it starts with the most influenceable and likely allies, such as Uyghurs, who already have armed groups that have a chance of extracting at least one, two people from this kind of tyrannical relationship with the CCP. I don't think the picture starts with saving everyone exploited but rather just one, two persons at a time and let the witnesses decide how to proceed.

Currently they are a designated terrorist organization so if I gave you any actionable advice I would end up in jail. Perhaps the first step is an American may be to solicit these self defense organizations to be removed from the designated list so an American may even discuss what could be done without suffering a long prison sentence.

Having worked in an ED I can tell you it's much more like "when you make ED the only place that can't turn away patients, patient goes there for everything including the common cold."

It's not so much a minor thing turned into an emergency (that is a problem of course) but rather the patient has no other venue for minor needs without money or insurance.

Oh I see you are comparing countries not cultures. In that case US is older.

Does Chinese history show they are any more immune than others to our weaknesses in living together?

And in some regions of 18th century America there was no reasonable immediate alternative to survive without buying goods produced by negro slaves, so it would have been pointless to point out the situation.

I'm a bad guy too. happier? Maybe the world would be a better place with more high minded lectures now and again, so I'm all ears.

That's a pretty compelling argument for anarchism.

America just moved their slavery elsewhere and got the CCP to administer it. Out of sight, out of mind, get me my iphone while the plebs desperately jump out 5th story factory windows.

Parallel evolution? Incredibly unlikely, but possible. I'd like to think my great great grand daddy might be a mollusk with some wicked genetic mutations.

You're basically saying if you lost the ability to walk and it inconveniences me I'm bailing on you

Nobody says it like that. Usually it gets to the point where the end-stage symptoms resulting in their leaving is something like suicidal depression and the kids are badly suffering. The impetus is the disability but you're downplaying how it gets there.

It really shows gross ignorance to think you can extrapolate the yes UNUSUAL case that after getting world's best neurologist we did what the doctors said couldn't be done. And then extrapolate all the people other than you that faced disabilities that resulted in dissolved marriage must have started with weaker marriages.

Honestly someone that belittles the plight and hard marital choices of the disabled as much as you have, would be worthy of much worse name calling than anything I've seen here, and it's especially harmful to the disabled who have actually initiated the divorce out of LOVE for their partner.

I don't think sticking with your partner through thick and thin is abnormal, ad

Yeah investigate a bit people going through the serious disease of chronic addiction. When the husband uses the entire paycheck to keep from getting dope-sick and passes out while the toddler is crawling around after the second, at best third rehab the wife dumps them like a hot potato. Honestly it is rare to find a chronic addict that is still with their family. When push comes to shove when the kids are suffering the wife will drop your ass, even if you're trying your best to overcome the disease and act in love. All that shit about sticking around no matter what goes through the window, and these aint people in hospice care or even acting purposefully with malice against their family. Usually they genuinely and badly want to fulfill their responsibilities.

"for better or for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health."

Again this is just smugness that you like your particular transaction more than others. I seriously doubt you would have entered this without the counterparty also agreeing to same terms as their bit of the transaction. Very few people making these vows are gonna go through with it if the spouse isn't vowing to offer the same in trade.

Yeah just be able to get the world's best neurologist and hope the situation gets better. If it does I'll say after the fact I'm sure no matter what it'd be in sickness and in health and I'm super man who doesn't fatigue. Obviously the impoverished mom who can't even afford to hire a doctor and walks away so the kids won't get bankrupted, well she just doesn't see marriage the same as you. Hell maybe she did all the things you tried and nothing responded, the husband couldn't go back to work after the operations failed and maybe even made things worse, we shouldn't really presume just because someone tapped out that they didn't go as far as you have.

You have even less than an anecdote, and then when you asked me for a response which uses actual anecdotes where it doesn't get better, you suddenly get upset about it.

You walked right into it, that's not my fault. LOL.

This is just straight up sociopathy. You knew you had an unusual outcome, so you asked for the expected outcome with the trap that yours was a heartwarming but unexpected one. It was never coming from a place of curiosity.

The reality is there are plenty of people that would love their partner for better or for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health.

Marrying someone for this is also transactional if you expect this also of your partner as a condition of getting married. In this case it's like a transaction with an insurance policy built in as par of the transaction. You're just bragging about your particular transaction and terms for insurance.

To anyone else considering this, here's a test if you believe this applies to your situation. Ask your partner if they believe they would "love their partner for better or for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health." If they say yes, tell them you think that's all bullshit and you don't reciprocate the agreement. You'll find out fast whether a transaction happened.

Lol it's hilarious you pretended to ask a genuine question when you already knew the answer for your marriage. In fact you intentionally withheld it as some kind of poorly executed trap. Talk about a bad faith discussion.

Not all marriages involve people with the money to continue supporting the children when both rather than just one parent is bankrupted by medical debt, and not all disabilities end with being able to drive and walk. Usually don't involve people privileged enough to get "best in the world" Neurologists either.

There are people out there that may have to divorce precisely because they can't look their kids in the eyes with the marriage as it stands due to the disability, knowing a divorce will separate the finances and possible allow them to find more support for their child. Every human is susceptible to caretaker fatigue and you yourself can't possibly know you would never get fatigued if the disability never ended. Some people can go a 1 year without cracking, others a decade, others 100 years and until it happens you probably won't know your breaking point.

The fact of the matter is I get to see the people that deal with hundreds of seriously chronically disabled people. My dataset to work with is that it's a bad bet to expect that the counterparty will sacrifice themselves indefinitely for the sake of the marriage.

I have family in healthcare so I hear the stories. Serious unfixable medical injuries almost always end with the spouse at the very least getting sex on the side, at least if they're reasonably young.

Getting a long term badly limiting disability in anything but old age is a recipe for divorce. Eventually the loving spouse gets caretaker fatigue and is overloaded from carrying the weight without relief. I fully expect and will not hold it against my spouse if I'm seriously disabled for over a year and the marriage ends. Any high moral ground about love and honor or whatever falls apart when you're grinding in poverty and going to be sucked under yourself with no light at the end of the tunnel.

David letterman had a TRO because a woman claimed he was harassing her with code words over the television on his show. [0] The judge granted it "because she filled the form out properly."

This varies wildly by jurisdiction, but the burden of proof can be pretty slim and the judges in some jurisdiction have been on the record saying they grant them out of fear if something goes wrong when they haven't that they'll be held responsible.

[0] http://www.ejfi.org/PDF/Nestler_Letterman_TRO.pdf

Also: Child support, or even alimony, is a recognition that in a marriage, the income may be produced by a single party, even if the overall roles and responsibilities were divided equally. If someone is a stay-at-home-partner, they may not be bringing in the cash income, but they are still 50% of the effort of operating that family unit as they tend to take on more responsibilities such as cooking and cleaning and child rearing which all need to be done by someone. When a marriage ends, the low-income partner cannot necessarily immediately shift into self-sufficient career mode, and obviously the child should be seeing the necessary financial support they would have, so the income of the two parents needs to be compared with where the child spends most of their time (and hence, incurs the most expenses).

This is an interesting monologue but we all know the reasoning by child support. I'm merely pointing out it's a real specter. When I'm married if I lose my job there's no court process and if I have to take a shitty one and spend way less money on the kid then we will adapt; but after a divorce you have an "imputed income" which is what the judge expects you could make. The judge also expects you're spending 20% of that imputed income towards the kid even though if when you were married it could be just 5% and the kid was fine. If I have to take up trucking and the judge says I really could be an engineer and I'm slacking then I could end up in jail. Granted most people making an effort probably aren't going to end up in jail but merely the fact you have potential debtor's prison hanging over your head at all times is a very real concern even in the event it is justified.

To point out the absurdity of child support debtor's prison as currently run, see the story of the guy arrested because he was held hostage in Iraq while working the contract job he needed to work to pay his child support... [1]. The reasoning? He did not mail the support while the captors were pointing a gun to his head. IMO any system where you can be jailed because you didn't make payments because you were taken hostage while trying to earn support for your children is just utterly fucked.

[1] https://greensboro.com/ex-hostage-jailed-in-child-support-ca...

I would argue society-level collectivism is actually a big destroyer of these families.

The phenomenon of say the elderly being disconnected from the younger I theorize is in part due to the fact they extract their social security through violence of the state in taxation rather than through family bonds. The lack of mutual familial reliance destroys the unspoken quid-pro-quo arrangements that held families together. The end effect also is children are a pure cost driver as the support they provide as adults to seniors is equally distributed amongst society rather than mostly directed towards the benefit of the parent who invested in their upbringing. This brings a massive free-rider problem where everyone is incentivized for the other guy to have kids but not for you personally to have one.

I theorize this also has destroyed to some extent inner city poor families. Non-familial nation state social payments to single mothers can actually work against marriage in poor families, as the single mother may be financially penalized for getting married. The resulting lack of father figure inspires more poverty and crime and recycling of the issues.

When my partner and I were first expecting we honestly were not sure whether to get married or not, as a lot of possible government benefits vaporized when you took my partner from "single poor mom" to "married middle of the road family."

I honestly don't know which is worse though. The 1930s fear and taboo or the 2020 divorce court take you to the cleaners, TRO issued and banned from seeing your kids and your guns taken away and then tossed in jail because you lost your job and the judge says you still owe support. I think I'd actually take the 1930s and I say that as someone who really dislikes those taboos and social pressures you mention.

People that don't, don't stay married long.

I started out married thinking of it as a nebulous thing. My marriage improved when I realized it was all an exchange and I need to make sure I'm always providing my bit rather than just working towards some nebulous idea of love.

Tinder is straight up depressing for the median dude. My mind was blown just how much harder it was to get a date on tinder vs getting a date in real life. I can do the latter pretty easily but trying to get one on tinder would be like months of constant effort to then get ditched before the date even starts.

It feels like 90% of women on there are chasing the top 10% of dudes and not settling for anything else.

If you time the stock market wrong without leverage, worst case you lose all your money.

Time the housing market wrong and you could rapidly have sizeable negative wealth. Toss in a forced sale in a divorce or something and you've lost both all the money you ever had but also the money you ever will up until bankruptcy filing after which no one but absolute sharks will rent you a place either. At that point MonkeyMalarkey will not be around to point you to the best dumpster to sleep behind...

In the first para, you are optimizing for expected value by not timing the market. In the second para you should not be optimizing for expected value but rather assurity you don't end up sleeping behind the dumpster, so the advice may not be transferrable.

I would think fear of being blown up by mainland China at any moment is bad for capital investment... meanwhile you have a highly skilled and educated workforce vying to man the capital in the country. I would think that would make labor artificially weak.

IMO Taiwan needs world recognition and solid assurances their capital investments won't end up in the opium pipe of some CCP party man. Until then you'd have to be kind of insane to bet the farm providing jobs to Taiwan.

Taiwan offers a really easy "gold card" for Americans that I considered getting but I realized what they needed wasn't my labor but lots of foreigners from powerful allies living in the crosshairs to make sure allies will get really really pissed if they get blown up.

Is there any survival bias here?

I don't want to be too presumptuous here but my understanding is there are a lot of desperate broke African immigrants finding their way into Italy.

In such a situation you would be forced to rapidly acquire the language to survive, move on somewhere else, or possibly resort to crime because you are unable to communicate to secure a job (which <should> rapidly leads to expulsion from the country). Bad learners get tossed into the last 2 bins, and thus unseen.

Comparatively if white American hacker guy shows up flush with tech cash there's really not much chance I'm going to find myself on police radar or starve not learning the language, even if I'm there for an extended period and even if there illegally.

I would think one would look at the original quote and see it says:

"私は日本語がかなり下手です" [0]

Not being good at something is not the same thing as having refused to learn it. From the authors response I honestly can't assess their level of Japanese well. I routinely have had people tell me they don't speak English well but then have a full conversation with them.

https://twitter.com/wingcommander1/status/161706014073333760...

There is a theory that children have a "language acquisition device" that goes from muscular brawn to a flubby dough-boy with age in most people. IDK if that's accurate but there does seem to be something to it.

The countries where everybody is multi-lingual this almost assuredly happens in middle to early childhood.

My country has no official language and the lingua franca of my neighborhood is not a language I speak. Shit just got weird because basically no one would not consider me part of this society and I sure as hell understand it roughly as well as anybody else in my hood.

Maybe America is just weird but you can come here and not learn English and if someone refuses your right to comment on our society they'll probably just be called a straight up racist.

Slums are unfortunately the shitty alternative to having no home at all, when you live in a world where no one gives a fuck about the poor.

If we must live in a world where no one gives a fuck about the poor I honestly am not so sure they should be denied at least their slum house rather than freezing to death behind a dumpster.

I'm a little lost. Not because I think you've said somethin wrong because I'm not sure what you're replying to. Can you quote what you're responding to?

The bizarre thing it isn't even capitalism/money first. The housing system in the USA is far from the optimal free-market capitalistic structure. It revolves around a people first approach of the right people controlling the regulations, the permitting office, and tyranny of more comfortable majority.

If you let brute-force raw capitalism run roughshod I would build a japanese style capsule megavault and trick a bunch of college kids into thinking it's the cool thing, selling them each 100% ownership of their personal pod for $X. I could probably buy a shitty old warehouse and fill it with these capsules and you could own your own fucking capsule in a coop for maybe ten grand and aside from whatever services your coop votes to buy you wouldn't owe jack to a landlord.

I could pitch a yurt here on a deck all in with land included for about $150k.

https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/1882-Quesa...

What's the cheapest legal free standing residence in san francisco? I couldn't find anything under half a million. That's an easy 1/3 the price of any legal freestanding structure.