EV never has to be recharged… Because it recharges on the way downhill.

“World’s largest EV never has to be plugged in” is sufficiently click-baity without being so dumbly self contradicting

“Lmao no sympathy for anyone who buys expensive shoes”

^this you?

When you mature as a human being, whatever age that may be, you develop kindness through a willingness to understand and empathize with perspectives that conflict with your own. That doesn’t necessarily mean you have to accept it for yourself. For many people, clothing is not simply a means of pragmatic function. It’s also a source of self-expression, joy, and beauty. Now for me, $600 for a pair of sneakers is exorbitant and ridiculous no matter who designed it. But it’s not a product for me. And if someone with the means feels great buying and wearing them, I don’t see the harm. I don’t usually pay more than I have to for footwear, but I would pay a premium for certain kitchen tools I use all the time if I like the design, enjoy looking at it, and feel good using it. What I do sympathize with and would like to see reduced in harm is the consumerist culture that pressures people with less means into feeling like they have to have such things for fulfillment.

I would too. Unfortunately I’m pretty sure most places that check even half those boxes still fail in the market. You often have to drag consumers kicking and screaming towards something more equitable and less exploitative, even when they’re the ones being exploited.

Because they are reacting to living under the oppressive structures of late capitalism. Having been raised in a capitalist world, they naturally overemphasize economic systems and their alternatives and make assumptions about government.

So when they communism theyusually mean communism + some equitable government or just they mean socialist democracy.

Funnily enough, you live pretty well in China these days if you’re a good little capitalist.

Yeah well there’s cooking as in purely functional preparation of nutrients, and then there’s cooking as in a process of caring for others by creating a worthwhile experience of food that is needed, engaging, and delicious. The downside is this experience usually has a time limit dependent on time and others’ availability (eating hot food together). It’s sad for such effort to go to waste. The alternative extreme to this kind of nurturing is abandoning the idea that family time over meals is worthwhile and just shitting out nutrient bricks so the children don’t starve. I don’t think anyone really wins in the long run with that.

That’s not an insult, it’s a specific form of trolling/harassment called sealioning.

I would say the greater achievement of right wing grifters is the connotation that “politics” is inherently bad and shameful, as implied by your comment as well.

I see, I think there are a couple things to clarify. Causally, you can view it as the political system of decision-making determines the economic system, so keeping capitalism is a political decision made through a political system such as democracy or theocracy with downstream political consequences, e.g. property has high capital value, which affects citizens.

You may also be conflating decisions that carry a political quality with decisions made by a political system. Or conflating systems that carry political qualities such as economic systems and education systems with political systems proper, which are system for instituting decisions that govern societies. For example, the market may “decide” that asbestos is the best insulation, however, the market does not set political policy about insulation. It is up to the political system (e.g. democratic parliament or dictator) to decide whether or not to pass policy about limiting asbestos insulation, not capitalism. This distinction is also present in your own argument. Like you said, the market (capitalism) doesn’t create and enforce property law, it’s the state (political system) that creates the law and is responsible for enforcing it.

-EDIT- Okay I think I see the semantic disagreement. What others are emphasizing is that the economy is political in nature and therefore it is a political system. What I understand for the term “Political System” is more narrow to be more narrowly “system of government”. I certainly agree that the economy is political in nature. And honestly, I’m not married to my definition of political system. What I cared more about is drawing the distinction between “system of government” and “systems that are political in nature”. The only reason why I’d disagree is that by the latter definition, any system of social structure such as religions, education systems, human transportation systems, communication systems, language systems etc. Are also political systems because they’re political in nature. So the term “political system” may be too broad as to be useful.

Thanks for this, I like the pragmatic view that those with economic power select those who obtain political power. I certainly don’t think they’re independent. The economic system influences the political system for sure, but categorically/formally we’re still talking about two distinct systems, otherwise we wouldn’t be talking about a separate political structure

Can you elaborate on how capitalism is a meaningful political system?

Imagine there was a group of people in your school, in your workplace, in your city who for some reason feel that Kazakhspy should not exist. They’re not allowed to kill you, that’s against the law, but they would if they could. Instead, they say fuck Kazakhspy, go kill yourself Kazakhspy, I can’t stand you Kazakhspy. Hearing that kind of thing on a regular basis might be a little hurtful. Now imagine some game studio heard about this and thought hey, let’s include Kazakhspy in our game. And then that group in your community was like “what the fuck is this! I hate Kazakhspy and now they’re shoving Kazakhspy down my throat in a videogame? I will not stand for this.” And goes through the effort of making a mod to remove you from the game and puts it on the website. You hear about this and see that it’s up there with a few downloads. You might be a little hurt to know some people hate you so much they’ll mod a game to spite you just because they don’t like your existence. Then the website owner is like, “Wow, this is weirdly hateful and doesn’t belong on my website. Let’s not perpetuate hate against Kazakhspy.”

That’s why. In context it’s hurtful to people because the intention of creating it was to hurt people through hate.

What’s wrong with having a mod that removes the skin color selector? I get people care about race and stuff, but is it really necessary to force everyone to have a skin colour selection option if they don’t want a skin colour selection option? You’re not going to make a racist see clearer by forcing them to do something that only affects them.

You have it in your own question. It is hateful. It was made by the hateful for the hateful to perpetuate a hateful idea. You might even call it a kind of hate speech, which probably means it violate Nexus’s terms. Even if it doesn’t, it’s icky af. And Nexus is entirely in their right to refuse hosting it. The nod creator is still free to use their own mod and share it in other ways, but Nexus should not be forced to host it.

Same reason most people recommend gettinf a Honda/Toyota when asked for a general recommendation for a car. If you need to ask the question, then your needs are probably not that specialized. So something generally reliable, widely accessible, and good value would be appropriate. Lenovo still tends to fit that description.