Ideally the answers aren’t just political soapboxing.

  • Dialectic Cake@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    Tax Brackets. “I got a pay raise and will now be taxed more and make less money than before the raise”

    If <=30k was taxed at 25% and 30+k taxed at 30% and you go from 30k to 31k a year, only the 1k is taxed at the higher rate.

  • NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Pandas reproduce just fine in nature. The myth of them being bad at fucking and making babies was a myth started from before we understood zoochosis. No animal wants to have babies in a prison, it’s not just pandas.

  • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    That they need to buy cases and cases of water in plastic bottles which they throw in the landfill instead of just drinking their perfectly good tap water.

      • Hodrobond@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        Don’t know why you got downvoted. I drank tap water in India and threw up 3 times before leaving the office. I’ve seen the data center water and it looked worse.

    • MIDItheKID@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      Plenty of people saying their tap water is not good. Just buy/install an RO for your tap ya dummy. They aren’t that expensive or difficult to install. Or some kind of brita-type filter. I’m lucky enough to have an in-fridge filter. Cold, clean water on tap. It’s the best.

      Bottled water companies don’t produce water. They produce plastic bottles.

      • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        Ummm, my comment was addressing the millions of people whose water IS perfectly good but they buy bottled water anyway.

        • Professorozone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Well mine is actually perfectly good safety-wise, but it tastes like shit. I eventually got a reverse osmosis system so I don’t waste any bottles anymore. Instead I waste water. BUT… But, when I’m at other people’s houses, if the water tastes fine, I drink that and refuse bottles. This is the best I can do.

    • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      I live in the US, I’m not drinking the tap water lol. That being said you don’t have to buy cases of individual plastic water bottles either.

  • TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    4 days ago

    High price = high quality.

    The luxury pricing model has totally enveloped markets at this point and the correlation rarely applies now.

    • otacon239@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      4 days ago

      Absolutely. I’ve learned over the years that it usually works out pretty well to find out how much the cheapest dogshit option is and aim for an option roughly 1.5x the cost. Obviously not a blanket rule but it covers a surprising amount of common items and I’ve gotten plenty of long-lasting affordable alternatives that I actually enjoy using rather than having the crappiest version of everything.

    • theherk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      That’s true but the other direction is generally true. Not always, but often high quality does come at a cost.

  • faltryka@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 days ago

    That their neurodiversity absolves them of any responsibility and the rest of the world should cater to it.

    • Madrigal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      This is true, but at the same time it does not mean that people shouldn’t be given reasonable accommodation for their particular needs.

      Many people struggle to grasp that these two ideas can coexist.

      • ChexMax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Embarrassingly, I think I’m someone who struggles with both ideas. How many meltdowns am I expected to accommodate before someone is not invited back to a social event? A work event? Because if a neurotypical yelled obscenities at me, it would be one and done, but I’m expected to forgive and forget when the person is autistic. How many times do you accommodate someone’s tardiness? I have ADHD, and I work really hard to be on time, but I’m late plenty. Sometimes for work. Often for social events. It’s not because i don’t care about other people’s time. I try really hard, I just fail a lot. Like who decides what’s reasonable?

        • Madrigal@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 days ago

          Perhaps the question you should be asking is why are the meltdowns happening in the first place?

          Accommodations aren’t about tolerating bad behaviour. They’re about changing the environment to be more friendly, and putting systems in place to help people manage things better.

          • ChexMax@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            Ooh that’s a good point! I hadn’t looked at it like that!

            Of course the meltdown I’m thinking of is that his own toddler was trying to eat old food off the floor and I was preventing that and offering fresh food while babysitting for free for him.

            He doesn’t have meltdowns so often now, but the only thing that changed is that he feels safe and comfortable around us. Ironically, his bad behavior is what made us uncomfortable around him which is what made him feel unsafe. So as it got better, it just got better and better.

            Unfortunately for him, he was raised in an emotionally abusive home, so his regular bad behavior was learned and then when we reacted poorly to that it would lead to an actual meltdown. Consistent kind behavior and firm boundaries is what eventually led to a two way street respectful situation. A meltdown now would be much more accepted and understood but we had to go to group therapy to get here.

  • pomegranatefern@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    That because a problem is real, any proposed solution to it is a good idea, and anyone arguing against a proposed solution doesn’t want to solve the problem.

    Yes, grease fires are bad. No, you should not use water to put it out. No, that does not mean I am pro-grease-fire??

      • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Tomatoes are both a fruit (botanically) and a vegetable (culinarily). “Vegetable” doesn’t have a botanical definition, so the old aphorism about tomatoes “not being a vegetable” is trying to conflate terms from two different domains and hoping you don’t notice.

        • Omgpwnies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          And a large number of “fruits” aren’t even a fruit. We’re kinda bad at naming things sometimes

          • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            A large number of culinary fruits aren’t even botanical fruits, yes. Most of them are botanical berries (and some things that aren’t botanical berries are still culinary berries). Conflating the two linguistic domains causes lots of problems!

  • Tanis Nikana@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    4 days ago

    Photography is so much more than pointing a camera and pushing the button, even though cell phones have reduced it to that for a lot of people.

    Good photography requires intention, planning, luck, skill in knowing how to compose a scene, knowledge of light and color temperature, sensor exposure, how to direct people about if people are involved, and then, in editing in post-production, skillful edits, adjusting tone, doing masking, color grading and calibration, and any other steps to perfect an image.

    For me to produce one work here on this site, it can take me two or three hours, not including travel time!

  • FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    That people are either purely evil or purely good. I once argued with a homophobe who wanted to protect her children from seeing lesbians on tv. She said she had to protect her kids because they came to her from turbulent backgrounds. So she adopted kids in need, that makes her a good person. Still, she was a bigot and teaching her kids to be bigots and that is a problem. Homophobia is bad and harmful but not all homophobes are automatically completely horrible people.

  • DomeGuy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    4 days ago

    Decimation means “lose 10%”, not “lose all BUT 10℅”

    If two people suddenly quit your twenty-man team you’ve been decimated. If eight or eighteen people quit you’ve been devastated.

    (Plus a bunch of “politics” and civil rights things.)

    • theherk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      4 days ago

      Linguistics just doesn’t deal with definitions like that. It does mean that, and certainly even connotatively historically. Today, in modern parlance, it definitely means “to kill a large portion of” something, and is almost never used as a 10% reference. So your team could be correctly described as “decimated” in both scenarios.