ObjectivityIncarnate

The not-so-subtle misogyny of equating adult women with children, depriving them of all agency, strikes yet again.

It’s not victim blaming because he’s not referring to the same women you are. Like it or not, there are plenty of women (no one is saying it’s all or most women, by the way) who will pursue rich men with the desire for a purely transactional “I’ll fuck you so I can have your wealthy lifestyle and/or a part of your fame.” They’re perfectly content with that arrangement, as are said men.

Johnny Depp’s girlfriends for decades have basically all been women in this category, even now that he’s way past his prime aesthetically. The women accusing Trump of sexual impropriety are, obviously, NOT in this category.

Women are not a hivemind–different types of them can exist in the same society, you know.

He was tried and found guilty of raping a woman.

That’s not true. He’s never been convicted of a sex crime. “Found liable” in a civil court and “found guilty” in a criminal court are VASTLY different, and require VASTLY different standards of evidence.

It’s important to be accurate.

In the US at least, we already pay more every year in welfare programs than we could afford even if we wealth taxed our “very richest” at literally 100%. Nearly $800 billion. Yearly. This is not a solution.

We as a country pay more than enough taxes already, period. It’s the government not spending it efficiently, and not being held accountable when it doesn’t.

As just one example, the US government already pays more per person for healthcare than any other nation on the planet. But how many health categories are we first place in? We put the most in, we should be getting the most out, right?

The majority just give enough to lessen their tax burden.

There is no amount of charity you can give that results in you having more money than if you hadn’t, Kramer.

My man I don’t think I give a shit where you think I belong.

show me some billionaires that never took advantage of anyone to get their billions

You can’t prove a negative, screwball. It’s literally impossible to prove “never took advantage of anyone” about anyone, billionaire or not.

Not that you aren’t almost certainly using an overbroad definition of ‘take advantage’, on top of it.

I’m down to change my view.

No, you aren’t. People who are don’t play these kinds of semantic games.

I just don’t see getting to a billion without someone being taken advantage of on the way though.

Just because you don’t understand doesn’t mean it’s false.

Which of course is a stupid comparison indicative of economic ignorance, because wealth does not grow linearly for anyone who doesn’t stuff their money under a mattress.

That’s because you’re a textbook example of the infantile minds infecting areas where actual discourse has a chance to happen.

Atheism isn’t a religion, likewise asexuality is not a sexual orientation, but the lack of one, I say.

(emphasis added)

Men aren’t allowed to discuss their feelings because men have created a society that looks at them as losers for doing so.

The implication here, that societal norms are created and maintained by only men, and therefore any aspects of it that affect men negatively deserve to be blamed on them, is one of the most pervasive anti-male sentiments that people try to fly under the radar with. Women have at least as much (arguably more) influence on societal norms and conventions, as men do.

This entire comment is teeming with this undertone; that is, until the end, when they come out and just say ‘all the bad stuff is men’s fault’ at the end, lol.

Everyone loves building strawmen. If you think only “they” do it, it’s because you’re unquestioningly accepting the ones that confirm your biases.

Removed by mod

That is one horrendous logo, lol

It works in that show because the entire family are losers, and they all get mocked by all the others, regularly.

True equality, lol.

Your opportunities in life are absolutely dependent on your wealth. Those hoarding wealth are stealing opportunity from everyone.

What if the wealth you possess was created by you? Wealth isn’t zero sum, it’s created all the time (and at a rate literally not achievable simply by underpaying employees, to pre-refute the expected response). The implied premise of ‘because they have it, we don’t have it’ just doesn’t hold any water.

Also, it doesn’t really make sense to call it ‘hoarding’ when it’s largely/all invested in businesses that run within the economy. To hoard something is to keep it isolated–investments in publicly-traded companies can never truly fairly be called “hoarding”. You could only fairly call the funds kept in back accounts etc. unspent ‘hoarded’.

1 in 4 households earning over $100,000 a year live paycheck to paycheck–not because they can’t make ends meet, but because their money management sucks. A high income has very little relationship with responsible borrowing, despite what many would assume.

As for your claim that “nobody” steals for their baby

Congrats on contradicting the absolute literal interpretation of what was obviously hyperbole, I guess.

imposing a higher interest rate on them on top of that is just the final nail in the coffin.

That’s the only way to justify loaning to people like that at all, given how much more often they default (and the lender never gets repaid at all). If lenders were forced to give the same interest rate to everyone, that would cause them not to lend to “A person with a low income with a precarious job” at all.