I live 10 miles outside of Seattle and have never once spent more than 30% on rent. I have 0 of the downsides you listed, except a long commute, and I don’t make 6 figures.

It’s honestly not that hard to find affordable rent even in a VHCOL area.

A known side effect of Ibuprofen (and most NSAIDs) is sweating, so the faster release tabs that aren’t in your system as long and thus clear out faster, dont have that aide effect… maybe

When cocaine usage first exploded, it was almost entirely in “laborers, youths, black people, and the urban underworld”. Most of the early history of its usage is associated with non-whites and lower class peoples. Making it illegal worked for a long time until the cocaine boom happened and then it became popular with disco and rock, but again, still mostly used by non-whites. It wasn’t until crack became a thing that the racial divide became more clear - rich whites got the clean cocaine, everyone else got addicted to crack.

https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.12987/9780300255874/html

The switch to being heavily used by the rich white class is a “relatively” recent development.

Signal does not. https://signal.org/bigbrother/santa-clara-county/

Tl;dr: Signal gave the court timestamps for three out of nine phone numbers that the court demanded data on. The timestamps were the dates three phone numbers last registered their accounts with Signal. That’s it. That is all the data there was to give.

This is why I use Signal. This is why I donate monthly to Signal.

There’s grandfather rates plus bulk discounts!

The top 1 percent of earners alone pay over one-third of income taxes.

Accounting for all forms of taxation, they pay roughly 25%.

Corporations “pay nearly no taxes” is just categorically false. Language matters - some companies avoid paying federal income tax. In these cases, chances are it had a combination of both zero or negative book income and either net operating losses, significant foreign profits, sizable capital investments, or all of the above.

Of course, it’s also important to remember that federal income taxes aren’t the only taxes corporations pay. Businesses are also liable for state income taxes, payroll taxes, property taxes, and excise taxes, of which are almost entirely unavoidable.

Empirical studies show that workers (i.e., labor) bear more than 50 percent of the burden of the corporate income tax. How is it possible that workers bear the brunt of a tax they don’t even pay? The key lies in the difference between “legal” tax incidence—who is legally obligated to pay a tax—and what economists call “economic” tax incidence—who indirectly pays for a tax, often in the form of lower wages.

The higher business taxes are, the higher the cost of investing is and the less likely businsess owners are to invest in things like equipment, buildings, and trainings that will make their staff more productive. And the less productive workers are, the less their employers can afford to pay them in the long run.

Instead, maybe we look at limiting a companies ability to offshore profits, limit incentives for stock buyback, and adjust how deductions for stock options work.

Crazy idea, how about we make it easier to pay taxes so companies don’t feel the need to cheat. What if we make it so it’s cheaper to pay federal taxes than it is to avoid them.

Back when there were numerous loopholes, deductions, and methods of evasion and nearly none paid that rate? And when they later lowered effective rates, closed loopholes, and ended up collecting more?

Yeah, let’s do that. Let’s incentive finding ways to avoid paying taxes.

This is exactly how you give incentives to higher CEO pay. Record profits? Give all of it to the CEO and you’ll pay none of it to the government. You didn’t mention a higher personal tax rate, so end of the day the CEO wins.

Own an S-Corp? Pass through all profits to yourself and pay 0%.

It has to do with the fact that testosterone is a performance enhancement drug and men are categorically stronger than females, and a man punching a female is strictly unsafe.

Removed by mod

…? Did you even look at the picture? That’s 60-70%+ of the brands in any major retailer. It a bit of an oversight to suggest that poor decision making is leading to buying from these shit companies. You have to actually go out of your way to NOT buy one of these brands.

There was/is a 90% off sale atm.

However, who replaces the aging workforce? Who pays for social security? Back in the 60s, it was a ratio of 6 workers per 1 retired. Now, it’s 3:1. Soon, it’ll be 2:1. That’s bad. Very bad.

A smaller working population and a large inactive population create huge labour shortages which must be filled by migrant labour which creates additional problems.

One solution is enabling people to work for longer but this is challenging. Do we push the retirement age to 75? What about the declining health and abilities of ther population.

People are having children much later than normal. Births under the age of 20 have dropped 90% in the last 10 years. We are aging faster than we are replacing.

Your point is that people do say they take classes of drugs?

I tell people I’ve taken an NSAID. I tell people I’m on an opiate. I tell people im on stimulants. People say “I take an SSRI” without being specific.

Ah yes, because it matters if it was diazapram versus alprazolam. The pharmacology is effectively identical… a headline stating “benzos were given to children” is a lot more clear than and obvious than “children given klonopin”