huh, yeah that's fair i did not actually notice that :/

fr fr no cap 🧢

I see this online, how true is it though? like do I need a bag of sugar or just a few sprinkles.

Yeah I guess if I could add free time and money and make it so everyone is happy I would add it.

Hm, I think the kinds or categories of differences might be significant. Enough for legislators and policy makers, and I think enough for residents of different countries to get some perspective. If there's no context or the context is not well understood, how would one know if things can get better or worse in a meaningful way?

prices are lower, piracy is nearly free for most, no?

i'm gonna be completely honest with you, almost everything you said after 'graduates' went over my head. i have no clue what an auror is, did you mean the aurora like the thing in the sky?

I appreciated the info. I agree too! The circle v thing in your profile name is cool.

I don't quite understand, Satan is a contentious figure in Christianity (and maybe other Abrahamic religions? idk, not knowledgeable about it) and it's reasonable to be worried or concerned as an adult about what interests the youth might have. And it really seems the opposition is simply speaking platitudes. They haven't demonstrated 1. it is not a faith, and 2. it causes harm. The folks who are opposed surely can't have their preferred beliefs determine the beliefs of others in areas where it's clear there is not immediate harm.

Fair assessment. It generally seems to be a way of conditioning the argument to prevent further or critical discourse. Honestly with how deprived folks in the US are (as I am in my country), I think it is a bit condescending to rain on their parade. What else would they look forward to? The widening gap in wealth inequality? The increase in infant mortality? The support of genocidal regimes? Working on the positives and what people want might be a better strategy. I will say I do appreciate your comment even if others don't think it's insightful, it made me pause and think a bit.

That said, I am glad this is implemented, and I don't have evidence (read: haven't seen anything or bothered to look too much into it) this project will fair worse than others which appeared to be 'too good to be true', baring such evidence and with the general sentiment that this makes total sense, I want to say it's fair that it would be done even if it is being done decades late.

I think it's work that does the work, a tautology, I think using money as a proxy for work is a convenient hop and skip. When it comes down to a rigorous analysis (of the kind say a climate scientist does in a life-cycle assessment money is to vague a reason. What does it represent? Some amount of gold? Well, the US dollar is no longer pegged to gold à la Bretton Woods, how then does 'money talk'?