So true, sometimes you do have to take a side.

I , of course, choose the side of strapping the guy who says it’s nuanced, at the place of the guy who was strapped.

If you are not willing to hear the marginalised —
Then nuance kills;
Taking a side saves lives.

Isn’t that the Odyssey?

To you and OP @[email protected] , it’s to prevent scams where someone essentially tries to subtract all of someone’s money from a card.

If the card does an economic activity of a large sum, and that was never seen before, it’ll be asked to scan and will do so more often. I think there also is a limit, but one can customise them up to an extent.

If someone asks you to customise the limit, don’t listen to them.

Finally some good news!

Exactly. Good housing can be done.

Shortages are an issue, and desirable only by capitalism – because it drives up prices.

Privacy voor mij, maar niet voor u.

• De politie

ACAB

ACAB, eh?

Plenty of choice. In my view, most presidents were rambling reeking right wingers in some way or other, save for FDR and Teddy Roosevelt, who were the two presidents I’d actually call capable and outspoken on civil rights (rather than just pragmatical like Lincoln). They did have their blemishes, but less than e.g. Andrew Jackson.

So many presidents were terrible for one people or another.

Andrew Jackson? Held hundreds of slaves and quite literally led an ethnic expulsion against Native Americans (the Trail of Tears).

Lincoln? Mostly good, but did not forbid slavery in the form of penal labour. If one were to abolish slavery, why not go the full mile?

Wilson? Rabid antisemite, pretty much.

Hoover? Might’ve tried to tackle the Great Depression – but did so by allying with large coorporations, effectively being corrupt and choosing bribery.

Truman? Dropped nukes and set the stage for “we support any government that hates people being remotely leftist”.

Nixon - corrupt and wanted to sidestep the rule of law, all for his own profit: to stay in power. Other than thaf, decent, but that’s a big “other than that”.

Reagan - enough said. Ultracapitalist, misleading, made the US economy far worse by accruing debt like there’s no tomorrow, and shoving it onto the poor – typical oligarch behaviour! Militaristic, power-hungry. And no, he did not end the Cold War: Gorbachov did.

JFK: socially pretty good, actually. But economically, the cutting of the top rates made the richest keep more money. At least it wasn’t down below 50%, but still. Had that happened, I think the tax rates would’ve allowed wealth accumulation.

And so on.

So, in my view, it’s hard to focus on who is the worse, and better to rather focus on what is the best. Ted would be my candidate. Not only social progress, but also economical, and in a way that favour the worker – and he also was environmentally aware. That is a good president.

Same, it was big news here.

The FDP sucks, I’m glad the SDP and Grünen stayed their ground.

Based

What are you on about? Most aren’t tankies or fascists here, and certainly don’t worship dictatorships. You might wanna change your feed.

A good tip is to not interact with trolls, but to report and ignore instead.

When multiple great powers on each of the sides are directly* in conflict, with multiple continents being theatres of war.

* as opposed to proxy wars.

Eh, Lemmy isn’t that left wing. It’s just normal left.

This ain’t Old English, it’s just fancier modern English. Nys þæt swa, ac ic cweðe on ðære Engliscan tungan.

There is a reason, originally it’s the colours. Also they’re cuddley.

En meer naar de Randstad. Het PVV-kabinet geeft ook geen zak stront om de niet-Randstedelingen.

Oh how he suffered being a billionnaire (200 billion. That is more than you’d earn if you worked for over 2,000 years, 24/7, with a $200k salary each day).

But it gets worse.

Let’s say you live to be 75. You work from 15 til 70. That’s 55 years of work.

The average world citizen works around 40 hours a week.

You’d need to earn $1 million per hour, just to get almost halfway of the wealth Elon Musk has.

Does one gets this rich by work? Does anyone get this rich by smart investments?

The answer shows itself: only through stealing from people like you, exploiting everyone, and evasion, can someone acquire this much wealth.

“Surely Elon was initially at least normal?” But it gets worse. He supported apartheid, a system under which white, coloured and black people would all face struggle:

The black suffered the most and heaviest,
The coloured were accused of collaboration,
The white lived calm but were spoonfed fear of the other groups, lied to by the oligarchs, of “criminal black thugs” stealing their hard work.

While all groups eventually shared one goal: abolition of this system. F. de Klerk and Mandela showed that this was possible, to reconcile. And yet, Elon Musk opposed this.

But it gets even worse with Musk. He claims to be a family man. But, he never loved his daughter. He abused his daughter, when his daughter told her what any daughter ought to feel able to tell her father: I am who I am.

Musk is the archetypical oligarch: rich, spoiled, and with no sympathy. Let comrades learn: this is not what we are. Musk, Bezos, and all their ilk: to them, you are a mosquito. You are nothing for them.

They are the reason prices rose. They profited from inflation. And all this, while even people with $100k income, struggle to pay mortgages. All this, while the poor starve on the streets, drugged people get no help, and queers are being murdered.

Comrades! You are one front, and the fiend is the oligarch.
The poor cannot steal your wealth, for they have none,
The junkie cannot ruin your health; for they have none,
The queer cannot kill you, for they are killed.

The oligarch has their wealth, health, and kills. Comrades! Once more ye are one front, and the fiend is the oligarch.

Join or resocialise your socialist party, join a newspaper, and unionise! Rich, poor, healthy, ill, straight, queer: disagreement be told: all share one enemy, the oligarch!

It is bad. Companies could just have some fucking standards.

The issue is profit-motivated companies existing in the first place.

Rather, they should be self-led, and motivated towards the best labour environment as according to their workers. That means their workers feeling accepted, heard and listened to, being able to not only live but also thrive. And all that, while still making the organisation more efficient.

Specifically, it’s Breaking Dawn. I think part 2.

while China is the second biggest country in terms of population, India has the biggest population. For the majority of the world (>4 billion) to live somewhere, you’d have to take a circle with a diameter from roughly Ulaanbatar to Makassar, and draw it.