If you are emotionally invested in something that you can’t change, that’s ego not empathy. Let it go, and go work to change something you can control for the better.

Taxes and property values are based on building values in the same area. The building you live in has become more expensive, whether you like it or not.

I’ll buy 5 copies!

Christopher Hitchens: ”In 1786, when the United States was barely a country, it was having its sailors taken as slaves by the Barbary states, the states of the Ottoman Empire and North Africa. Tripoli, shores of Tripoli. Ships stopped, its crews carried off into slavery. We estimate 1.5 million European and American slaves taken between 1750 and 1815. Jefferson and Adams went to their ambassador in London and said, why do you do this to us? The United States has never had a quarrel with the Muslim world of any kind. We weren't in the crusades. We weren't at war with Spain. Why do you do this to our people and our ships? Why do you plunder and enslave our people? The ambassador said very plainly, Mr. Abdul Rahman said, because the Quran gives us permission to do so, because you are infidels, and that's our answer. Jefferson said, well, in that case, I will send a navy which will crush your state, which he did. Islamic fundamentalism is not created by American democracy. It's a lie to say so. It's a masochistic lie, and it excuses those who are the real criminals, and blames us for the attacks made upon us.”

Glitter is made from dead bodies

This is the ultimate midwit healthcare take. No, 32 countries have not “figured out” universal healthcare. The UK has “free” healthcare, and roughly 1 in 3 cancer patients in England still fail to start treatment within 62 days of urgent referral. Canada has “free” healthcare, and the median wait for neurosurgical treatment is around a year. Australia has “free” healthcare, and over half the country still buys private insurance despite paying for a public universal system with their taxes. Switzerland has universal coverage, because residents are required to buy private insurance. There is no government system where benevolent bureaucrats tuck you in at night with a warm blanket and an MRI appointment. The actual lesson from other wealthy countries is not “they figured it out.” America’s system has huge problems. Our prices are insane, insurance markets are distorted, and hospital systems are cartelized. Our regulations make care more expensive than it needs to be. Yet we still guarantee access to even the 8% who don’t have coverage. We give easy routes to qualify for medicaid for those with disabilities. Pretending the rest of the world solved healthcare because they slapped the word “universal” on a rationing scheme is not analysis. It is bumper sticker policy for people who think access means having a card in your wallet while you wait a year to see the doctor you need.

No one under the age of 40 should be allowed to be a teacher and they should all have at least 10 years real experience in their fields.

Hello Julia, sans aucune ironie, c'est top que tu prennes le temps de te renseigner. Mais le problème quand on lit Marx aujourd'hui, c'est qu'on prend pour acquis sa prémisse de départ, alors qu'elle a été démontée scientifiquement il y a plus de 150 ans. Toute la pensée de Marx repose sur la théorie de la valeur-travail. L'idée que la valeur d'un bien vient de la quantité de travail nécessaire pour le produire. Si tu acceptes cette prémisse, alors oui, tout son raisonnement tient. Le capitaliste "vole" la plus-value du travailleur, l'exploitation est mathématique, la révolution est inévitable. Sauf qu'en 1871, trois économistes (Menger en Autriche, Jevons en Angleterre, Walras en Suisse) découvrent indépendamment la même chose : la valeur n'est pas objective, elle est subjective et marginale. Un verre d'eau dans le désert vaut une fortune. Le même verre à côté d'une rivière ne vaut rien. Le travail incorporé est identique. Donc le travail ne détermine pas la valeur. C'est le consommateur qui valorise un bien selon son utilité marginale dans un contexte donné. Exemple concret : tu peux passer 1000 heures à tricoter un pull moche que personne ne veut. Selon Marx, ce pull a énormément de valeur (beaucoup de travail incorporé). Selon la réalité, il ne vaut rien. Parce que personne n'en veut. À l'inverse, Bernard Arnault crée des milliards de valeur non pas parce qu'il "exploite" mais parce qu'il a su anticiper et organiser des désirs humains à grande échelle. La valeur est créée par la coordination, pas extraite par le vol. Cette découverte (la révolution marginaliste) a invalidé tout l'édifice marxiste. Pas pour des raisons idéologiques, pour des raisons scientifiques. C'est pour ça que plus aucun département d'économie sérieux au monde n'enseigne Marx comme un cadre d'analyse valide. On l'enseigne en histoire de la pensée. Maintenant, le truc important. Si ton intention en lisant Marx c'est d'aider les pauvres (c'est une intention noble), alors tu vas être surprise par ce qui suit. Regarde les chiffres de la Banque mondiale. En 1820, 90% de l'humanité vivait dans l'extrême pauvreté. Aujourd'hui, moins de 9%. Cette chute historique ne s'est PAS produite dans les pays qui ont appliqué Marx. Elle s'est produite dans les pays qui ont libéralisé leur économie. Chine post-1978, Vietnam post-1986, Inde post-1991, Pologne post-1989. À chaque fois qu'un pays libéralise, des centaines de millions de gens sortent de la pauvreté en une génération. À chaque fois qu'un pays applique Marx (URSS, Cambodge, Corée du Nord, Venezuela), c'est la famine et les goulags. Ce n'est pas une opinion, c'est l'expérience la plus massive jamais menée en sciences sociales. Plusieurs milliards de cobayes humains, sur un siècle. Donc paradoxalement, si tu aimes vraiment les pauvres, la position la plus cohérente n'est pas d'être marxiste. C'est d'être pour la liberté économique. Parce que c'est empiriquement la seule chose qui a jamais sorti massivement les gens de la misère. Pour creuser, je te recommande trois lectures qui vont changer ta vision : "La Loi" de Frédéric Bastiat (court, lumineux, gratuit en ligne) "La Route de la Servitude" de Hayek "Économie en une leçon" de Henry Hazlitt Bonne lecture, et vraiment chapeau de chercher à comprendre plutôt que de rester dans tes certitudes. C'est rare.

🚨 WOW. Border Czar Tom Homan just gave the PERFECT response to Pope Leo "I'm a lifelong Catholic. I wish they'd STAY OUT of immigration, they don't know what they're talking about." "Because if they wore my shoes for 40 years, and talked to a 9-year-old girl that got r*ped multiple times, or stood in the back of a tractor trailer with 19 dead aliens at my feet, including a 5-year-old boy that baked to death, if they understood the atrocities that happened on the open border, I think their opinion would change!" "And I welcome discussion with any of them, because they don't understand illegal immigration is not a victimless crime." "Where President Trump had the most secure border in the lifetime of this nation, right now, lives are being saved. He's saving thousands of lives a year because he has a secure border!" "Human traffickers are out of business, right? The cartels are going bankrupt because of that secure border. I wish they'd understand that." "Because if they did, I think they'd have a different opinion." Mic drop.

This kid doing gods work

sailor moon

So what Mara LePere-Schloop is saying is that this new HBO series will be terrible & won't follow the books in many ways? They might as well just rename it if they want to change it so much. Something like: "The Affirmative Action Apprentice & the Philosopher’s Pronouns"

Coloring is off on more than just Snape. The Harry Potter trailer is too dark.

Yes. All Iran has left is basically terrorism and whatever missiles they hid in mountains. Their conventional military has been wiped out. Their warships were easily sunk. America has total air superiority, which is why they’re doing strafing runs with the A-10 now. And most importantly: Chinese missiles, drones, and air defenses have proven completely useless against US tech. Both in Iran and Venezuela. We basically just turned them off. Every “victory” you’re citing from Iran is basically improvised guerilla resistance. Fair. But defending is easier than invading. And who would be the invading and defending force if China invaded Taiwan? If China’s military tech fails in defensive uses, how do you think it would fair against the West in an offensive war? Literally no chance. Both recent engagements have been a humiliation for Chinese and Russian tech. The consensus is pretty universal on this. Stop falling for slop propaganda from third worlders, lmao.

Canada in 1966: "We'll just sign a little liberty over to the government. It's a small price to pay for free health care." Canada in 2026:

Universal healthcare straight to the grave. We told you.

they were fairies 🧚🏼‍♀️

I just got result 'Moss' on quiz 'what color is your aura?'. What will you get? uquiz.com/quiz/pxTx2D?p=2637… via @uquiz

I love seeing all the fun supernatural con pictures and it seems like it would be a blast, but it’s expensive! I’d pay maybe a hundred or two for the experience and the pictures combined. Above that amount and I start feeling like this is why Chuck created photoshop.