• 0 Posts
  • 99 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 16th, 2023

help-circle
  • This is amateur advice. You can’t lift with your knees for a bulky and squishy item like a body if it’s in front of you. If you attempt this, you’ll notice that your knees get in the way and you need to reach out a lot and can’t lift as a result. Body isn’t like gym weights on a perfectly nice to grab steel bar.

    If you don’t actually have to lift at all, just drag it. And if you do, use a fireman’s carry which is designed for carrying unconscious hoomans.



  • Shoes have too much of a usage difference to go off of Amazon reviews. You don’t know their lifestyle. For anyone that runs a marathon or similar exercise to have shoes that last over 3 months would be a miracle. Any typical big brands like adidas, Nike, etc lasts me many years if I only wear them lightly, like if I take the car. But if I exercise outside in them, they’re not gonna last half a year. It’s just usage dependent.

    Occasionally you might get a bad batch and glue comes off or stitching rips. That’s inevitable bad luck. Though you can just get gorilla glue and glue it back yourself.

    Dress shoes is a different ball game. Get stitched build/welted, not glued on. That’s usually a safe choice though expensive. These can be repaired and resoled, so you could wear them for 10+ yrs. Though getting bored of them might be an issue.

    Light weight shoes are also obviously going to not last. Like hey dude shoes. They’re literally a single sheet of cloth. Easy to wash, but not going to last.

    Also stop trying to buy shoes from Amazon. Go wear shit and try them on.


  • The most acid trippy book that survived to the current version! Bunch of books were removed over the ages when they thought it was too crazy.

    You should check out book of Enoch for extra trippy. It’s largely about fallen angels and many batshit crazy games and novels spawn based off of it, like Xenogears (which is awesome but also considered the most convoluted story JRPG ever).




  • Free market per wikipedia definition:

    In economics, a free market is an economic system in which the prices of goods and services are determined by supply and demand expressed by sellers and buyers. Such markets, as modeled, operate without the intervention of government or any other external authority. Proponents of the free market as a normative ideal contrast it with a regulated market, in which a government intervenes in supply and demand by means of various methods such as taxes or regulations. In an idealized free market economy, prices for goods and services are set solely by the bids and offers of the participants.

    It’s not equal to lawlessness, but it is lawless within market. These two are not equivalent. Still, that is not to say it is without order. Free market is entirely an economic system and not a social system nor any other plethora of systems in a country. So the topic of those other systems are simply out of the scope. Therefore, laws can exist in the society.

    Robbery is part of the free market. Along with whatever happens like tornadoes, fire, murder, etc. Including the cost to hire your own security if necessary. Police is against free market because it is an intervention by the government. There does exist a grey area like if a robber becomes a gang and becomes a businesses’ external authority. Then they are impeding on the free market.

    This is how free market is defined. So, to reiterate, if there exists any body that is redistributing your profit, it is against free market.

    Communism is not a share of labour profits. Communism is more than just an economic system. It’s also a social and philosophical one. But assuming we’re only talking about the economic parts, it still doesn’t mean to share labour profits. Quoting wikipedia once again:

    Communism is […] a socioeconomic order centered around common ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange that allocates products to everyone in the society based on need.

    The keyword here is common ownership. Everyone owns the entire chain of production together. Your view on the concept of profit even existing is out of line with communism. From wikipedia:

    Monetary relations in the form of exchange-value, profit, interest, and wage labor would not operate and apply to Marxist socialism.

    If we go with Marxist version, you already own everything together and nothing has monetary value. You can’t have profit because there is no such thing as selling, and there is no money, so you can’t profit on anything. The concept of the profit sharing would be anti-communism.

    If we go with Lenin’s view on state capitalism (which he said is not communism, but may be a necessary transition state to communism) where we accept that things have value but that only the state engages in capitalism, people still wouldn’t get profit. Because people still wouldn’t have money. You would simply have better status in livelihood in hopes that the state has used that money well for the benefit of the people.

    Communism is not profit sharing, its very core purpose is to remove the concept of profit.

    Sharing of labour profits at a nation level is called “labour share”. And at a company level, it is called “co-operative business”.


  • Complete communism can’t have free market by definition. And complete free market can’t have laws to redistribute profits. That is the definition of these words. The theoretical maximum definition obviously differs from actual application as nothing is applied in a complete sense.

    Revolutions and socioeconomic systems aren’t human nature. Along with all your above examples. My entire point is that there is a difference between individual human nature and the societal nature. Your point of human nature wanting feudalism is opposite of my point. I’m stating that EVERY SINGLE social construct you can imagine or think of is not of the individual nature but the societal one, including feudalism. And that less of construct you require is closer to human nature. More construct required is further away from human nature. That is, communism requires greater management by the society than the free market to exist, and thus is further from human nature. You may choose to define “human nature” differently, but this is how I see it.


  • Grumpy@sh.itjust.workstoMemes@lemmy.mlFear me
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Yes, it’s stupid. But it’s so ridiculously commonplace when talking about animals exerting force of any kind, especially “bite force”. Even in scientific literature to nat geo. They seem to actually mean force but I have no idea why they use the word pressure. I’ve seen some supposed experts on tv even interchangeably use words force and pressure in the same sentence.

    I hate it.


  • Grumpy@sh.itjust.workstoMemes@lemmy.mlHuMaN NatUrE!
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    That interpretation seems more like your own opinion rather than the opinion of those who actually say that. I see little causal relevance between charity and trickle down economics.

    You have to think more impartially to understand why these two train of thoughts have little to no intersection. Do you know why these people you’re characterizing are saying “people are generous”? Because like you said, greed is simultaneously said. If you get it, you’ll see it’s not about trickle down.

    Additionally the general right wing argument for the structuring society around volunteer charity over forced social care is that volunteer format is enough from the view of the giver, not that they will get enough from the view of the receiver. If that happens to be nothing, they’re saying so be it. If that happens to be a lot, that’s great. The argument is also about having the option to choose where they help rather than a government body choosing it… Though I don’t think individuals could possibly know though to choose well.

    I am not making an argument for the right or left. I’m just fixing the polarized viewpoint of the other party.


  • Grumpy@sh.itjust.workstoMemes@lemmy.mlHuMaN NatUrE!
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    3 months ago

    Communism is against human nature.

    Along with every social construct that we make including laws and traditions. We make these rules precisely to counter the human nature in an attempt to create a better society, though not all are by intentional design. What is good for an isolated sole single individual is very different for a whole society and a prosperous society benefits individuals to have different opportunities than a lone actor. For example, a society where you aren’t constantly worried about theft allows you to engage in trade more freely and thus able to trade more. The act of limiting personal freedom (nature) to steal, in turn, allowed society to have an increase in ability to trade.

    What is closer to human nature is going to be more easily accepted by humans. And free market is closer to nature than communism. That is why it was invented first and what has set place first. If communism is indeed what society as a whole feels is better for society, they will constantly shift towards it. Some may argue similar to Canada or Scandinavian countries. Though I wouldn’t define what they’re shifting to as communism because countries like Sweden, Denmark, etc. score higher than USA in economic freedom index (free market). But, that discussion would go off course from topic of what is true communism which has no end.

    Last 2 panels of the OP’s memes refer more greatly to individual actions rather than societal actions. I’m sure certain individuals will help and be charitable. Though as a whole would be obviously less than communism since certain definitions of communism would be a mathematical maximum of reduction of poor due to equalization.