

Mailing someone more letters than they’re capable of replying to is not equivalent to, nor a component of, gaining access to the inside of their home.
Mailing someone more letters than they’re capable of replying to is not equivalent to, nor a component of, gaining access to the inside of their home.
Yeah, that is the key question. Not to mention that the headline is giving 100% of the ‘credit’ to the psilocybin.
Smells fishy to me.
Because “gonna” is centuries old, while “finna” only started getting popular around 2010.
Not exactly an apples to apples comparison, ‘younger’ slang is always going to be less ‘familiar’/‘normal’-sounding.
No thanks, I value my time.
Youtube acting like it has anything to offer
This is weapons-grade copium, there is no other platform with even 1% of the content on YouTube.
The 10% of the time when it’s both folded and unfolded must be sublime.
Yeah, this is a flex of naivete re PayPal, more than anything, lol
But you did say it. Everyone knows what the word is. You went out of your way for literally no reason, to accomplish nothing but making people wonder why you did such a pointless thing.
I thought he was just in character.
Watch out for those sexually dransmitted illnesses
deleted by creator
That’s not relevant.
Whether you don’t pay your debts by choice or not, the fact remains that not paying them demonstrates that you are risky to lend to. It makes perfect sense for people to not want to lend you more money if you didn’t pay back what you borrowed before.
Downvote all you like, but that’s the fact of the matter. Getting rid of credit scores will change nothing for people who don’t repay their debts, but it will harm those who do, because good borrowers won’t be able to prove that they have a history of repaying their debts, and will therefore be treated as greater risks than they actually are.
Credit scores are objectively beneficial for everyone except people who don’t pay their debts.
Downvoting doesn’t make it not true.
You said something stupid, and it was identified as such. That’s not being offended.
Though the fact that you had to assume several things about me personally to rationalize the way you behave, as your ego is apparently just too fragile to conceive of the possibility that YTA, says a lot, and makes me wonder if you’re available in IMAX.
What’s your source on that? Your arse?
Good luck finding a single source in any country that has females being on the receiving end of violence more often than males per capita, overall.
I think you’re an incel who hates women and doesn’t care about violence against them.
That’s because you’re enough of a fool to think caring about male suffering is misogynistic. All I did was point out your deliberate blindness to the suffering of half of humanity, by describing the half that is assaulted and killed less, as the half with the ‘epidemic’ of violence against them.
It’s like when the reaction to 11% of journalists killed the year before being women is to say “stop targeting female journalists”. You’re so deeply sexist that the 89% who are male don’t even land on your radar.
Men don’t deserve empathy.
You’re sexist scum.
You know what else is an epidemic? Violence against women and girls
Men and boys are victims of violence at an order of magnitude greater frequency, you just don’t care because you hate males, so only female suffering bothers you.
Misandry isn’t a problem compared to misogyny, and likely wouldn’t exist if there was no misogyny
This is what peak anti-male sexism looks like.
“Who cares?” Yeah, not your pathetic, empathy-free ass, you’ve made that abundantly clear.
For shame.
need a large gender affirming car
???
This is a projection of your own brainrot sexism, nothing more.
Don’t try to make it sound like you ever mocked a woman for having a large car, either, you’re not fooling anyone with “people”, lol.
The US’s incredible levels of prosperity back then was essentially a unique period of time created by extremely specific circumstances (i.e. the US was THE superpower, and the primary economic force on the planet for decades). There’s a reason the ‘baby boom’ happened then. It was literally a unique slice of world history.
It is unrealistic to expect to ever return to that level. Comparisons between now and then are all disingenuous for that reason.
Instead of framing the changes we want to make in terms of ‘but we had X back then’, they should simply be framed in terms of what improvements are beneficial, feasible, and sustainable, in the present.