I don’t know that there are many white capitalists in South Africa who deserve their money more than any black individual living there

Thank you for the clarification.

In what sense is he correct? It’s not because he’s not black, you’ve just cited the workaround—and it’s not like he’s a guy who takes a principled stand against nepotism. The idea of the state taking partial ownership of a company that is operating in their country also doesn’t give me too much pause, free trade is extractive—and I’m simply not sure that Elon Musk deserves that money more than someone in the South African government, lol

Thankfully the people in charge of deciding whether your actions are performative or not have great judgment

Yeah that’s a great counterpoint if the entire world spoke Esperanto but languages still exist so

Yeah it’s funny the nostalgia that gets attached to the old sponsor. But I think it’s because you forget the company. Nobody gives a shit about Sears anymore so I think it’s one of the best examples. It’s just what people call it, and refusing the new name isn’t defending Sears’ honor, it’s taking a stand and claiming practical ownership over something in your community. It’s eschewing the idea that someone’s virtual monetary exchange that’s represented on a couple of spreadsheets and in a bunch of advertisements news articles somehow matters more than what the actual people call something

Firing someone after they notify you of an inability to be present is bad, and there are many cases where it’s illegal, such as in the U.S. when FMLA paperwork exists. We’re not discussing that, nor are we discussing how a real manager reassigns mission critical work and doesn’t blog about hirings and firings. No—we’re discussing whether it’s hypocritical. I disagree with your usage of the word “most”. I truly do not believe that most workplaces are one person away from missing an important deadline. Most workplaces I’ve experienced get over it extremely quickly, but that is just as anecdotal as your workplace experience.

If we assume most workplaces are exactly like your hypothetical workplace, which is to say, happy to let someone go despite how long hiring someone new will take, then these workplaces are still usually not up against the wall when it comes to someone taking time off; they instead spend most time in a state of not caring whether or not they have full staffing, which means taking time off shouldn’t be an issue for most of the year. So again, in a world where every workplace is understaffed and hyper focused on deadlines, the mathematical odds are that this action was still hypocritical.

But those are just odds! I could be wrong. This person who publicly posts about workplace drama and fronting may also also be a very fair and judicious person. Maybe they just care so much about their clients.

Because they’re likely hypocritical. Most workplaces are not on the brink of collapse one week due to one person calling out and yet capable of handling their absence for the next few months.

And I’m being a tad more pedantic pointing out that “they are no hypocrite” and “they are not a hypocrite necessarily” are not the same statement, that one of them is baseless, and that you lead with the baseless one.

They are no hypocrite for firing them assuming your fantasy scenario is reality

Okay, so again, no new machine learning ever, unless you can prove it’s done without environmental impact or affecting peoples’ right to a dignified existence. That’s the wrong righted. That’s what you’re advocating. Am I misunderstanding?

Sure, if we presuppose that credit cards exist as a way for a middleman company to make a huge profit and pay their CEO tens of millions of dollars annually. If we instead consider them a regulatable utility, the necessary rates for viable operation go pretty far down. The business model of “convenience is free or even costs less than cash for those who already have plenty, and this convenience is funded by the destitute who are being held down by the exact same people” is also suspect to begin with, and I’d rather DiSrUpT tHe EcOnOmY than remain complicit, which I am

Hey, you drew the comparison. The whole world of corrupt US politicians to choose from. Don’t like the conclusion people draw when they read exactly what you’ve written? Just write something else lol

Yes, the second most pressing concern in everyone’s lives after a second Trump term—Nancy Pelosi’s husband

The Nuremberg Trials are a great example of how you don’t hang if you provide enough value to the military-industrial complex, and a terrible example of full stop no excuses. Seems ill suited to be a foundation for a moral philosophy.

https://www.newschannel10.com/2024/09/26/tulia-family-displaced-after-home-suffers-substantial-damage-storm/

why

Well, you could count the trees on the right and find a way to fit them in between the houses on the left.

Would start by looking up how plants interact with each other and with mycelial networks—monocropping deprives the farm of an important support network, and the soil and plants’ subsequent underperformance leads to unsustainable use of pesticides, additional water supply etc. to compensate. Monocropping to simplify the field layout and crop gathering makes plenty of intuitive sense, as does cutting down all your trees so you can plant more crops. It’s also not a good long-term plan to treat these unfathomably complex systems that have evolved over millennia as something we’re going to improve using our intuition.

Sure, because you’d realize the developed world’s wealth comes from exploitation and that you don’t actually want to give it back

??? Maybe Bernie’s supporters cared about his policies more than his lack of dad charisma lmao