![](https://lemmy.sdf.org/pictrs/image/a07f1f47-9cf6-4d29-8c11-4f03aa52d62b.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/db7182d9-181a-45e1-b0aa-6768f144911a.jpeg)
I’d rather not, but I know this is a thing, albeit not for me.
I’d rather not, but I know this is a thing, albeit not for me.
My state does not recognize it.
I was married, later divorced, and am now in a position where I’ve been in a committed relationship for more than 10 years, but we aren’t married.
The benefits are clear and pushed onto us: I can’t share health care with my partner if we aren’t married. The system is rigged to make people in relationships eventually get married.
Sounds like a good life lesson about not saying things you don’t want others to hear.
Then they can’t claim to be the party of law and order anymore.
Unfortunately they won’t need to. They’ve been playing a different game than the rest of us.
Whew, I’m glad someone is blasting here. I can’t imagine a world where someone doesn’t get put on blast for their actions.
What did we do before judges and anyone with authority learned to blast people like this? Must have been even crazier before all this blasting. A true world without consequences.
And the employers are actually already breaking the law for employing such people. It shouldn’t be going beyond that, and yet we never see politicians making that point, because it’s apparently a no-no to call out corporations for their actions at this point in American history.
Edit: and also, at least in the case of who I was talking about, they’d never suggest wages were too low across the board. They’re secure in their scapegoat. We aren’t really disagreeing, I don’t think, but this issue runs deeper because there are ideologies at play that do not adhere to logic.
A former friend of mine was heavy into the right wing and worked construction (surprising, I know). He was always complaining about “illegals taking jobs” and how he thought the work they did wasn’t good anyway.
One day, I asked him: why doesn’t your company stop hiring these people you hate? He said it’s because then they wouldn’t have enough people. Naturally, this is a contradiction. It didn’t matter, of course. His whole personality was built on hating these people.
I think it is that way with a lot of folks. If we penalize employers (like we should, because, you know, the law), then these people can’t hate as effectively. That means they might start voting differently.
Not an internet thing at all. The writing has been on the wall for years about right wing politics in the US. Since long before the internet.
Keeping birth rates high is hugely important for capitalism to maintain its endless growth of wealth.
And 6 free months of “identity protection” which is actually just a total farce.
Ah, I meant agreed that it was “forward thinking”. I suppose I should have been clearer about that. 100% it is typical GOP process.
There’s that classic GOP forward thinking.
/s just in case anyone sees this comment and actually agrees. Be better.
$150k a year now is the equivalent of $80k ish a year in 2000.
The point is the change in buying power. $80k per year now is equivalent to $45k per year in 2000.
To make what would have been $80k per year in 2000, you would need to make $150k per year now.
But in 2000, it is also very likely you could have bought a house on that salary of $80k per year. The equivalent $150k per year now may not even do that, depending on your state. In some sense, to be “well-off” (which is poorly defined, but let’s say: enough to comfortably afford a home) is likely more around $200k per year now. The baseline has changed, so even though $100k may sound like a lot, it isn’t what “six figures” used to mean in the context of salary. It is the equivalent baseline of about $50k per year in 2000.
And, the definition of well-off is a moving target. $150k a year now is the equivalent of $80k ish a year in 2000. That was a middle-class income then, but $100k+ now is seen as well-off by a lot of people.
It’s more well-off than many, but it isn’t what well-off used to mean. Outside of the super rich, everyone now gets fucked in their own way.
In general, Parliament/Funkadelic has a ton of artists within its scope worth exploring. George Clinton is probably the most famous among them, but there’s also Eddie Hazel, Bootsy Collins, Gary Shider and his son Garrett Shider, Fred Wesley, and a lot more.
I also recently discovered a Japanese artist called Masaki Ueda who seems criminally unknown.
Literally a worry of most people in the country every day.
It’s always projection.
Lol ok, Target
We all do, Joe. That doesn’t really change anything.