How to say you are not a cat owner without saying you are not a cat owner.

They won’t arrest anyone. If they do, everything about this whole process will be subpoenaed and plastered in public for all to see.

You oversimplified. The problem is not empathy on it’s own, but that’s how you worded it. The problem is life is fucked up.

We also see that rural crime is undercounted, underreported. Many studies show that (sometimes) rural areas have more crime. Of course it varies by time and location and depends how you define everything.

Everyone understands that in life compromises may be necessary, but I’m worried that you’re representing a position that already failed. If you’re trying to say, hey, these people should have voted for Kamala Harris, then my response is that Kamala Harris should have learned. From Hillary Clinton. If the candidate is that bad, they are going to lose votes, and it is 100% their fault. If you’re running a failed campaign for the second time, you deserve what you get.

And it’s tempting to blame the stay home people or the third party voters, but the numbers show that if Harris had taken a stance against genocide, she might have won the election. Obviously we’ll never know because there’s no way to actually measure that policy change other than doing it, but it sure would have been exciting to find out.

I think this is incredibly obvious, but somehow people keep pretending it’s not clear… It is possible for a candidate to have left-wing values, to express them openly, to want things that are better for the average worker like strict labor laws or increased unions or real environmental regulation or anti-monopoly regulation or anti-billionaire regulation, a candidate can have clear views on those issues and still be in a position where they need to make compromises on specific legislation. The voters understand that, the voters are generally amenable to that. But many voters are 100% opposed to candidates that don’t have any values to begin with. Because we know these valueless candidates are worthless pieces of shit. They are guaranteed to give us nothing because they believe in nothing.

That is asking the wrong question. The question is what readers will want to read.

"Hold hands and say it like me

The most shady, Frankie baby, fantastic

Graphic, tryin to make dough, like Jurassic

Park did quick to spark kids who start shit"

-Biggie

And since a grad school thesis isn’t published, there’s definitely no restrictions on the author sharing it. Maybe it’ll get a few citations in the future. Not many, of course, but anything more than zero is nice.

Don’t kid yourself. Rich Democrats love dirty cops.

Not exactly. The mass pig expansion program across the country in the 1990s was spearheaded by Bill Clinton. The pro pig Dems are just as actively racist and murderous as the pro pig Reps.

Right … except for all of the poor Boomers out there … let’s just forget about them. Let’s forget about all the Boomers who tried very hard to stop the wealth shift to the rich. They don’t count; they don’t exist.

You decided to blame the old people instead of … checks notes … the rich people. That was a bizarre choice. Meh.

I would qualify your first point. Parkinson’s Law tells us that we have pointless bosses in huge numbers, and they need to justify their own existence. The people who actually produce things, everyone can see if they’re working or not by looking at the output. But their supervisors, and especially their supervisors’ supervisors, those people are desperate to make themselves relevant, to justify their pointlessly-large salaries despite a complete lack of utility.

It’s certainly true that the system is broken, but at the same time you’re suggesting we should forgive HR employees for the bad stuff they do, and I don’t think that’s how morality works.

Not only that, we all understand that sometimes employees don’t have control of a situation and they’re going to follow company policy or go along with their bosses. But we can see through their words and their body language how they feel about it, and we can recognize small actions that they could take to make a bad situation slightly less bad. In my experience it’s very rare that you will encounter such behavior in HR, because the vast majority of HR workers are perfectly happy to f*** us over as much as they can.

Last year I was talking with a veteran coworker who was worried about where the company was going to end up in 10 years, but my contract ends in a year and will not be renewed. I told her openly, they’re not paying me to think about 10 years from now, they’re paying me to make the next year a good year, and I don’t really care about the long-term future cuz I won’t be here. She was furious, but she wasn’t furious enough to go get me a long-term contract. I think she never saw the hypocrisy; even today she still thinks that I’m a bad worker.

I think you’re trying to make a pretty s***** implication. Remember that this is a situation where the parents got charged with a crime for being reckless. Are you insinuating that the parents knew that their 7 year old child was likely to jump out into the street, and that perhaps the child had a history of doing so, and that the parents nevertheless allowed the child to walk home from the store? It sounds like that’s what you’re claiming.