You have misunderstood what I wrote. I said nothing about an employee purchasing a flag, I said that they would not be permitted to raise one, as they are a resource that is paid for by the act.
I think it’s “asinine and childish” to be so rude, especially when it’s you that has made the mistake.
Right, but the public employee is being paid for by the funds that are covered by the act. Therefore if an employee raises the flag, funds are being used to display a non-state flag.
Edit: To be clear, I have not suggested that an employee of the state wouldn’t be allowed to purchase a flag. The way I read the act, an employee would not be allowed to raise a flag because they themselves are a resource paid for by the act.
I would think that the “or display” part prohibits a public employee from raising the flag.
Thanks for the reply! I think I’m going to pull the trigger on the white one as well. Can’t wait!
Which color did you get, and how do you like it? I’m really leaning towards this option.
Yeah I’m getting the sense that it’ll be a good choice, I just think they’re hideous.
Will do, thanks!
I think it’s unfortunate that you’re being so hostile. It was an interesting point and very good sources that you brought to the discussion. But you’ve decided to play the "you’re all ‘autists’ " card.
I disagree. The connotation and literal meaning of the phrase “doing better than”, combined with the comment on social circles indicates that they’re trying to suggest the poor are somehow doing well, whatever that means.
That’s how I read it, anyway. And I think that’s why they’re getting down voted as well.
I think the wording in your original comment is pretty misguided. Nowhere does it say the poor are “doing better than” the wealthy. They just had the strongest short-term wage growth since covid. This does not equate to prosperity. Perhaps it is you that has the restrictive social circle.
Ah yes, okay I see what you’re saying. I think I’m very fortunate to have a couple of friends who care about media the way that I do, and we know each other’s tastes and take recommendations seriously. I have a lot of other friends that are absolutely not like that, so I guess it’s an individual sorta thing ya know.
Yeah I just don’t take it personally. I get what it’s like, people have their tastes and aren’t necessarily quick to try something on a recommendation. Honestly I don’t think it’s something you can really expect of people, and certainly it shouldn’t be so transactional.
Quite some years ago I offhandedly recommended a band to a friend, and like a week later she texted me thanking me for the recommendation, and gave me her thoughts. I thought that was really cool of her, because it’s all too common that recommendations are ignored. I decided then that I would do my best to actually follow up on recommendations from friends and then try to let them know what I thought. It’s a practice that’s generally very well received.
I also then decided to be more honest about whether or not I actually will check something out. For example, I don’t really listen to podcasts so I’m pretty upfront with people that it’s not likely I’ll listen to whatever they recommend. I think it’s had a ripple effect of generally being more honest in my relationships, which has been transformative. I highly recommend it.
This is cultural. Some cultures really do not care about nudity the way others do
This is some really high quality reading and critical thinking. I appreciate your write up as well as your identification of and attention to nuance.
Looks like you best get to switching.
I read the article. It was entertaining, and there’s definitely a lot of truth in what they write, but I found the whole thing to be, very ironically, over simplified. I think what bothers me the most is the author assumes/implies that human empathy does not extend beyond our line of sight. As if it’s impossible for me to be considerate towards people I don’t know. Which is complete bullshit. Their arguments seem to assume that a general sense of morality does not exist amongst people.
I, personally, believe that most people are good and value being good. Certainly there are plenty that do not, but I believe they are the minorty. Fortunately my gripes with the article don’t really discount the main point being made, it just suggests that things aren’t as simple as the author tried to make it seem.
What formula are you using? And where did 25 come from? 2023-1997 = 26 and (26 / 36) x 100 = 72.2
Edit: nevermind, I see you were estimating the mom’s age. My bad, all is well.
deleted by creator