I imagine a lot of the stupid people who voted for right wing policies, and are then hurt by them, won’t connect those dots
Part of being stupid is the inability to look at facts and draw a reasonable conclusion.
Someone might look at “we cut funding for the town, and now the library sucks” and realize there’s a connection. An idiot might instead say “it’s the black people’s fault”
I really want to drive that home. Some people are stupid. They look at the world and draw bad conclusions. I don’t know how to fix that.
It already is. For instance, the majority of rural texas’s access to natal care, cardiology, and a few other of the major medical practices is in the same rank as places in central america. It’s not just texas either.
It’s been hurting them a long long time. But they’ve got that crab mentality. They believe things can’t be better. But as long as they can make someone hurt worse than they believe they are. They’re happy.
It doesn’t directly state it, but religion has a system of rules behind it, and rigid rules are themselves attractive to a certain authoritarian mindset. Doesn’t matter if they make sense; the rules are an end unto themselves.
I need somebody to help me find a blue state where I can afford a 4 bedroom 2400 sf home.
I’m at twice the median income in my city and my house cost 280k built in 2020. Not to mention interest these days really kill the possibility of moving when I got a 2.75% interest rate and no PMI.
I am a bit curious where the balance is for how much shit you’ll put up with if it means a lower cost of living (or bigger/cheaper home, anyway). I’m personally of the stance I will pay (or give up) a significant amount of money to live in a good, mostly sane place.
It’s obviously a balancing act. Nobody will give up all their money to have marginally better emotional safety. But where is the line? How much better do things have to be in a different place (or how much worse in your current place) to accept, say, a small apartment that costs a solid third of your income? Or inversely, would you put up with a Gilead situation if you got a sprawling mansion out of it?
Thanks for the try but I’ve had a 35 year old house the energy consumption difference and upkeep cost is astounding compared to my current new build.
But yea I don’t think I’ve considered NE I’ve been everywhere else. I think that’s also fairly safe climate change wise? Or maybe it was a specific state according to pbs eons.
35 isn’t old for a house. It’s a one-time insulation upgrade. Maybe new appliances and lights, but other than that I don’t see a problem? Idk. I don’t own a home because I make less than the median income and homes start at 800k here ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Not trying to be antagonistic, just stating my situation as a vent :)
I really am interested in knowing the details of why a 35 year old house is a no-go for you.
I would argue that not caring about politics disqualifies you from being smart in a general sense. (obviously this depends on how one defines “smart”, which is a whole topic)
The problem is just because you’re smart enough to realize this doesn’t mean you have the money to move
.
I imagine a lot of the stupid people who voted for right wing policies, and are then hurt by them, won’t connect those dots
Part of being stupid is the inability to look at facts and draw a reasonable conclusion.
Someone might look at “we cut funding for the town, and now the library sucks” and realize there’s a connection. An idiot might instead say “it’s the black people’s fault”
I really want to drive that home. Some people are stupid. They look at the world and draw bad conclusions. I don’t know how to fix that.
.
You say that as if they aren’t taking the rest of us down with them.
.
Well lead did a pretty big number on a certain generation that has been in power for quite some time, and you actually can’t fix that.
It already is. For instance, the majority of rural texas’s access to natal care, cardiology, and a few other of the major medical practices is in the same rank as places in central america. It’s not just texas either.
It’s been hurting them a long long time. But they’ve got that crab mentality. They believe things can’t be better. But as long as they can make someone hurt worse than they believe they are. They’re happy.
Facts. Never doubt these peoples ability to withstand suffering, as long as it makes it worse for the ‘other’.
It’s sublime and sad and sadistic at the same time. They’ll cut off their own nose to spite your face.
I’ve been unable to find where in the bible this attitude stems from other than a misattributed ‘trials and tribulations’ vibe.
It doesn’t directly state it, but religion has a system of rules behind it, and rigid rules are themselves attractive to a certain authoritarian mindset. Doesn’t matter if they make sense; the rules are an end unto themselves.
That same mindset tends to not apply that to themselves either, being quick to abandon all norms, decorum or decency to attain or retain power.
And then the historical editing comes down heavy handed
He who controls the present controls the past
I need somebody to help me find a blue state where I can afford a 4 bedroom 2400 sf home.
I’m at twice the median income in my city and my house cost 280k built in 2020. Not to mention interest these days really kill the possibility of moving when I got a 2.75% interest rate and no PMI.
stares at you in Australian
hysterical laughter
I am a bit curious where the balance is for how much shit you’ll put up with if it means a lower cost of living (or bigger/cheaper home, anyway). I’m personally of the stance I will pay (or give up) a significant amount of money to live in a good, mostly sane place.
It’s obviously a balancing act. Nobody will give up all their money to have marginally better emotional safety. But where is the line? How much better do things have to be in a different place (or how much worse in your current place) to accept, say, a small apartment that costs a solid third of your income? Or inversely, would you put up with a Gilead situation if you got a sprawling mansion out of it?
.
Thanks for the try but I’ve had a 35 year old house the energy consumption difference and upkeep cost is astounding compared to my current new build.
But yea I don’t think I’ve considered NE I’ve been everywhere else. I think that’s also fairly safe climate change wise? Or maybe it was a specific state according to pbs eons.
35 isn’t old for a house. It’s a one-time insulation upgrade. Maybe new appliances and lights, but other than that I don’t see a problem? Idk. I don’t own a home because I make less than the median income and homes start at 800k here ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Not trying to be antagonistic, just stating my situation as a vent :)
I really am interested in knowing the details of why a 35 year old house is a no-go for you.
Same boat here.
or, some smart people don’t care about politics. sadly most people also don’t care about politics
I would argue that not caring about politics disqualifies you from being smart in a general sense. (obviously this depends on how one defines “smart”, which is a whole topic)