!lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world

Maybe n Roblox. I haven’t bothered trying the games, but I know Adopt Me started as something like that.

It has to be given, otherwise there would be infinitely many solutions.

You would need some other information to link the line segment X to the rest of the figure.

It’s always going to be more difficult challenging the “winning” strategy.

Democrats seem to be more open to change and internal democracy.

Whatever shed of ideology is left in either party is also pointed in different directions. Roughly described, the ideologies are (supposed to be) that left wing is taking ideas from the masses and sending them upwards through democratic elections, while right wing only accepts top down decision making. Seeing the many “Trump regret” clips, it’s pretty clear that his policies did not originate from his voter base.

Another case of point is when politicians flip flop and change party. Democrats allow right wing politicians to infiltrate their party dragging them to the right, whereas you don’t see someone like Bernie Sanders joining GOP to drag them towards social democracy.

… that is why you need to join and elect other politicians.

I’m not American but I will promise to support you if it comes to that.

The workers unionisation in my country against land owners in the 1800s would not have succeeded without international support. I’d gladly chip in for anyone attempting to do the same.

So…if that’s your only option… when are you going to start a revolution?

I’ve seen a lot of similar comments lately. People wanting to start 3rd parties etc, because the Democrats suck so bad.

Yes, it’s true. They suck, but if you’re going to beat the Republicans, you’ll need to look at what Trump did. He didn’t start a 3rd party. No, he took the existing party and changed it into whatever the fuck it is now.

You need to change the democratic party from within too, because 3rd parties will always lose because of the first past the post. 3rd parties also have a tendency to branch out, because quite frankly, not being Democrat or Republican isn’t enough of a politic in itself, and you guys don’t get along well on anything else. The Republicans had this issue for a long time until Trump came along providing them with something that united their voters more than the previous politic of simply being not Democrats.

The democratic party already has a framework for running politics and they actually have some kind of democracy within that allows people to change it. Yeah, it will require a lot of work to get enough people engaged in politics to make the change, but it is absolutely much less than what is required to start a successful 3rd party.

That’s basically the answer to the opposite question: what is something that someone thinks isn’t obsolete, but really is?

Do his farts smell the same as mine? Then no, sorry dude you’ve gotta go live somewhere else.

Ask for assistance. It’s a great conversation starter.

Never heard them before either, but as soon as I did, I immediately knew that this would be on the Nettwerk label. In my book that’s a mark of quality.

Math is off.

He makes 30% more than her. If she makes 100, he makes 130. The total income is 230.

Her income is 43% of that (100/230) and his is 57% (130/230).

Why does it have to be static in the first place? Why not just let them contribute what they can, when they can, since the money’s not tight?

Who is to decide when and what they can pay then?

It’s also as much about determining the disposable income. If she has a different opinion on what is reasonable to spend on other things that could easily become a can of worms.

“This is what you need to contribute to the household, whatever you do with the rest of your money is not my issue” is much better than: “Hey, I know you’re low on cash but maybe if you cut back on lattes, avocado toast, gambling, booze and cigarettes, we would be able to pay the bills.”

In reality, the fixed amount isn’t very fixed anyway. If one part can’t pay, it’s still unlikely that the partner would kick them out. But as long as money isn’t that tight, it’s simply better to allocate a fixed amount to the household, so the money isn’t disposable for random spending, so they don’t risk overspending or increasing expensive habits.

This isn’t just to curb the costs, but also to avoid the situation in which one part becomes financially dependent on the other, which is also a recipe for disaster for both parts.

I prefer not having a meaning of life.

Imagine having a real purpose. Then the question would still be “why”, but you’d also have that obligation to do.

don’t force open, hit “cancel” or whatever

I don’t think the timer on the microwave at my job has ever been reset. People just push the “start+30” button and jank it open when they’re bored of waiting. It never reaches zero and nobody presses stop.

I never click them anyway. If the meme isn’t wild enough to get pixelated into a shitpost gif then I don’t need to see it. Not once in my lifetime have I ever clicked a Twitter/Facebook/Instagram link and thought that the click was worth it.

In Denmark it happened rather quickly and less than 200 years ago. Soo many things happened in the late 1800s after the abandonment of absolute monarchy in 1849, that I’m not going to pretend that I can explain it all in a comment.

So… while Denmark has a long history with vikings and kings and stuff, our constitution is relatively new and written around the same time as Karl Marx and the industrial revolution redefining what work is.

If you ever get around Copenhagen, the workers museum is well worth a visit for an insight into the specific events that lead to the democratic socialist government. It was a long hard process and tightly tied to the history of worker’s unions.

Very briefly told, it was a worldwide class war. The events in Scandinavia were heavily influenced by the “bloody week” in Paris in 1871 and the establishment of the world wide organisation First International.

It culminated in a several months long lock out in 1899, which eventually gave workers the right to organize for collective agreements. This was only made possible with support from workers from all over the world.

One of the most amazing things about it was how they even managed to organize anyone at all in a time where all workers were dirt poor and only the owning class had any freedom and income at all. The founders of the first unions realized that it would be an uphill battle and were brutally honest about it. They told workers “It might take several generations to succeed, but it needs to be done, so that your grand children will have a chance for a better life.”, and yet they managed to organize almost everyone.

It succeeded though and also much faster. One of the three founders of the socialist democratic party lived long enough to see it become the largest political party in the country in 1924 - a position it held until 2001.

It’s about the half flags isn’t it?