Consept

I wish I was joking about that, wasn't even a big hole lol. Thanks for the sheet though I'll check it out

It seems important though, because getting taxed compared getting your tax back at the end year are definitely 2 different things. You could make the argument that they shouldnt do it that way but thats a different argument. Also it would make more sense to me to pay a living wage rather than not tax, the problem isnt that the tax is too much its more that non-skilled jobs are paid so low

She can be although im not really a push over, hence the clashes. She has clashed with other as well, im generally more laid back. Shes from Latin America (Colombia) which is predominately blue and yes its like she looks out for things that are not perfect, its funny cos its almost like she never enjoys the perfection because shes always worrying about the next thing she has to do. Im always trying to get her to be in the moment. Ill look into the sedona method, ive heard about it but dont know much about it. This is true, sometimes i do feel like i need validation, its something i really need to work on. I know how to show i dont need it but internally sometimes it claws at me, i have improved but its a process. The socks thing i was more annoyed that she would be so angry about something i didnt think was important in the slightest. We had a discussion after that and thats when she told me about her mums high standard etc, so i can understand that culture and why she may be like that, but it still does trigger me when its in full force. Yeah she is tbf, but i think if i was to stay long term it would still be a problem, sometimes i think maybe its a good test for me to stay in presence, because when i am things are a lot easier and she can be really cool to hang out with, obviously focusing on the negatives here. We are definitely on different levels, but then it is tricky finding someone i can truly relate to. Yes definitely true, i think that is how she works in general though she tends to be a bit of a worrier and focuses on the avoiding fearful things so i guess this would extend to me lol. But also i do tend to focus on it, usually if im not feeling good and i cant just laugh it off, or she does it multiple times in quick succession. One of the best times i had with her was actually in lockdown because she felt completely free, didnt have to worry about work, had loads of time etc. I take your points though, i know its me focusing on it that makes it seem worse, so i have to work on that and open myself up, even if we stop speaking or whatever its still something i would want to bring into different relationships.

Thanks for your response x. Im definitely not perfect, im under no illusion about that, but none of us are and i think we're always works in progress. I feel a lot of compassion for her because a lot of these behaviors are automatic, through her very blue upbringing and now (i would say) shes in orange, shes very hardworking and achievement orientated, which is a positive for her, its just when she puts that on other people, mainly me, i think it causes problems. I, as you say to do, try and bring out the best in her which she recognises but i think she feels frustration in that she cant do the same for me, she wants to hence the nagging but the method is not great, she knows and she says in this respect she wants to be more like me (probably the only aspect of me she wants to be like lol). I have told her many times how it makes me feel etc and i feel like the intention is there to not do it so much, but at this point it just seems so hard wired in her, and she is probably even harsher on herself, which is why ive been encouraging her with meditation etc.

I'm not an expert on US tax but in the UK we get a personal tax allowance of upto £12500 where you don't pay any tax if you earn under that amount. I think the US have something similar. I know there are deductions for certain things, so I don't think it's as simple as just they take 23%. Your overall point that Amazon and other companies should pay more tax is definitely true, but they need to adjust the system and not allow tax loopholes. Problem is companies will do anything within legality to avoid paying tax, so if they can get away with it in any country they'll go to that country, so it becomes a balancing act for governments if they want to keep big businesses.

Its a similar structure but obviously living conditions, human rights (at least in the west) have vastly improved. Also if you are entrepreneurial you have the opportunity to start your own business and exploit others. If youre smart you can get a higher paying job as well, so long as youre providing a lot of value to your employer. But regardless its still a vertical structure where those at the top make money from the work of those at the bottom, whats clever about today is that most people will have hope that if they work hard enough theyll be higher up the food chain one day. There are some that say in the days of peasants they were actually happier because they didnt have the false belief that anyone can be at the same level of the rich, so they embraced their identity as peasants and had a disdain for the rich people. In modern day the notion that anyone can 'make it' means that wherever you are its your doing, even if you work as hard as possible if only you worked harder youd be better off. This culture is more prevalent in the States, which is why the have the worst benefits (least holiday, maternity etc). A true evolution would be a more flat structure where the workers would have more say and have a share in the company, it would be a move toward socialism, until then we havent really evolved too much from the past.

I agree with you somewhat here. Another example is that in relationships men that abuse women usually do so predominantly physically, obviously because on average men are stronger than women so they use that to their advantage. But women can and do abuse men mentally and emotionally as they, on average have a higher EQ. So in both cases there is a potential power differential its just that a more rounded, empathetic person wont use that to take advantage but of course some do. The difference i believe is that domestic abuse is seen to be a male dominated thing and the idea of it is through physical dominance but according to the stats its much more closer, something like 40% of domestic abuse is by women. Because its seen to be male dominated you get things like much less refuges or help for men and also women can, if they are taking advantage of the man, use that to blame the man and its quite easy for them to be believed as is the case with Johnny Depp and Amber Heard. To me the domestic abuse problem isnt necessarily a gender issue its more people will use whatever tools they have if they want to manipulate and dominate someone.

But is it a good way to measure whether someone is better than another? like for example Floyd Mayweather might lose to an average heavyweight but does that make the heavyweight a better boxer?

Would be great but a mess for trump, look at the recent interviews with axiom and fox, imagine 4 hours of that. He works well with an audience where he's not pushed to hard on things

His point is that comparing men and women based on gender is arbitrary and you might as well use whatever metric.

What is God for you?

No im 35 and thinking about studying something, i dont think its ever too late honestly

Well what I mean is that youtube is so wide and varied but each channel is almost like a forum in of itself. For example if I went to a pro trump channel on YouTube and criticised him, I would be insulted and could get blocked from that channel. So there isn't absolute freedom of speech on YouTube. You can post most things yourself on your channel but you're not free to just say what you want on other channels as that's up to whoever owns the channel. So I would ask again, and it's a very important question because you maybe asking for something that is not really possible. Can you give me any examples of a forum where you can say whatever you want without being at risk of being kicked out or at least dismissed?

Specifically a forum though, as a video sharing site is so wide in scope its not really the same thing

Can you point to any examples of a completely free speech forum, that follows the criteria you've set out?

To further extend your analogy its like if someone goes on a bodybuilding forum and is really pro-cardio and thinks that those that disagree are pushing a body building narrative. Then if they are banned or no one agrees with them, they complain that alternative viewpoints are not allowed on this body building forum

What would be an acceptable way to you, to criticise Trump?

So do you think it should be completely free here where anyone can discuss anything?

Of course but there has to the understanding of why relative truth is different from actual truth. If you mistake relative truth for actual truth it plays out like what we see day to day. Just thinking about it though it must be so easy if you see your relative truth as ultimate truth

@sholomar would you say a lot of people on here are extreme left?

"I am the wisest man alive, for I know one thing, and that is that I know nothing." - Socrates (allegedly) @Jennjenn this is such an important insight that you've had. Really when you think about it to have a strong opinion or pick a side on anything is to block out probably most of the truth and then fight for your partial truth against someone else's partial truth, it's a kind of insanity. We do it because the human mind likes certainty, we hate not knowing and uncertainty so in the inevitable absence of certainty, we hold onto some story whether it's true or not is not important. So it's scary but embrace your not knowing it really frees your mind. Very good, if we're truly honest this is the answer to nearly all questions

Can I ask, is there a reason you don't want to out right say the evidence points to there being collusion with Trump and Russia? For example I'd have no problem saying that if a Dem majority senate panel confirmed collusion between Obama and Russia, its a matter of fact thing, but you seem very resistant to give a straight answer. What would actually satisfy you that there was collusion and in fact that's not really a good thing regardless of party?

You could give a clear answer if you focused on this question. It's not a trick question and I'm not talking about media or Democrats or anything else, I'm talking about a republican-majority senate panel that concluded there was collusion. It's very simple this panel (majority of which are trumps party) said something which I've summarised for you, do you disagree with it or do you agree with it? Try answering without talking about the other side, let's just focus on this side for now. Again I have no strong opinion, I'm not from the US, its just a question

I'd disagree, there's plenty of statistics that show more rehabilitation focused policies are very successful. This is about a prison in Norway - "Norway’s humane approach towards prisoners seems effective: only 20% prisoners are reconvicted within two years, almost half the rate of many US states, even though only hard cases—which are more likely to offend—are incarcerated to begin with. Amidst a global climate where the number of prisoners is steadily rising, the drop in both incarceration and re-offending rates in liberal European countries seemingly proves that a less prison-focused justice system is effective in reducing crime." Full story here if you're interested - https://www.prisonersabroad.org.uk/news/rehabilitation-not-recidivism-norways-success-in-keeping-re-offending-rates-low But yeah the stats and studies more often than not show the effect of rehabilitation focus is much better than punishment focus. A big issue of why governments don't switch is that sometimes to be elected you have to be seen as 'hard on crime', so it takes a more evolved country to have this focus.

Keep in mind im only playing devils advocate here so just presenting something to think about. Is there an argument for trans-age? ie legally changing your age if you look and feel younger. Trans-gender makes the claim that if you are born a man and feel like a woman from birth you should be accepted in society as one, I understand this argument as of course we all have different hormones and body make ups and its entirely plausible that someone could feel this way and this is backed up by a lot of scientific data with regards to gender dysphoria. I personally dont have a problem with accepting anyone as such, but if we switch it to age i dont think you are legally allowed to change your age and it definitely wouldnt be accepted by society. In theory there would be a better argument to be able to change your age, you could physically have the body of a younger or even older person. Its common enough that say a 50 year old has a body of the average 35 year old. Mentally someone could be younger as well, its possible to test brain age. Also someone could genuinely feel younger or older internally the same way a trans-gender might feel they are a different sex. What we might say is that gender feels more central to who someone is than age, which is fair enough. But in general we can make the argument that grouping people together by gender doesnt make sense anyway because everyone feels slightly different than each other. I think the joint experience comes from being treated as a male or female whilst growing up, in the same way black people have a shared experience of growing up in a society that perceives you a certain way, so if a white person then says they identify as black its hard to accept that as they didnt have a similar experience. So if you are trans-gender you would have had a very different experience than someone is the gender youre transitioning to, however your experience is valid in and of itself its just not the same as a cis-gendered person. Anyway hopefully i havent caused any offence with this post and if i have, apologies i just thought it was an interesting and slightly taboo subject. It was sparked when I came across these two videos below, one was of someone who wanted to legally change their age and was ridiculed and the other is of a cis-woman debating with a trans woman over whether she should be accepted by society as a woman, in this case the presenters were on the trans womans side. Relatively speaking theres no difference in the argument apart from how the debates were framed.