Ehhh, you were judging the money left over after taxes. Not factoring in FICA is a mistake there. My FICA taxes are about $20k a year. That's uhhh, not nothing.

So do I. I'm not complaining about my taxes at all.

However, it is a mistake to think that people in that income bracket pay an 18% effective tax rate on their actual income, unless there is a huge amount of long term capital gains income. No matter how you swing it- FICA counts.
Hell, one could argue it's among the most important contributions of the well-to-do.

Hatred? How does condescension require hatred?
Hatred requires energy. Dismissing you as a malformed semi-sentient pond scum is free.

My profanity makes me a creep? lol

I like my language like I like my food- spicy as fuck.
You're a real meat and potatoes motherfucker, and there's the whole problem with spicy food being enjoyed by brown people, so I'm unsurprised it's not to your palate's liking.

I'll take a foul mouth over your bizarre attempts at trying to categorize women as depressed because of their freedom any day, you fucking creep.

ME? Victim? lol
Never in my life.
But you motherfuckers with your War on Christmas, War on Christianity, War on Families? You're the biggest fucking professional victims alive. You're ever fucking bit as lame as the victims you mock. At least they're victims in the minority. You sad fuckers are victims in the majority.

Nice.
Can we seriously at least not agree that we shouldn't be trying to prove points with fucking political think tank "research"?

The original cited study doesn't not support the author's argument in the slightest, it in fact states that increase in depression among liberal women corresponded with the backslide of the US into large backslides in policies they cared about being undone by the election of Donald Trump.

i.e., to answer the question being asked, Why So Blue: Liberal Women are Less Happy, More Lonely. But Why? The answer is because misogynist pieces of shit have gained renewed political power at their expense. Next stupid fucking question.

Seriously, you're such a fucking creep.

Being ashamed of its behavior is different than being unhappy.

I'm quite happy, and also quite ashamed.

I can use my phone or my watch. Only have 1 wallet.
Good thing it can't be lost/stolen/damaged.

What the fuck struck you as intelligent about the comment you made?

I use my phone, or my watch. I never have to get it from my wallet. It's vastly easier to use NFC. Literally tap my wrist against it, neat dinging noise, done.

I don't know what shit-for-brains moderated you insightful, but you're not.
The very fact that NFC payment methods are easier is exactly what is driving them.

Are you stupid, or trying to manipulate the direction of the argument?
Slavery was a legal practice in the US. Gassing several million people and starting a war that led to 50m some-odd death was not.
One of these is relevant to the discussion at hand (your equation of US law with right and wrong), the other is not.

Indeed. You're poor in the "able to buy laws department", but literally millions of people are not.
Guilt didn't apply to this particular line of responses. You're getting confused, I think. Or we're back to you trying to be manipulative.

Nobody was indicting the system. It was your indifference that was indicted.
I'm beginning to think you just aren't a very intelligent person.

Why would I ask my doctor about anxiolytics, because some dumb fuck on the internet thinks that anything legal is a-ok.

Life expectancy is a misleading thing to lump into one metric.
Life expectancy in the US is complicated. For the top quartile, it far exceeds Canada's. For the middle 2, it's about the same. For the bottom, it's considerably less.

Funny enough, CA also has this distribution.
Basically, whether in the US, or CA, your life expectancy is tied to your wealth.
Where CA excels, is that its bottom rung of the latter isn't quite as destitute as the US' bottom rung of the ladder.
However, pretending like that means the 89% of the US that isn't on the bottom rung don't have excellent life expectancy is bullshit.

Royal Assent hasn't been withheld since the early 18th century.
If the monarch were to do it, there would promptly no longer be a monarch.
The monarch's powers are only wielded upon request of Parliament in modern constitutional monarchies, and parliamentary primacy has been established in the Westminster system since the Glorious Revolution. i.e., Parliament can vote for the King to no longer be a King.

I don't think so. I think they're just pointing out that everyone TACOs under pressure.

CA did, indeed, overplay its hand. It predictably pulled it back when they found out that Trump is more than willing cause some harm to the US economy to utterly fucking devastate people who piss him off.

Make no mistake, economically speaking, CA needs the US far more than the US needs CA.
They didn't "do the same thing back to him to show that they could do it".
Trump is afraid of domestic pressure. CA is afraid of becoming a third-world country.

Trump is a fucking moron, and I love CA and the Canadians, but come the fuck on. Get real.
You're doing the same thing the Trumptards are doing- pretending CA getting slapped was really some 4D chess move on their part.

As someone who makes ~30% less than that, my effective rate is far above 18% if we include FICA (~30%), and about 20% if we don't.

Yes, I understand the utility.
But the fact is, all the safe code in the Rust universe* uses std::, which is absolutely *full* of unsafe { } code.
Your particular rust application may be perfectly safe. But if it uses a std:: method, it simply is not. "When the unsafe code has no bugs" is just as fucking absurd as the claim that C code can be written without bugs.

No, it's not just that. It's also done for performance. In the case of std::Vec, it's done to skip the bounds checks.

I understand why unsafe { } blocks exist. But the fact is, if you use them, your entire application is tainted.
This is a problem that Rust doesn't acknowledge in its attempt at replacing everything applications using a standard library absolutely riddled with unsafe code, and thousands of man-years less auditing of its code.

Rust the language is memory safe. Rust the runtime is not, and if you use it, your application isn't either.

No, there aren't. There are judges for legal and illegal.
Slavery was quite legal. Would you have sanctioned it on that grounds, or fought to abolish it because it was wrong?

That's because relatively speaking, you're poor.

And yet, when I said it is your place to judge when people are being hurt, you said:

Your moral relativism is fucking repugnant.

Actually, scratch that. Still sitting at +4.

We were discussing this comment, here
Where poster implies that "it's the economy that's destroying the environment", and that "it's the 1% imposing their own governance on their own assets".
This is of course pure-fucking-poppycock.

It's a problem of energy policy and insane externalized cost structures.

Indeed, not all of them. We'll see what the final accounting is, though.