Propaganda rag signs propaganda agreement. Not surprising.

You know, I don’t normally do this, but hell, vindication is nice:

encourage more people to be gay

Ah. So your entire argument is based on debunked right-wing talking points.

1/10 trolling… or, $deity forbid this is a legit thing you think… in which case, go look at like ANY actual science around this subject in the past couple of decades.

Ignoring that we’re way, way off track from my criticism of your initial comment, it looks like we’re now into some random criticism of antifa being cooperative with Hitler?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antifa_(Germany)

That’s the closest I can find to your “quote” (wiki gives it as “After Hitler, our turn!”) Are you trying to do some kind of nihilistic “bOtH SIdEs” here, or am I missing your point?

If you’re trying to say that even the supposedly more left of Bernie source is complicit, just say that instead of your random comments.

I don’t know where you’re trying to go with this comment.

You complained people were down-voting something without knowing it was “left of Bernie”. I pointed out it used Trump admin data, which is… not “left of Bernie” (and frankly not to be believed under any circumstance without validation).

I do understand this is from Jacobin (if you ignore they republished it from some guy that hosts most of his stuff on substack).

I also understand that they unapologetically and uncritically used data from the fucking TRUMP ADMINISTRATION to “prove” their point.

Even if true, it requires so, soooo much independent verification before it could remotely be taken seriously, let alone used as a hit piece on the former admin. I’m not saying the Biden admin was great - but damn, does this smell suspicious.

I’m well aware the plural of “anecdote” isn’t “data”, but literally no dev I know (senior or otherwise) thinks this. Give me a junior work with - most of them at least actually learn.

Agreed.

Literally the comment that was removed. Weird how the modlog has your edited comment as your comment instead of your original one.

100% same. Over 40. US based. No one says “thick” here.

At this point, I’m being redundant, but:

To “send money to hamas” you need to actively do so. To “alllow her money to be sent to a corp that chooses to kill people” - that’s literally retirement in the US?

I’m literally not saying it’s a good thing but - not understanding the difference between these two is an impressive level of cognitive dissonance.

stop being thick.

Take your own advice. Most people do not look at the fucking stocks in their retirement portfolio.

Also, “stop being thick” - you’re not from the US, are you? Literally no one here uses that phrase. Maybe stop advocating violence like you did a few comments ago?

No. No you didn’t. NO ONE picks the damn stocks in their retirement account - not 100%.

You either don’t understand how retirement accounts work in the US or you don’t care.

You 100% ignored my response.

I said initially said to jail the fucks fueling this. You then said we should penalize the people with 401(k)s. I tried to shift the blame back to the people actually picking the damn stocks.

Not, you know, the fund advisor that actually understands what she’s investing in.

No. You want to punish someone? Punish the people choosing the investments.

Yep, grandma, who had maybe a base level of knowledge of where her retirement was invested, should serve time for the fact that the funds her advisor picked happened to contain a share of this company.

Not, you know, the fund advisor that actually understands what she’s investing in.

You’re actively advocating for citizens to be punished for decisions made by people in the ruling/investment class, while also advocating they commit violence that they will be jailed for. That’s honestly kind of impressive.

Maybe try fining the people that pick the investments instead?

Absolutely agree.

Don’t get me wrong - this is absolute bullshit, but no, that’s a bad take.

The people that regulate this don’t give a shit if the average person is prosecuted because it doesn’t affect them. The only actual way the system gets changed is if the obscenely wealthy/regulators/lawmakers who profit over this go to jail. Not some schmuck with a 401(k).

You penalize folks that happen to have a single share of this in their retirement portfolio, all you’re doing is screwing over the chunk of the populace that is already overworked and just trying to survive by shoving what they can into recommended retirement funds.

Then I hate to disappoint again, but I’m just some rando that votes of their own accord - not part of some grand “vote manipulation” conspiracy.

Hate to disappoint, but I’m a real, live human being.