Employers have spent so, so much money trying to get employees to make your argument to one another. You’re describing a job as “doing your time” and then defending the system that treats that exploitation and uncertainty as a privilege. I would encourage you to explore that contradiction, a lot of other people are…

I don’t think that it’s the idea as much as the budget. You can’t cut the corners necessary to release that generic movie/show to a profit when you also have to pay a premium to make it recognizably Halo.

Condescending on a topic while fundamentally misunderstanding it, on Twitter? My word!

American workers are increasingly over-specialized, mobility within an industry is very difficult because of the extreme consolidation (you’ve got maybe 2-4 chances per industry to make it work, then you’re out of options) and getting anything besides an entry-level job is difficult outside of that industry unless…

If debate was going to solve this issue, it would have. If you want to talk about presenting a logical and reasonable case for legal abortion to people who are open to hearing it, that’s been happening for decades and now pro-choice outnumbers anti-choice nearly 2:1. If you want to see what happens when anti-choice…

Your response proves my original point, I don’t know if that was intentional or not but it’s very affirming. But please don’t act as though the difference between a budget allocation from a public pool of tax money and a school administrator siccing collections on a bunch of parents is somehow a semantic difference…

I’m not, the issue I was pointing out is that a school lunch program is expected to generate any revenue at all instead of being a totally taxpayer expense. Society has decided that they don’t need to absorb those costs, the parents do, and we’re already seeing the consequences of that

“The District lunch program cannot continue to lose revenue.”

“Bottomless Pinocchio” sounds like a fetish account Tumblr just shut down

When people tell you who they are, listen to them. When people have to be convinced that other people’s 14th amendment rights should apply, that’s a bad faith argument from the jump.

The real issue for these big companies is that they just don’t want dedicated players spending 200+ hours on something, even a product they sell. They want them spending money every couple of hours or too bored to continue playing so they’ll go buy something else (preferably something from an in-game ad).

Again, I am not advocating ignoring anyone. I am saying that engaging with “you are a murderer and I will never agree with you” is arguably worse than ignoring the problem altogether because it provides credibility and a platform to a fringe idea that requires a logical jump to “sure, I can see how you’d feel like I…

Remember horse armor from Oblivion? Remember how we all laughed? Simpler times, then

Yeah, where are the makers of Fortnite going to find a whole bunch of customers who don’t have brand loyalty to the makers of Half-Life 2?

How many merits did she end up saving?

Jonah Hill circa 2005 agrees with this take

Why fire them when you could just promote other people? “Your supervisor says you’ve been avoiding her” is much clearer cause for termination

Without getting into predictions, it’s fair to say that the Senate and Supreme Court will the centerpieces of GOP power going forward. They’re currently trying to run a two-party democracy with 35-40% of the population supporting them and no bipartisan buy-in, gerrymandering and voter suppression work but they can’t…

People too wretched to have anyone to share they’re bullshit with in real life are over-represented online. We have to keep “public consensus” and “internet vitriol” separate and that’s hard sometimes

Tune Inn seems like a theme hotel in Branson MO with a 3.8 on Trip Advisor