deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
I should like to spank his little bottom for such childish thinking.
deleted by creator
We could attempt a more complicated maneuver as I have seen described once in a magazine in the library: a somersault.
I don’t think it’s needlessly overthinking as you put it to ask that people work toward sustainable long term changes that can not only alleviate current problems but improve conditions and systems resiliency and fairness long term. The unfortunate truth is that going part of the way also helps the people who don’t want to reduce global inequality. If people are satisfied with a world in which the equilibrium is reached between poverty that is so destructive and impossible to tolerate that global unrest increases as predicted, and a poverty only slightly more tolerable, that is not, in my humble opinion, anything to strive for. It would in fact be the least optimal result, since it maximizes suffering and precludes change.
You mean the kind of economists someone with money would, at a respectable arm’s length, choose to pay to be an economist.
A man is a man, a woman is a woman, and an invisible sky daddy controls the weather. You see something unhinged about that?
When did mandatory state education ever serve people’s needs? School has always taught only what was needed to serve our masters.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator