

My wife and I have been on board for decades :)
My wife and I have been on board for decades :)
“NRF data from its annual Retail Security Survey indicates that the percentage of shrink attributed to external theft, including organized retail crime, has largely remained around 36% since 2015.”
Holy fucking shit dude…wasn’t expecting some shit like that…So we’re saying that spoilage, damage, logistical inefficiency, pilferage/embezzlement etc. is roughly twice as likely to cause losses in inventory than shoplifting?
Next time someone wants to check your receipt, ask em to empty their pockets. Sounds like they could, statistically, be as likely or more to be stealing shit…
Like a habitual troublemaker that never really gets caught with anything solid, and firearm on parole is the long awaited “gotcha”?
I could see that being the reason for the exuberance actually. That’s plausible. Could also explain the taser, frustrated with dealing with dudes shit for so long maybe…
You’ve added a shadow of a doubt I didn’t have before. Good discourse :)
Don’t know a single thing about Matt Gaetz, and Google suggests I really wouldn’t care to :)
I’m a moderate, a (GASP!) Jordan Peterson type. Gaetz sounds partisan enough that I wouldn’t listen to him for more than about 15 seconds, but I gotta qualify that remark by saying I’m not really part of his opposition either, because not choosing a side is basically not a thing anymore and I do it anyway ;)
Lol, “come to Jesus” is a very obscure (apologies for that) slang expression for “waking the fuck up to reality”, usually with some tough love style assistance. No religious connotation whatsoever in the context I meant it.
I read the article, and it quoted her as having said “oh yeah” when he declared a weapon, and I thought “yeah that’s not great, but I kinda get it” because I assumed the context was that she assumed he meant it as a mild threat perhaps and was responding with “oh yeah?” the way one would when being insulted or threatened…
Then I watch the video, and that’s not the case at all… The tone implies something much more along the lines of “yippee, you got a gun, now I get to develop a sudden fear for my life and do THIS!.. Yeehaw!”
She ain’t intimidated or threatened, she just mentally busted through a brick wall holding a pitcher in her hand looking to have a tropical punch party, that was a koolade man “OH YEAH!”
Y’all cops need to come to Jesus and establish some fucking standards and enforce them, because what you got going with the paid vacation and taxpayers funding their own restitution is not gonna be indefinitely sustainable. You’re filling a keg full of powder and one of these evil motherfuckers you keep turning a blind eye to is gonna throw a spark in the wrong place at the wrong time, and not even the bomb squad in their full staypuft costume is gonna qualify for immunity from the explosion it causes.
I don’t think we need to go down that road, but a lot of people do, and cops like Ms koolade here arent making the opinion shrink…
We need to get rid of riders… Someone propose a “one bill-one item” rule already, and stick that motherfucker on every single fucking bill as a rider until something comes along that’ll bait em all into that shit.
Jesus fucking Christ…
Is this to suggest that out of all the options in the DNC, Biden is not just the best one available, but the only person in the DNC capable of winning an election against fucking trump?!?
That is a hella sad implication.
It’s kinda sad as well that after four years at the helm (arguably), the best the dude can go with as a campaign is to just drag out the same lame ass “I’m not trump” he ran on last time… Not that “I’m not trump” isn’t worthy of a vote, it is in my opinion, but shit man, you can’t hold up anything else, after 4 years?
Anyone know who’s going on the libertarian ticket next year?
Not wrong, but it’s a shitty answer. Not shitty on your part, you’re just calling it what it is, no problem with that at all, but that’s bullshit…
Then they are still subject to the terms they actively agreed to… It’s not like there’s no agreement if you don’t get a reply… There was an agreement before you asked for new terms, there’s an agreement still.
We need laws addressing shit like “if you don’t say no in 30 days, we’ll take it as a yes”…
If you can get convicted of rape for assuming silence to be consent, then why the fuck does shit like this pass muster?
Are you serious? They aren’t forgetting that rule, they’re taking it to insanity. Trump supporters have been called treasonous for literally years now, and the most egregious shit is mainly knee jerk turnabout already.
No Mark Twain because n-word, k, we’ll ban whole ass libraries. Want sanctuary for immigrants and homeless, we’ll bus you thousands of them. Republicans aren’t forgetting turnabout, they’re escalating the fuck out of it.
Trump is 100% going to be calling Biden and Biden supporters “enemy of the state” (if he isn’t already) because it’s been said of him. Every remotely sketchy thing his opposition does, he adds it to his list of sketchy shit that he can get away with, and there are others taking up the same tactic, some of whom are arguably even more trump with it than trump…
If you’re allowing a corporation to have it, you are giving de facto consent for government to collect it with zero regard for your rights whatsoever.
They have the greatest ability to buy it, the greatest ability to steal it, and a fairly unique ability to confiscate it.
Supposedly not selling it…
These systems exist already, they just use a belt driven air compressor because it’s ridiculously more practical/efficient.
I’d have expected that we’d passed the peak already tbh. Anecdotally, I’ve seen a hell of a lot more windmills on the road or on barges than I’ve seen actually installed, but still, they’re all on their way to somewhere, and as commonly as I see them being shipped, it feels like they’ve almost definitely have had to start a decline by now…
There IS a really low rate of utilization though I suppose. I’m kinda hoping that’s just a matter of silliness with rules on who gets to sell their power into the grid or whatnot.
My property tax is $1200 a year. Failure to pay that for a while (a year or three) could result in the state selling the house, keeping the overdue taxes, and paying me the rest (if there is any. Sometimes they get sold cheap).
The state can also buy my house from me under eminent domain, to put in a rail line, or power lines, or some other utility. They’d owe me “fair value” for it, but they basically determine what that means, and it could be significantly less than what i could sell it in the market for (but to be fair, taxes are based on “fair value”, and almost everyone quietly allows the state to low-ball their property value because of this).
It can also be condemned. If it’s egregiously not maintained and shows obvious signs of structural issues, or the property gets hoarded up and looks like a trash dump. This is much more common with commercial property.
There’s also civil asset forfeiture. If you’re manufacturing and/or selling drugs/weapons/etc. (as a random example. Any crime counts really) on a property, it can be seized outright with no requisite compensation at all.
HOAs ar often described as similar to asset forfeiture, but they’re closer to a tax siezure. The HOA has to have in its charter that they can fine members for rule violations, and the process for an HOA is the same as for overdue taxes, but with unpaid fines. The authority for HOA is entirely contractual, you have to sign a contract agreeing to those rules.
All of these are incredibly rare occurrences, and usually involve some sort of genesis, like an investor wants a specific property, neighbors hate someone, etc.
Agree completely. Old school calculator is wrong, but why? Pemdas wasn’t really big in school curriculums until around the turn of the century, but the order of operations existed at the previous turn of the century, and should operate correctly on every digital calculator ever made…
I think I need some cast iron or something, the element cycle on and off, and we got aluminum pans. I got a cast iron griddle that spans two of the like elements in back and it works perfect.
Your question would be much better applied to height discrimination, which is something that’s almost never mentioned, but is a lot more indicative of the nature of discrimination itself.
It is instinctual, as others have said, but it has nothing to do with tribalism or war, its about resources. Discrimination is almost always about resources (the notable exception being gender/orientation based discrimination, which I guess is religious?).
The discrimination against small people (and obesity and age as well), is more basic, and likely older (in evolutionary terms), and is oriented towards hunting and fighting. We think less of smaller, fatter, and older people because they’re assumed to be less capable of gathering (and fighting for or defending) basic resources.
Discrimination against races is more recent, and more societal, and is more about monetary resources, and isn’t even entirely a matter of race. Poor white people can be discriminated against in the exact same way for the exact same reasons. Racism is more classist than discrimination against height, weight age, etc. but is essentially still a matter of these classes being seen as less capable of getting resources.
You can see it more easily if you look objectively at the discriminatory tendencies of women (and I mean that in a very generalized way). They tend to be far more discriminatory towards resource based biases… Height, weight, physical condition… They’re often inexplicably attracted to overly aggressive partners, occasionally to their own detriment. The more instinctual a woman is, the more likely to pursue the overly aggressive men. Race isn’t anywhere near as much a factor, and there are notable exceptions in all factors for women if a man obviously has a lot of resources already (no indictment intended ladies, just is what it is, and generally)
And of course it’s more obvious among women for the same reason… The disparity (again, in a very general sense) between male and female in ability to gather and defend resources affects women’s choices of partners more so than men.