Side note… I did watch the vid. She was pretty and all. But she was dressed far more conservatively than most high school girls. Certainly not dressed to look hot. So if he can’t keep his mind off the underage girl dressed conservatively, what would happen if he saw a bare midriff…

Really either one honestly. The dems are just better at hiding it.

As a voter, I have found that there is a significant lacking of useful information to make a decision on. I put in a fair bit of effort and often feel like I have nowhere near enough. And that is how the politicians want it. That way the majority of voters to have very little information of substance to go on. That way they can win on charisma. And they don’t have to do anything positive for the voters to move up. They just have to please the political powers in the area to get endorsements, campaign help, and straight up donations so they can move to the next level. But when it comes to school boards. Most won’t move to the next level. But they take advantage of the way the system is set up to get elected. They probably even believe that their opinions are the will of the voter, when the voter barely knows anything about their real opinions.

So your general point is a concern. Who can you trust to make the judgement. But that doesn’t mean you should just toss up your hands either. As was pointed out, tests of various sorts could be done and the results presented to the voters so that they have more to go on than the number of lawn signd they have seen for a person. The write ups in the guides are nearly pointless. They can say anything they want in there. For a person running for reelection, their voting record would be nice to give voters easy access to. There are lots of ways to present the voters with objective information so that they can choose based on thier preferences. But none of that happens today.

Thats what you get when you choose your leaders by popularity contest. That wouldn’t be appropriate even if she was an adult.

Look back at your own comment history, then look at the comment with all the drama. It stands out a lot. Normally you are level and making logical points, but in the one with ridiculous and such, you aren’t.

Can’t seem to find that book available on libby, so will have to do some extra digging. My info comes from mainly articles, not books. So I will take a look, as sometimes articles can misrepresent the people they are quoting or the work those experts have done. But usually that is done to sensationalize things. Not much of that happening in the area of ancient societies.

You are very confident about things that are easy to prove wrong.

Hierarchical societies have been around a long time. A very large variety of animals today have hierarchical concepts in their socialization. So you can use your inflamatory statements to try and hide how little basis the things you say have in facts. But it doesn’t make them any less false.

The more "I’m sorry"s, “ridiculous”, “bullshit quack…”, and association of the opposing view with racists and such you do. The more obvious you have no real logical arguments. Just like the people who talk louder to get noticed because they have nothing to say that people are interested in.

The general idea of school is to learn how to learn. Most of the core subjects are just the tip of their iceberg.
Take the older software devs who didn’t have computers in school when they went. They technically use almost nothing they actually studied in school. So you don’t really want to requie an overload on any given subject. Schools are even dialing back the math requirements. Like pre-calc. Not everyone needs that. The required algebra is more about problem solving than equations now. Which is good. Let the kids follow thier interests a little more.

It’s not.

While there are plenty of cultures on the planet, they all seem to trend towards authoritative leaders. There are probably some very small cultures that are exceptions. But it seems to me if you get a group big enough, it goes that way.

As for you personally. I mentioned mutations. You had some differences that allowed you to escape the societal pressure to be a conservative. And likely without that pressure, you wouldn’t have come so far to the other side. The issue is that not enough people are born able to do that. And often they end up persecuted for even trying. So the mutation doesn’t propagate as much as those without it.

In the US (possibly state specific), the estate (all assets of the deceased) are held for a time. There are laws about allowing people the deceased owed money to to make a claim. I think in my state it was that an ad had to be placed in a newspaper or something, and then 30 days.

After that, some government agency or court decides/rules if the claims are valid. If so the estate is liquidated enough to pay those bills. After that, anything that is left is claimable by next of kin. If the debt is higher, anyone who wants something from the estate, like someone who was left a specific item of value, would have to take on the debt to get the item directly. Though they can probably work something out to just buy the item as part of the liquidation.

For rent specifically, it would depend on the rental contract. But anyone who didn’t sign it is most probably free to leave without paying. Anyone wanting to stay would have to work it out with the landlord.

All that said and done. If you are considering this as a way out. Don’t. Not having to pay the debt will be little consolation to the roomates who undoubtedly would find the body. Further… the world may suck today. But tomorrow aliens may arrive, kill all our greedy leaders and revelutionize our lives into something of comfort and meaning. Or something simpler but worth being arou pnd for could happen. Death is so… final.

You mention before anyone says to show your company how good you are… the comoany isn’t a person, it doesn’t care. But in most places, who you know matters more. So the question you have to ask is… of all the people who would know you stopped working now, would any be the type that when asked about you, would mention that. Or are any the type who would mention that you didn’t just phone it in (american expression) if asked about you in general. I say this because having people who would say positive things like that about me has been the key to getting the best jobs I’ve had. So there is some value there. That said, I find it really hard to give a shit when I know I am done at a place.

See but ghostbusters always crashed on my c64. So it was like the forbidden fruit. I never got to lay more than 5 minutes of it, but in my head it was the best thing ever. Lol. Human brains just suck.

Not sure what retails stores you go to, but most basically say fuck you multiple times per visit. The easy one is the self checkout, or if they don’t have that, the one checkers with the massive line while the manager looks on from not too far away. Then you got the grocery stores constantly moving things arpund even though everyone hates that. And the fake sales price that is really just the price… I could go on.

I finally had a chance to take a look. But I didn’t last long on the first link. Lots of fancy words, but it wasn’t really coherent. At the same time as it talked about removing the hierarchy, and not necessarily listening to the experts, it was spending a lot of time name dropping and raising people up on a pedestal. They only real path forward is to stop idolizing individuals.

The second link was much better. I correctly identified that the issue isn’t the hierarchies themselves, but the people drawn to them and such. And there in lies the rub. You can’t just change the instincts of all humans on the planet. It would take hundreds or thousands of years, assuming there was any pressure to change. But their isn’t. So right now, through luck of mutation, some people are born who don’t want to idolize a powerful leader and such. But those people are at a disadvantage currently. So they are essentially selected against.

A change is needed, but I don’t think we can make it happen. Something external would need to do that. In the mean time, I think we should simply try to ensure noone gets selected against. That way at least the pressure to be more authoritative is removed.

Overall, I support much of what anarchists support in general. But I don’t think tearing down the hierarchy is going to do anything but make room for a new hierarchy. And that will probably happen naturally anyway. It seems to have in the past, it probably will again. The quesion at hand is mainly about if we will cause our own extinction before it does.

Management

Wow. Learn to read.

The answer to that is literally the last sentence of my first comment. I’m pretty sure you have a very narrow definition of what evolution means. But even the normal narrow one covers what I said above. It’s practically a textbook case.

So both are true. Humans are the most co-operative. But if you look at the achievements, most are done to better one group of humans over another. Rarely is something done for the good of all humans. I’m actually struggling to think of even one thing that was done for the good of all humans. There must be a few, but I just can’t think of any.

I’m not excusing it in any way.
I wish I had a way to advance our evolution past this point so that we didn’t have a significant portion of the population that are monsters.