ObjectivityIncarnate

Yeah, there are a lot of comparisons like these that at least partially break down when you don’t consider the way the US is set up, re state governments.

Another big example is minimum wage. While the federal minimum is $7.25, it is a very small minority of places where it’s even possible to find (above-board, of course; if you work under the table, all bets are off) work at that low a wage, both because of the above (state minimum is higher) and because other market forces essentially negate it as the minimum, even in most places where $7.25 is in fact the legal minimum wage.

I’ve been using Firefox for over a decade, and Windows has never complained about it. What are you talking about?

were those numbers perhaps cherry-picked to make the situation look more dramatic than it actually is?

If anyone can go from 554th to 5th in any sport/event just by competing among the other sex, nothing else changing, then that obviously indicates something. You can’t handwave that away.

Her personal 100m freestyle time dropping less than a quarter of a second post-transition is honestly a bigger indicator that transition is not making a substantial difference, because that angle completely removes the ‘chance’ element in your opponents being different people.

The very fact that their ranking is lower than what it should be is an issue in and of itself, your disingenuous mockery notwithstanding.

The question is fair, but so very few people are affected, who cares?

The vast majority of people are never murdered, either. But I’m sure it matters to them and their loved ones.

It’s an extreme example for the analogy, but the point stands: it doesn’t follow that a bad thing being rare makes it less bad. This is not a valid argument against.

My understanding is that there is absolutely no evidence that trans women have an advantage.

Going from 554th place pre-transition to 5th place post-transition doesn’t line up with that claim.

The fact that the University of Pennsylvania swimmer [Lia Thomas] soared from a mid-500s ranking (554th in the 200 freestyle; all divisions) in men’s competition to one of the top-ranked swimmers in women’s competition tells the story

In the 100 freestyle, Thomas’ best time prior to her transition was 47.15. At the NCAA Championships, she posted a prelims time in the event of 47.37. That time reflects minimal mitigation of her male-puberty advantage.

During the last season Thomas competed as a member of the Penn men’s team, which was 2018-19, she ranked 554th in the 200 freestyle, 65th in the 500 freestyle and 32nd in the 1650 freestyle. As her career at Penn wrapped, she moved to fifth, first and eighth in those respective events on the women’s deck.

It may not be an issue to you, but it’s an issue to every woman whose ranking is lower as a result. I imagine it especially hurts if you’re pushed out of first place in that way.

It’s now trivial, in 2025, to depict the world as a 3D shape, this is coming a few decades after it matters, imo.

“stop taxing” doesn’t mean stop taxing

calling a lie a lie is ad hominem

Fuck all the way off, pathetic liar.

Fuck off, liar. This is what I identified as a straw man:

it’s such a serious threat to the country’s financial stability that we should chicken out and stop taxing the rich.

Now quote me “spew[ing] exactly that talking point” that we should stop taxing the rich. You won’t, because you can’t, because I didn’t.

Shameless, pathetic liar.

it’s such a serious threat to the country’s financial stability that we should chicken out and stop taxing the rich.

No one’s saying this, this is a straw man.

It’s just a simple fact that there is a ‘sweet spot’ when it comes to maximizing tax revenue. It’s the same as if you’re selling a product for $10, then 100 people buy it, and you assume that you’ll double your $1000 profit if you sell it for $20 instead, but then the number of buyers went down to 10, and now your bottom line is $800 less, instead.

“Just tax them more” is not the simple/obvious solution it appears to be on the surface. Also, people don’t just not react when stuff like this changes, to protect themselves; just compare tax revenue presently to what it was when it capped out at (iirc) 91%.

And even IF ‘turning that dial’ simply increased tax revenue, it needs to be combined with that revenue being spent productively, for it to make any difference at all. Hell, I think the US already brings in more than enough tax revenue to do everything we want it to do, if it was doing it as efficiently as it could be.

Someone needs to read up on “capital flight”, this is a known phenomenon we’re talking about, not speculation.

“News” that’s 2 months old, lol

Is appearance really the first thing it occurs to you to comment on?

EDIT: “Yes, body-shaming is indeed my chief concern, hence my comments based on candid photos” was the response. Cringe.

“Indestructible…”

Well, the purchase is probably already made by the time this is seen, and for those who see it, they probably just ignore it similarly to EULA popups when installing programs.

“I’m indestructible…”

When the fuck did Asmongold become the largest POLITICAL streamer?

He didn’t, not even close—the OP just made that up to augment the ragebait level of their post, lol.

and then goes on to say “why would you add people to your country that don’t speak the language” in English and not the native tongue of the tribe that the land was stolen from

The irony of this is that people who are hardline isolationist/against immigration use that having happened as fuel for their argument, because ‘look what happened to the Native Americans when Europeans were able to immigrate en masse’, and they argue that that’s what’ll happen to them if they allow immigration now.

Yeah, the voice someone’s born with is definitely what should be focused on, when it comes to criticism.