Remember to Smile

I REALLY WANNA SIT HERE AMD GO THROUGH TAGGING EVERYONE BUT I HAVE TO GO TO BED NOW SO I’LL DO SO TOMORROW!!!

Also: while we’re doing checkpoints, make sure you’re on WiFi and not data

And unclench your jaw

If you need to use the bathroom you have to do that now

Please get that drink of water and remember your meds

If you can’t remember the last time you showered/brushed your teeth here’s your sign to try and do those today

Set an alarm for tomorrow if you need to!

don’t forget the laundry in your drier

This was very helpful, I took my meds and had a shower.

If you haven’t yet slain thine enemies, take a quick break and do that

shrimp check!

if I had a nickel for every time I voted for the potential first female president over trump and trump won I’d had two nickels and it’s really fucking fucked up that it happened twice

when you download a pdf and it's called like 1328723486basdf12.pdf but then you gently rename it to what it's supposed to be. that's forming a bond with a hurt and wild mythological creature and reminding it who it is.

If you love Ten&Rose (Doctor Who) and you want reblog or like,this is the link of my reblog couples :)

thank you!

Very good news for the world.

So I'm realizing a lot of people don't know a ton about RFK Jr who very well may be our new secretary of health. In July of this year he proposed creating "wellness farms." He wants to force anyone on antidepressants, opioid medications, or those who are neurodivergent into farms to forcibly work with no contact with the outside world until they're "cured." I am not kidding. Please see this article with a clip from a podcast where he says it directly. It's not taken out of context. This is his plan.

We can also talk about how RFK Jr is directly responsible for the deaths of 83 children in American Samoa through antivax policies and how that will only get worse if he introduces his ideas to the American population.

We've all rightfully been talking about the dangers of the next president but we also need to pay attention to who he will be appointing to key government positions.

Here is an article about the wellness camps with a video clip of him discussing it.

I have sources about how he directly caused the death of almost one hundred kids in American Samoa too if anyone needs too.

"how are the democrats so good at losing?" why don't you ask how the republicans are so good at winning?? stop acting like democrats are the only political party with agency. republicans do things on purpose.

^^ It seems to me that I haven’t seen many people acknowledging that republicans are good at winning because they lie and because they have a multimillion dollar industry committing to getting them elected and backing up their lies.

I’ve seen statistics correlating misinformed views to voting choice, a study about how respondents preferred Kamala’s policies over Trump’s when they weren’t told who had which set of policies, people discussing ‘vibes-based politics’—but in my opinion all this analysis is incomplete without confronting how republicans have a veritable propaganda machine working for them. It’s pretty hard for democrats to fight that. We have to rely on average donations from normal people when corporations/rich individuals can invest millions into networks who will try to get people elected who will give them tax breaks.

#seriously I want more people to talk about the sheer amount of damage rupert murdoch has done to this country#fox news is the most viewed cable news network in the country.#i remember a few months back harris’ campaign had success bringing project 2025 to the public’s attention#but democrats still don’t have anything comparable @choppywaterswiftboats

Fun fact that I will tell literally everyone all the time!!! A former Nixon staffer said they would have survived Watergate if they had their own news network. And that staffer's name was Roger Ailes!

Books to read:

Dark Money: An examination of the Koch Empire, and its patronage and entanglement in Right wing media, politics, and lobbying.

Messengers of the Right: A history of the conservative media landscape, beginning with talk radio (Clarence Manion, before the era of Rush Limbaugh), through periodicals like the National Review, and notable books, like God and Man at Yale. I'm sorry, but you don't know half as much as you think you do about American political history if you don't know who William F Buckley is. All of this walked, so Fox News could run.

Let Them Eat Tweets: A political synthesis of history, economics, and communication scholarship that posits wedge-issue-identity-politics as the method by which contemporary conservative parties drive their white working class bases away from class-based solidarity toward a party that serves only economic elites. That, Hacker and Pierson argue, is how you explain the escalation of billionaire oligopoly, rising economic inequality, and fanatic racism/other bigotries.

If you can understand these patterns and these histories, you'll begin to see why the GOP has nosedived into overtly fascist rhetoric, while STILL successfully courting voters who vote against their material economic interests.

There are no surprises here.

You can even see the ripples of that abroad. My parents watch the Canadian equivalent to the conservative channel and this summer were telling me about how “both parties are the same and Biden is sooooooo old”. They are people who would usually consider themselves aligned a bit left of the center (CANADIAN center). And yet they knew nothing of what Trump actually said or did at any point in this campaign or during his last term.

Two weeks ago, a firmly leftist friend, a queer person of colour, told me “but the democrats are financed by all the big evil corporations”. And then he named checked all the corporations that Biden and the DOJ have been raking over the coals because of their monopolies. And I was just like “you think AMAZON wants the dems to win??? You think FACEBOOK wants them to win??? GOOGLE??”

The propaganda is real and it’s everywhere.

I want to make something really clear that I think Anti-Choice people have failed to understand that Pro Choicers definitely saw coming.

An exception for Rape, Life of the Mother, and Incest mean nothing when you have to prove it in a court of law, or get a team of lawyers and judges to sign off on it which can take weeks or even months.

Weeks a person dying hasn't got. Women are now dying. Actually dying. Because hospitals legally could not save their lives until they could wake up a judge and get their lawyers, and another sides lawyers awake and up and figured out if it was actually necessary or not. All people with no understanding of medicine, and no attatchment to the person suffering who simply doesn't want to die.

There's a lot more I could cover, like the increase in illegal abortion, abortion tourism, the massive increase in infant abandonment... but I'm going to leave it here.

People are dying. People who should be alive. Who would be alive if abortion was legal and the hospital could have simply treated their patient without waiting for a dozen men with no medical experience in another building to decide if their patient actually needs treatment or not. And yes they do have to wait. Because if they don't they get charged with murder for trying to save a life.

Your policies are killing people. Not theoretical people. Not fetuses with no conscious thought or pain. Adults with lives. Teenagers with a whole life ahead of them. Mothers with children who need them. Real people with conscious thought, with fear, with pain. People who meet every definition of personhood.

We ask your questions so you don’t have to! Submit your questions to have them posted anonymously as polls.

Who the fuck is voting no and can you please give me your money? Sincerely someone who makes about $17,000 a year

$65k depending where you live can be 'comfortable' but not rich. In some other places, you are still struggling bc cost of living is so high it probably covers bills but doesn't give u a lot of room for comfort. And , in fact, you'd still be considered low income. I say as someone who makes like $25k a year

It’s entirely location-dependent. I can tell you who some of the folks voting no are: Californians.

In 2023 there was only one county in the state where $65k even cleared the low income threshold.

Source

I voted no, but not because I'm Californian. XD (I've been to California for a week once on a college visit. It was very sunny.)

I read once about a study back in the '80s or maybe earlier, that found happiness increases sharply with income up to a certain threshold, and then after holding steady for a bit, starts to slowly decrease as you make Too Much money and have to worry about your investments and eating gold-plated beef and all that shit.

At the time, the study found that the peak of the happiness curve was around an income of $100,000 a year USD. That was the point where you have Enough money (on average) that you don't have to deprive yourself of anything you want to do or have, and an emergency like "the refrigerator/car/air conditioner imploded" is a mild annoyance rather than disastrous to life-ruining.

I don't know where that point is now, with inflation. Probably much higher. Maybe $500 thousand a year or even a million. (Probably a million a year in Silicon Valley is like vaguely middle class, if that's where they're keeping their poverty line.) I don't know if it was adjusted at the time for region of the country, family status, or whatever else.

But that's my definition of "rich", if I was to say I want to be rich. Rich is the correct amount of money to where it stops being a stressor in my life, including ever having to pinch pennies on like a vacation or event. Where it lets me enjoy my life to the fullest.

And "Eat the rich" is considerably higher than that, I figure I should point out that distinction while we're here. We're not eating people for being happily well-off and making us jealous. We're eating people who have so much wealth it not only makes them unhappy, they're spreading the unhappiness to others, or getting the wealth *from* actively exploiting others.

You know that gifset of the actor being interviewed and he's like "Uh, luxuries now that I'm making good money, I can get really nice socks and really nice coffee" and the interviewer is like "those aren't proper rich people luxuries, you should have like a private jet" and the actor goes "Larry, I'm on DuckTales"? That's a good demonstration of the difference.

Binary traps ruin everything.

People apparently need to remind themselves that economic class comes in more than two categories.

This is extraordinarily important for anyone who wants to eat the rich, but presumably doesn't want to remain poor. Since I assume they also don't want to get eaten, they must know there's a middle ground of financial comfort somewhere in there, right?

Specific numbers will always be hyper regional, but: Imagine a graph of 'quality of life' and 'income'. At the low end of income, small increases mean BIG improvements to quality of life! At the high end, they don't. The gulf between QoL for someone earning $20k and $65k is huge — without the latter person being 'rich.'

The rich you really want to eat don't even show up on the damn scale. You need bigger graph paper. if you zoom out enough to show their income, you zoom out too much to even see the difference between $20k and $65k.

(This isn't hyperbole. It's an actual data visualization problem that makes it hard to explain just how wealthy the wealthiest actually are).

Happiness or unhappiness aside, there is a point where the only thing left to purchase is power. And no one should be allowed at that point.

(Also, please don't actually eat the rich. Compost them and grow vegetables. This is how we avoid prion diseases.)

I lived for years at $70,000 with no mortgage or rent. One wage-earner, one homemaker with a part-time job, three dependent children.

It was doable. Barely. We could put money away for old age and for one major emergency. We could afford one major repair every two years (hopefully they came along that rarely). We could have some health care but not all of it. We could eat at family restaurants OR go to a movie about once a month. We could staycation. We were lower middle class.

When the Predatory Lenders' Recession hit, prices went up but wages did not; we became a paycheck-to-paycheck household.