Here - I can be your spell/grammar check for you:

First panel: Watching old movies is weird. Like, imagine if something like Fight Club came out today.

Second panel: Fight Club in 1999: We work jobs we hate to buy shit we don’t need; we are the middle children of history.

Third panel: Fight Club in 2026: We work jobs we hate but still can’t afford basic needs, while people born to wealth call us lazy.

Fourth panel: Our forefathers were told that if they work hard they could become rock stars or millionaires.

Fifth panel: We were told that if we work hard then maybe we will be able to afford rent and groceries.

Might be worth putting your text into a spell/grammar checker before adding it to an image if English isn’t your first language or you struggle with grammar, as I’ve made around 20 fixes to your text of less than 100 words.

For reference, I’ve also spell/grammar checked this comment I’m replying to:

The software I was using made it extremely hard to edit text. I had figured it out by the end but at that point it was too late; I had already merged all the vector layers.

8 changes to a comment of 35 words.

1/3 of the country will either blindly support Trump or the broader Republican Party. Because of a confluence of a lack of mandatory voting; first past the post voting; and the electoral college, 1/3 of eligible voters often decide the outcome of elections. This isn’t so much Trump being DEMOLISHED and EVISCERATED as it is a warning to the rest of the country: show up and vote or they’ll still win, even when Trump is this unpopular. Show up again in 2028. Show up to the primaries.

If your vote literally was meaningless, billionaires wouldn’t spend crazy amounts of money on elections; they’d consider that wasted money which is anathema to their existence.

Haven’t they invested like $100 billion or so in LLM companies though? I thought they were a big player in the Enron-esque cyclical investment scam they’re all running. Will be tough for them if they can’t recoup any of that.

Nice

Is it really? That’s really interesting, and would cause a lot of confusion in metric-English countries where ‘mil’ is pejoratively used in speech to either mean ‘millimetre’ or ‘millilitre’ depending on context.

Why does there even need to be a bill (in the sense of keeping track of costs on a per-patient basis) to begin with?

There doesn’t need to be a bill that the patient sees or has access to, but the costs need to be tracked so that governments can adequately budget for healthcare. Governments need to be able to make educated assumptions about future costs so that they can align their tax schedules to ensure that the monies are there to pay for the costs involved in healthcare. Individualising the costs per-patient and per-issue assists with forecasting costs when governments also have access to good data about prevalence. It also assists with ensuring that the correct number of specialists are available for a given issue.

A non-lethal stroke would just make him more of a Republican and more appealing to Republican voters.

No, but it can be a problem for vaginas.

I’ve had to do similar before. When I was 16 I was learning to drive with a friend’s dad out in rural Australia. There were a bunch of ducks crossing the road at one point; I stopped to let them pass, but after they moved on and I started rolling forwards one duck turned around and tried to attack the car, resulting in me hitting it. I couldn’t even look out the rear view mirror at it but my friend’s dad did, and told me it was still alive but very mangled. He gently told me to reverse back over it and keep on driving, which I did, and then we drove in silence for the next fifteen minutes.

I felt absolutely awful about it (and still do, despite it happening almost 2 decades ago) but I know that leaving it in the road dying slowly would have been a far worse fate.

I hope you take some solace in the fact that you did the right, albeit difficult, thing for that rabbit.

Thankfully we have an independent organisation that sets electoral boundaries and administers elections (the Australian Electoral Commission) as well as mandatory voting (including imprisoned populations), so that shit isn’t really a viable option here. We have our issues, to be sure, but those pillars of our democracy have been strong for a long time. It’s part of the reason why it took so damn long for a right-wing populist party to gain real significance, and they’ve not yet been properly tested electorally so we don’t even know if the polls will deliver them a decent amount of seats, let alone a chance at government.

100% agree the Woolies home brand ones are downright atrocious. Since I was diagnosed coeliac it’s been nice to see Arnott’s do a gluten free version but those are very pricey and probably only 80-90% as good as the originals. The rest of the Arnott’s GF range is pretty great though.

While I take your point and agree with the merits of power imbalances inherently muddying the waters of consent, at what stage are we infantilising adults with the capacity to consent? Without knowing the particulars of the circumstances, it’s very difficult to say that she acted in a predatory manner towards these people. In your comment, you suggest the idea that Boebert was the one ‘making moves’ on her staffers. Is there any verified information to suggest this was the case?

My broader question is this: are there any circumstances in which an employee can truly consent to sexual activity with their employer? I worry that answering ‘no’ to that question unfairly infantilises people, while I simultaneously worry that answering ‘yes’ justifies abuse of power to extract sexual favours.

It’s a very difficult puzzle, and one that I would personally argue heavily relies on context and the accounts of those who we fear may have been sexually abused. I’m reminded of the Bill Clinton/Monica Lewinsky saga which posed very similar questions, and to which you’ve also alluded in your comment.

Mike Schur wrote a great companion book to the series called How To Be Perfect that details all of the philosophy he got into while writing the show. Very entry-level stuff and quite accessible while still being an interesting meta-analysis of a few branches of philosophy. Definitely worth a read if you enjoyed The Good Place.

Yep, the pro move would be to wait for the food to come out; politely ask your server if you could speak to the manager about the discrepancy between the photos and the actual food; ream the manager loudly once they arrive; and then leave without eating or paying. Super pro move would be to leave a small tip for the server as well.

It’s always projection. It’s a line of thinking that goes something like “if I were pretending* to be a woman I’d use that to get into women’s bathrooms and have my way with women and girls, so that must be what they’re doing.”

*note: not what I think; that’s what these chucklefucks think.

I think it goes beyond mental gymnastics into mental contortionism.

I mean, that’s pretty similar to how it already operated in Australia. I’ve been prescribed oxycodone only as a post-operative painkiller (dry socket after wisdom tooth removal and sinus surgery) and was given fentanyl immediately post-surgery for my sinus surgery, but since they moved codeine from being behind-the-counter to prescription-only (2018), those are the only times I’ve ever been able to access opiates/opioids in my life, despite presenting with debilitating migraines since I was 11 years old.

At my age, with the knowledge I have now, would I want them for migraines? Hell, no. I don’t want to risk addiction for temporary pain relief. Would I willingly prevent people who experience chronic pain from opiates or opioids? Probably not, but I’m not a doctor.

The 44-year-old finished her jail term on what was the Labor Day holiday in the US, one week after the judge who presided over her case rejected a request from prosecutors to force her to serve a harsher sentence.

Didn’t even have to open the article - it’s in the body text of the post.

Now that the original sentence has been fully served, I don’t think there’s any avenues for further appeals by either the prosecution nor defence. I could be wrong though as this may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

He’ll do the exact same thing he did with Afghanistan - keep it going until the eleventh hour and then announce that the military will be pulling out during the next president’s term so they have to deal with the quagmire.

It’s a shame we don’t have the 2026 data yet because I’d very much imagine One Nation will be a significant recipient as well.

The Nats are going to fade into irrelevance after the next Victorian, NSW, and federal elections anyway.