Anneal

A lot of that has to do with land use and urban sprawl. A few generations ago, right after the post-WW2 era, cheap houses were being built en masse in suburban developments, and they were frequently low density and huge houses located in far flung cul-de-sacs. That kind of development may have been cheap at first, but many American cities have now been sprawling at such an alarming rate due to this kind of land use being promoted and encouraged for the last 60 years or so that it's becoming increasingly less and less sustainable. Now in cities like Los Angeles or Atlanta, you may have to drive an average of 50 minutes to work (and back from it) every day. This kind of suburban development has also hindered public transportation from properly spreading out and is forcing more and more Americans to buy cars and literally depend on it for their livelihoods. Now a ton of people are realizing that they don't want to be stuck in traffic at least two hours every day and want to actually move back to the city, which has triggered a ton of redevelopment projects in the cities. However, since there is an overwhelmingly amount of demand and not enough supply, along with the lack of housing regulation, this is inadvertently causing gentrification and rents in the cities to skyrocket, as well as causing poorer residents to be evicted from their homes when they can't pay up. This is most apparent in cities like San Francisco, where the average apartment or home is always in the seven digits. Now the millennial generation has to pick between living in the expensive city or living 100 miles away from it and spending three or four hours every day driving to and from work. Unless more and more American cities try to encourage better public transit, better land use (less 3000 sq ft single-family homes and more multi-story mixed-use buildings, or at least smaller homes), and better housing regulation, houses are only going to become less and less affordable in the foreseeable future. This isn't really a problem that's restricted to the United States, though – in other cities around the world, rents are rising and it's becoming harder for many people to afford living on their own.

It’s still quite a complicated issue. Getting most people to stop eating meat is virtually impossible and even more “humane” ways of raising animals (free range being an example) take up vastly more land, more resource intensive, or are far too expensive. Developing and improving in vitro meat technology – which require significantly less land and water and without the slaughter of animals – may be our best option. Thankfully there has been more and more scientific interest in in vitro meat, as it could be used to feed astronauts on long trips or scientists working in extreme environments (such as the poles or the deep ocean) and keep their morale up. Though it might take a while before in vitro meat begins to simulate real meat, as bio-technology hasn’t gone far enough to allow us to simulate connective tissue or blood cells properly that gives things like beef or pork its taste. We might have to live with in-vitro Spam for a while. GMOs may be another option. It’s possible to genetically modify animals so that they can be less resource intensive – however, this doesn’t solve that said animals would be slaughtered anyways, and genetically modifying animals outside of selective breeding is rather controversial. A better alternative may be to simply modify GMO grains so that they can taste more like meat without actually being meat. This may not be too difficult as even without genetic modification, the beans used in veggie burgers taste reasonably close to meat.

I'm just pointing out the North has plenty of bigotry as well and it's not localized in the South. Hell, there could be more in the North – bigotry is not always apparent and can be hidden behind doors. I'm not trying to downplay bigotry in the South, I'm just pointing out that it happens everywhere.

I personally don't really like how Southerners are stereotyped, and this idea that it's absolutely racist, backwards, and intolerant is something the North likes to perpetrate. I'm saying this as a Californian. I'm just going to point out that hate groups and general intolerance exists everywhere, not just the US, and in many different forms, so pretending it only exists in the South lets a lot of Northerners off the hook about their own prejudices. So moving up North means that you won't escape from those kind of people anyways. Also ironically enough, the South is quite racially integrated while the North has far less African Americans in general and tend to show signs of neighborhood segregation and white suburban flight. I can agree with the second part though. MGTOWs and incels are far worse than any Tumblr backseat feminist I've seen and in some cases far more dangerous – one was responsible for a mass shooting near my university, if that says anything. Outside of political stuff, personally the one thing that really gets my nerves on my daily life is bad Wi-Fi connections. Always sends me into a rage.

That topic name sure is loaded though. Reviewer and critics do have lives and these are real, legitimate jobs. Becoming a professional critic is a lot harder than people think, especially when you are also entertaining people through YouTube videos. These videos require hours, if not days of editing and voicing. Even if you are just writing for a news website like Kotaku or Rotten Tomatoes, all articles frequently have to go through editors before the final written product is posted online. Some people don't understand how much hard work and effort goes into being a critic, only to be flamed online for being a "corporate shill" or whatnot.

Unexpected Thanos (or any meme involving Avengers: Infinity War) and Unexpected Sans are close to a year old and I think they're both good enough last a bit longer. Also, anyone who's part of the JoJo's Bizarre Adventure fanbase has plenty of memes that have lasted for several years and are still relevant.

While I generally vote conservative it's usually very hard for me to ever get committed to registering as Republican because there are a ton of terrible Republican candidates. That being said, there are plenty of terrible Democrat candidates as well. Both parties have bad, hypocritical, lying politicians...though I have to admit the Republicans have more of it as of now. Now to point out, I don't hate everything about the Republican Party or Democratic Party and I do realize that the most vocal parts of them don't represent the entire party. The few Rockefeller Republicans and old conservatives don't seem to be that bad (remember that Dwight D. Eisenhower and Earl Warren were conservatives for their time and generally helped the US for the better). Neither are some Democrats like Bernie Sanders or Tulsi Gabbard. Nixon's more of a mixed bag. Everyone knows him for Watergate and general corruption, but a lot of his policies still remain active to this day. Believe it or not, Nixon was actually quite environmentalist and was responsible for establishing OSHA, the EPA, and Amtrak (admittedly he wanted to appease the liberals and actually wanted to kill it). He also enacted the Clean Water Act, Noise Control Act, and Endangered Species Act, and tried to cool relations with China and ended the gold standard (anyone who knows economics can arguably say that this was a good thing, and the stagflation that ensued was mostly due to the oil crisis). This is probably why not many Republicans talk about him anymore.

That's not really true. Plenty of times you have to use some degree of algebra to make some calculations. Compound interest and "breaking even" are simple algebra concepts that you will definitely have to use when it comes to basic finances. There are also a lot of problems that can technically be solved by arithmetic, but algebra makes things a lot easier and lot faster. And a lot of career fields require algebra, not just STEM. Agriculture, accounting, architecture, and even some liberal arts careers do require at the very least some algebra knowledge. There's a reason why it's literally required to graduate high school...and it's on both the SAT and ACT. Though it's true that calculus is not as important as geometry or algebra for some fields. I still find occasional use for limits and integration, especially calculating the area under a curve or arc length.

That's actually true when you go above algebra. In calculus and statistics, some things simply cannot be calculated by hand and you will learn to depend on your trusty TI-84. Also, calculators help to compute basic equations that you input into it, but problems in more complex math are rarely one-step calculations and frequently require you to interpret the problem and given data.

It's not that bad. No matter what though, algebra is an essential math class and you have to take it at some point. People think that it really doesn't mean much, but almost all jobs do require algebra and it's a minimum requirement for graduating high school.

Yeah, I can agree with that, it's just that this phrase is not the best way to discourage people from dangerous actions, and is usually used negatively to encourage things like gambling, paying for lottery tickets, or promoting pseudoscience (fortune telling being a big one). It's often used to dismiss legitimate concerns as well.

That being said, there are some phrase that I do believe try too hard to be profound or deep and are in fact trivial or nonsensical. "Nothing is both real and imaginary" is in its literal sense true (0 is both a real and imaginary number), but from a philosophical standpoint, it would mean that there was a distinction between reality and illusion. Both are trivial and therefore this phrase is not particularly helpful. "Improbable things happen all the time" is another phrase some people use to dismiss when something is unlikely to work. It's true in its most technical sense, but ultimately trivial, and it doesn't mean that particular person will be able to experience that one particular improbable event, whether it's winning the lottery or getting lucky sevens on the slot machines.

Like many tropes, the issue is not really that it is overused, but more cliched. Tropes that are used frequently are not always bad, and sometimes writers and directors can put a new spin to an old trope.

To be fair, in the context of FDR's inauguration speech, it makes more sense. He clarifies that he believes that fear is ultimately a "nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance", and during the darkest hour of the Great Depression, what is most needed is hope and resolve. It seems like a lot of the other phrases that "don't make sense" on here are either because people are taking it too literally or out of context of what the original intention of the phrase is meant to be.

Well, both of the accidents described in the original post are survivable with the right know how, so they aren't all that dangerous if you handle it correctly. For the plane crash, you have a good chance of making it through as long as you can glide down and find a flat and open space to land. Fuel exhaustion tend not to be the reason for most plane crashes.

Harris has been a major critic of religion, but just like Dawson, he seems to specifically target Islam and be overwhelmingly pro-Israel, sometimes to the point of denying IDF-related war crimes (like both sides using human shields or targeting civilians). It almost problematically borders on Islamophobia. Also, Bernie is not totally pro-Israel; recently he had defended Ilhan Omar's for being critical of Israel. The Israel-Palestine issue is very complicated, even within the Democratic Party. I usually just watch potholer54. He tries his best to stay politically neutral and usually criticizes global warming denialism, creationism and fundamentalism, and various types of pseudoscience, even certain "left-wing" ones like the anti-GMO, anti-nuclear, and anti-vaccination movements. They seem to be in short supply on the Democratic side and even shorter supply on the Republican side, especially with McCain out of the picture now. There's still John Kasich, Colin Powell, James Mattis, and Susan Collins. Sadly, if you're not a Tea Party member or a war hawk (isn't it funny that the Republicans who actually served in the military tend to be far more rational?), then you get called out for being a RINO or "cuckservative". It makes it very hard to have a conversation with the left-wing when all people see on the right here in the US are a bunch of nutjobs. Conservatives in Europe and East Asia are never this nutty.

Harris and Chomsky aren't exactly on the same spectrum though. Chomsky is a libertarian socialist, while Harris is more moderate, and both have had beef with each other (namely with Harris being very pro-Israel). While I lean a bit to the right myself though, I would still probably end up voting Bernie if only because rational and sensible politicians in US politics have been in rather short supply, and that goes for both parties.

Though comparatively, plane crashes are far less common and it's literally a hundred times safer to ride a plane than a car. Also, the plane accident described is actually quite survivable; the plane can still glide down and find a relatively flat area to land on as safely as possible.

That's true that vegans will generally have a harder time getting certain nutrients - vegetarianism still allows you to eat dairy products and eggs, which can substitute meat reasonably well. Vitamin B12 is a big one, since you can only really get that from animal products. Though if said vegans are alright with eating fortified grains and GMOs, then getting proper nutrients from a vegan diet isn't as much of a problem.

Not sure what's so good about that post when he literally just dismissed all of the previous posts before as being "lefties". I'm not even liberal, I'm just pointing out how "forced diversity" has been used as an euphemistic term for "any minority character I don't like that's in a video game or TV show". I have never mentioned that media should focus only on those traits, but that minority characters should not be stereotyped or offensive and that topics regarding minorities should be treated respectfully. Besides that, personality and story is ultimately what's more important than trying to over-emphasize their minority traits. What can be considered "forced diversity" is also pretty arbitrary. People complained about Tracer and Soldier 76 being "forced diversity" in Overwatch despite the fact of them being LGBT is only mentioned or revealed for a few pages at most. Ellie from The Last of Us was another example of this "forced diversity" people complained about before.

At least from a more nutritional stance, being able to eat dairy products and eggs makes it a lot easier to supplement the nutrients you would have otherwise gotten from meat. A major issue with veganism is vitamin B12 deficiency, and vitamin B12 comes naturally from animal products. This would require vegans to consume either fortified foods, supplements, or GMOs to account for nutritional deficiencies, which are even more apparent and bigger than that of typical vegetarians. Also, veganism isn't totally opposed to the use of animals in any kind of food product, but they are generally against unfair and harmful use of animals. Vegans generally will not care if bees were involved in pollinating crops or manure was used as fertilizer, but they do if they believe that chickens are being cooped up in cages to collect their eggs.

I use Reddit, Twitter, Discord, and YouTube. Not so much of a fan of Instagram or Facebook.