PlzGivHugs

As I noted, there is also a lot more money involved in movie production compared to retail. On the actor/writer side, you have more individuals involved who don't risk starving when they form a union, and on the studio side, they can less afford to delay or trash shows and movies. Compare that to, for example, walmart workers who likely have little in the way of savings, nonetheless funding to establish a union, and work for a company that could close down a dozen stores to kill a union an not even notice it in their balance sheet.

Again, I'm not saying they shouldn't unionize, but given the enviroment, the system is stacked against them. Blaming vulnerable workers for not unionizing is like saying the poor don't have money because they didn't work hard enough, or didn't invest in the right things. Instead of blaming them, we need to be looking at ways to support them. This might be pushing legislators to improve workers rights and social safety nets, it might be helping them to join larger unions (such as how a lot of IT workers end up covered by other unions), or it might be providing more tools and education on how to organize into unions, ultimately, the important thing is recognizing that these are people who need help and trying to offer it to them rather than jist telling them to pull themselves up by their bootstraps.

I'm not sure how recoverable it is at this point, but if you want Star Wars to act as a forever-story, don't treat it as one single story. Its okay if plot doesn't directly build with each release. Its okay if it doesn't connect to other parts of the cannon. Its okay if you have no shared characters. Hell, its even okay (if not ideal) if some media contradicts each other. The important part is making good stories, and if a new peice of media wouldn't work when attached to a larger plot, don't attach it to the larger plot. Simple as that.

Look at something like 40K, for example. While yes, there is a "main" plot, its only a small part. Honestly, fans often outright ignore the "main plot" Horus Hersey books, in favour of the more fun and compartmentalized books like the Eisenhorn Trilogy or the ork books because those are the books that most revel in the setting and themes of 40K and aren't burdened by dozens of other books that they have to tie in to.

Its a lot easier said than done, esspecially in an easy-to-enter, oversaturated field like tech or retail. There are so many workers, its hard to organize on a meaningful scale, and the barrier to entry is often low enough that the company can fire the whole team and have a new one overnight. So far as I can think of, the only fields sharing a similar low barrier to entry and abundance of workers, that has successfully unionised are all in hollywood, with things like writting and acting, where there was far more money involved.

Thats not to say people shouldn't unionise or that its impossible, but given the current state of the economy its also absurd to directly put blame on those who are most vulnerable, least likely to succeeded, and most likely to face retaliation.

If you're going to victum blame, it should really be on senior staff that are harder to replace, and other unions for not showing more support. Or, you could just blame the people actually responsible: the rich and powerful who built and maintain the current system.

Edit: Just to provide an example for context: Stats are iffy, but most seem to agree that about 15 million people work in retail the US. You'll need a significant portion of the workforce in the union to be able to negotiate. Its obviously more complicated than a straight percentage, but for the sake of example, we'll say you need 20% membership. That means you'll need a union (or collective of unions) of 3 million people, matching the NEA and dwarfing unions like the Teamsters, SEIU, and United Auto Workers. Again, I'm not saying we shouldn't try, but this isn't a simple or easy process. For those involved, its risky or outright dangerous, and they'll need all the support they can get if they want to have any chance of success.

From what I've heard (although I have no real sources) a lot of the rich Africans are similarly wealthy to many of the rich Americans. Its mostly owners of resource extraction sites and refineries, similar to oil barons and mining companies in American history, but with even less regulations. That said, you don't really hear about them as much because the local governments aren't strong enough to challenge them (or even collect accurate information on them) and they're less interested in flaunting their wealth to the poor.

Basically, the Republicans are now saying that they won't release the Epstein list after all, because no client list actually exists.

He addresses this some. 120v is still a lot faster than boiling water on the stove. Coffee makers are significant, but boiling water in a microwave is generally a bad idea, given the risk of superheating (not that people don't do it.)

Actually, the biggest tell is that for how long it is, it's mostly noise with little signal. Some of it doesn't even make sense, "check what instances or users you're federated with"?

So like someone dumb trying to sound smart, or someome trying to fill space. See my previous comment about tankies.

You mean using subheadings? Yes, AI often does that, but it doesn't have to, nor do people avoid it.

Half the stuff I write gets flagged as AI generated when put into a """detection""" service because its too average. You can't reliability filter AI text from non-AI text. Hell, even a lot of the tankie rhetoric here reads like a hallucinating AI, spitting out over-long sentences with little meaning and no overarching argument.

Be respectful but honest. Hopefully you can still be there to support her, but its not your responsibly to hide your sexuality for her, nor would it be right to lead her on when the relationship won't be successful.

Just try to keep in mind that she's likely in a vulnerable place right now, so while you shouldn't lie, try to be gentle. Prehaps emphasize that theres no blame, and make sure she knows you're proud of her.

To try and answer what you're asking genuinely, since I don't see indication that this is bad-faith:

The reason African-Americans and some black people get a "pass" to use it isn't because it isn't offensive. Its because they're expected to have a better understanding of their own oppression than someone who hasn't lived with it, and because it can generally be assumed to not have racist connotations. The word has such heavy history that if someone who isn't black uses it, it is usually (and reasonably) assumed to be racism. Even among those who are black, theres a lot of nuance, with many feeling uncomfortable with saying it, either because the word is so loaded that it can be offensive reguardless, or because they don't feel like they're connected enough to the history to have the "right" to say it (I.E. someone who grew up in a black-majority country might feel this way.)

Making immigration more difficult already benefits the wealthy. Not having birthright citizenship won't change that.

I think you're misinterpreting my intentions. I believe that making immigration and citizenship easier is best. I just also believe that Jus Soli is an ineffective band-aid solution, that doesn little to help the common man.

I'm not informed enough to be very specific in execution, but in my mind, immigration should be extremely generous. Ideally, I'd say it should be effectively unlimited, but I know there are economic considerations that need to be taken into account, such as the rate of housing construction. That said, I don't feel confident enough to outline specifics beyond that. I have nothing against immigrants or immigration.

Its purely citizenship, and the political power it involves specifically that I believe shouldn't be given out based on geographic location at one instant alone. Given that its effectively giving you power to change how the country is run, it should be given to those who are directly affected by how the country is run. Ideally, I'd almost want a system where someone can't be more invested in a different country, although again, I'm not sure about specifics. Prehaps something along the lines of a limit of how much property can be owned outside the country relative to within the country, so regular people qualify easily, but someone can't get citizenship while they own a dozen houses elsewhere. Again, I'm not an expert, and not trying to advocate for a specific solution, just that immigration be made easier and citizenship shouldn't be something you can buy.

Edit: fixed a couple typos.