sloppychops

joined 2 weeks ago
[–] sloppychops@lemmy.ca 4 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

The nature and scenery in the US is honestly stunning, and you're lucky to have the NPS to make all of it so accessible.

In saying that though; there is natural beauty everywhere you look in the world and it's very easy, and often cheaper to go elsewhere.

[–] sloppychops@lemmy.ca 3 points 4 hours ago

Welcome! Hope you have a lovely time!

[–] sloppychops@lemmy.ca 4 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I wonder if there's a way to block AWS? I've no idea how these things work, but surely there's some sort of signature that is readable and therefore blockable?

[–] sloppychops@lemmy.ca 5 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

It's the worst. Avoiding Pepsi, Coke, Nestlé seems impossible sometimes. I had to give up the masala chips that I like because it turns out they're a Pepsi front. Why are they allowed to just buy up everything?

[–] sloppychops@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It does seem like all the hoohah about how great the US Constitution is, or the genuis of the US founders may well have just been some good marketing mixed with a reliable dash of American Exceptionalism.

[–] sloppychops@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 days ago

I can't help but be struck at how cowardly 'moral relativism' seems. Yes, you could potentially offend or step on someone's toes if you express moral outrage at the practice of childhood genital mutiliation, for example, but are you truly opposed if you are willing to contextualise said opposition? If you have a strong moral objection to something, then have a strong moral objection.

There are 8 billion people, and not all of them are going to or have to agree with you. There's absolutely no need to play the chameleon to keep everyone happy.

If your moral objection to something isn't universal, then it isn't an objection.

[–] sloppychops@lemmy.ca 7 points 4 days ago

I also use Storygraph and like it well enough. Is there a good reason to switch to Bookwyrm?

[–] sloppychops@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 days ago

A majority when 'undecided' are excluded.

[–] sloppychops@lemmy.ca 7 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Thanks for sharing.

A lot of people who don't have much experience helping with the homeless don't realise how dangerous it can often be and tend to err on the side of optimism.

We've had to call police on numerous occasions because of instances of physical assault. Of course, the vast majority of people we help are lovely, but it helps to be realistic to keep yourself and others safe.

[–] sloppychops@lemmy.ca 19 points 5 days ago (1 children)

His policies have absolutely hurt, and probably killed, people.

This guy is a whiney little bitch.

[–] sloppychops@lemmy.ca 42 points 5 days ago (4 children)

I agree that people lack compassion, but for a substantial number, it's not 'for no reason.'

Many people's interactions with the homeless population are very negative, typically involving theft, drug use, and terrifying mental health breaks. Obviously, that's very much an issue of selection bias since it's typically the same few who give the entire homeless population a bad reputation.

I think if people gave more of their time to help the homeless and others who have fallen through the cracks of society, a lot of the cruel words and horrible treatment directed toward our less fortunate would diminish substantially. A few hours a week volunteering at your local food bank, shelter, church kitchen, nursing home, etc. Is a small inconvenience but an absolutely huge help.

Additionally, we must rethink how we treat repeat offenders and public criminality. A lot of the time police won't even respond to a reported bike theft or incidence of public drug use. The offenders are a danger and nuisance not only to themselves and the general public at large, but also, and most substantially, to other homeless people.

[–] sloppychops@lemmy.ca 13 points 5 days ago (3 children)

This is not a US specific issue, tbh. I've heard this weird belief repeated by all sorts of people.

view more: next ›