Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)BL
Posts
0
Comments
32
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Not sure about the anatomy (though I can agree that some of it is rather funny, when you think about it), but the ability to control your own body is, as I see it, one of the core liberties that can never be taken away from an able person. The ethics of "supporting" people with some mental disabilities is much more convoluted, I do not have a strong opinion there.

    Would be curious to see how you do your tax returns if that violates your anatomy!

  • If we are talking about 2 consenting adults - yep, this is my take on it, only these 2 are in charge, until the baby is born. Afterwards there must be some protection for the baby, so there is a role for a government. It was not always like that, but that is how, I think, it should be at this stage of society's evolution. Another moral claim, I know. )

  • Here in the UK there are in general 2 categories of ppl who are still wearing suits: corporate managers and real estate agents. Not sure which is the worst, a close competition.

  • There is a world outside the US, as they say... Regardless, why would a federal government enforce the control of someone's body? There are in general 2 people involved in this, and they should be the only ones responsible for this type of decisions. Not a state, not feds.

  • Thin ice. I believe there must be a balance between free capitalism and a moderately strong government with a safety net. People do fail in life, that should not necessarily lead to death. Children in particular are hungry not because they failed, but because their parents did. And there is a role for the government to support the children in need. This was a role of a tribe in the early days, or community slightly later; then governments took over. This safety net has to exist for other categories of people in need, the extent of this support is to be debated in a healthy society. Personally I do see a merit even in the universal income. Not because this is everyone's birthright, but because it may soon become a necessity.

  • NHS is a government service you explicitly pay for (unless you are exempt from NI). It is not a right, it is something you purchase. You can be exempt from paying due to your personal circumstances, but if all is well - you pay. The fact that our beloved government does not deliver what you pay for is another topic, but it certainly should.

  • I should add to that another point: in a more white collar fields companies in the UK compete for employees (among other parts of benefits package) with the terms they offer for maternity cover, and many will provide many months, at least 6, of fully paid leave.

  • Oh, didn't we all? I certainly did, and that with "cheap" stuff. I was not trying to go beyond mid-fi ever, mostly because i cannot justify it for my old ears, and still managed to sink quite a few grand.

    Having this said, the purchases I consider best were actually cheapest: most enjoyment i got from a pair of Adam T5V as a desktop set up, cannot beat it at that price point in my view; and noname "sleeping headband" from Amazon, like 20 quid or so, that helped me listen to numerous audiobooks in bed with comfort. The latter one though is also the least sexy accessory you can probably get, so choose your spouse wisely! ) The court is still in session for the most recent purchase of Bathys to have OTG music. Sound quality is certainly there for a pair of wireless cans, just not sure yet about long term enjoyment and overall value for money.

    k371s were my previous pair - and if it were not for their lousy snapping headband, I could certainly recommend it as well.