If you stoped repeating the same mistakes over and over again and tried to think “where could I be right” instead of “can you find a wrong and disprove” you would be a more reasonable person to talk to.

E.g. (cause you clearly need it)

You think the rarity of Bill Gates disproves my point. I say a friend who is neurodivergent and a high school drop out literally just bought cleaning supplies and started going door to door to businesses on a strip asking if they needed a good scrubbing. He did a few gigs on the spot for pocket change, but quickly found several of the 2nd story offices were displeased with their after-hours cleaning contractors. A few offered a trial to prove my dude could do a good job. Once proven they offered annual contracts. Boom! Entrepreneur. Today he has 3 vans and 7 employees. Still doesn’t know what standard deviation is.

This type of opportunity is everywhere. I could go on all day. But why? The point is made and you’ll either get it, or not.

As long as my right to destroy is intact, it’s deplorable, but manageable.

B-b-b-b-baby y-you ain’t s-s-seen n-nothing yet!

None of what you say is wrong. Statistically speaking you’re making two mistakes:

You are overemphasizing what is the primary path for most and concluding that everything else should be excluded. Why cut someone struggling from 31.46% of the jobs that don’t fit the optimal 1st standard distribution?

It literally isn’t as rare as you think. I know a great many overeducated and unemployed as well as a great many high-school dropouts that are Entrepreneurs, Sr Consulting Software Architects and Successful Artists.

When someone is struggling, consider the normal path might be why. A broader approach that doesn’t prejudice viable alternatives for the crime of being “not the most popular option” is prefferrable.

You misunderstand. If we get impossibly bright light fireworks, I don’t want to shield myself from them. Considering what comes next, I want to walk drunkenly stumble into the light and be free.

This is good. But “need” is perhaps too strong. Lots of highly successful people without education. Lots of highly educated people who couldn’t cut it. Plus it too has barriers of it own (costs, loansharking student loans)

It’s good, but isn’t the only way.

<activate mod ban protection - humour>

Have you considered the “other” economy?

• Prostitution or pimping
• Drug selling (B2B naturally, not retail lol)
• Drug manufacturing
• Panhandling
• Arms Trafficking
• Terrorism (eco, political, religious,)
• Religion (start your own church. There is a low barrier to entry here as a street preacher, plus you can combine this with some of the others, but you can work your way up to megachurch pastor with your own jets.)
• Mugging/Home Invader/Burglary
• Crime Enforcer a.k.a. the kneecapper
• Politician
• Spy/snitch (private/corporate/government)

It’s really about understanding yourself. What are your needs? What are your natural strengths? When you do what you love, you’ll never work a day in your life.

<deactivate mod ban protection - humour>

Edit: A seriously helpful answer that ties into this. I’ve worked closely with retail executives. It’s awful for you on purpose. Their business model is built on low barrier to entry and suffering. You are right to stay away. My above joke was not only meant to be funny. Who doesn’t need a giggle at times like this? But it was also to get you to think in different ways. Making a living is not the same as getting a job with an employer. That’s only one way, and it often sucks. Think entrepreneurship (non-criminal). Think lemonade stand. Not as stupid an idea as it sounds - Martha Stewart got started selling pies outside a plaza. Lateral thinking can help you here. Get outside of your own assumptions and consider a broader perspective.

• Start your own cleaning company. Residential or commercial.
• Daycare, Nanny, Au-pair.
• Food services
• Personal shopper
• Home care PSW.

US military is poised to TACO Tuesday!

Or

Enter Player 4 - China has joined the game!

I love a good taco, but I also have a lawnchair and case of beer ready in case we kick of WWIII and I want to watch the impossibly bright lights.

🎵🎶

And the band played on

As the helicopters whirred

Drunk on the lawn in a nuclear dawn

My senses finely blurred burned 🎵🎶

“No Kings but the Burger King™” could get traction.

Zeroing in “Missing the oily lustre”

1. Beans have natural variation in batches as seasons change and inventory updates. Old beans, dry beans etc… Could try another coffee for comparison.

2. Under extraction: Never mentioned the press, or your grinder. If your press is manual like a Flair, extraction is super sensitive to pressure which is dominated by grind size. If your grinder is aging, either slipping settings or wear on burrs could subtly increase grind size. Put the two together and boom! Underextraction, even with unperceptably small wear.

If you have an automatic espresso machine, could be slight changes in plumbing, like boiler temp (check with thermometer) or pumps. Service, repair, replace or simply retune via settings and controls.

Try one notch higher to bump extraction.

They are huge in real estate photography.

I disagree and I don’t think you got it, but I updoot for good faith, some fair points, wit and humour. I’ll always drink to that. ;)

Heresy! Where are the turtles? It’s turtles all the way down.

It’s not fundamentaly different than the Heritage Foundation trying to find ways to bring back lynchings. People pick a position that suits their narrative and groups eventually evolve extremists. It exists everywhere. This only appears absurd because you’re getting a rare glimpse of LGBTQ+ and neurodivergents trying to self govern.

It’s not absurd. It’s inevitable. These groups have never had a voice before, let alone the freedom to try and self-assemble power.

You judge a nascent phenomena in human civilization with a lense that was forged, refined and normalized watching the dominant power groups who have had fewer of the particularities of these minorities and a lot longer to work out the kinks of governance.

The real kicker here - tell me this well intentioned but unproductive spectacle here is “nuts” while I look at the dominant form of conventional politics in the news daily. It makes me want to pull out a lawnchair, sit naked on the frontlawn, crack a cold one and wait for the nuclear blastwave to free me.

c/wholesome

Hmmm. Upvote or downvote? You make solid points. You are defending a position in good faith. Yet “mental disorder”?

Your mentality and eagerness to stake a position and defend the bastion hurts as much as helps.

catholic sins were only defined later

You are making an artificial distinction. Catholicism can be, but shouldn’t be viewed as a thing with a start. It’s part of a continuum. Judaism>Christianity>Islam. Catholic sins weren’t defined later. Like all culture, they evolved from earlier sins. Even calling them Abrahamic Religions as we do is making the same error. The tradition didn’t just emerge, it evolved from predecessors and it has descendants.

natural law is the law of nature, that exists and has nothing to do with religious nonsense but instinct, which originated from evolution.

Aside from the above linking culture, specifically religion to evolution in a real tangible way, please consider that natural selection over time takes random mutations and selects for reproductive fitness. It doesn’t care about what is “good” it only cares about what is most advantageous until new offspring can extend the continuity. We tend to think of this in terms of physiological of biochemical traits, but that’s a narrow view too. Our minds are a product of evolution. Our thinking is a product of our minds.

“Sin” is just part of a evolutionary cultural continuum that started somewhere in the roots of cognition where “actions>consequences” evolved and branched into “sin” and “karma”.

Creatures with evolved complex cognition need their complex social constructs to evolve to survive as well. They become condensed, efficient, easily axiomized artifacts like “the golden rule”, “religion”, philosophy, ethics, morality. All part of a continuum where divergence, convergence and speciation occur.

Religious and atheists are seperate cognitive sub-species who can choose to compete, fall into a predator-prey relationship (e.g. inquisition or communist religious purge) or we can coexist in our respective niches or, like all the best stuff in nature, become symbiotic and make the system better for all.

In short, not Religion vs Evolution. Religion as evolution. 😉👉

It’s not nuts. It is uncalibrated and counterproductive. It’s also what I’ve called the “curse of the intellectual”, and why they rarely become polliticians, let alone successful ones. It’s what happens when ideas are carried further than their utility justifies.

Good point. It has utility as a shibboleth. Careful though, a weapon like this can burn friend and foe alike.

Remember when the neo-pronoun thing landed on:

co/cos
e/em/eir
e/em/es
hu/hum
ne/nem
ne/nir
per/per
s/he/hir
thon/thons
ve/ver
vi/vir
vi/vim
zhe/zher

I’m all for being inclusive and a completionist. But the community had to learn the difference between what belongs in academic and reference litterature, and what belongs in casual conversation. A well intentioned idea was badly introduced to the public causing blowback and faned the flames of the culture wars and energized the maga chuds. It’s weakness was not its specificity. It was trying to start at the end and forcing the language everybody’s been learning since birth to be rewritten. It’s unweildy.

To your exact point. Naming each group IS important. Specificity and identity has a power of its own. Let the acronym grow! But know where it belongs. This is already past the point of needing a shorter simpler umbrella term for conversation and is going into reference material.

When even your allies are getting tripped up, it’s time to rethink and pivot.