Maybe more than people need, but this is person specific
Resonosity
joined 1 year ago
Literally me this morning
Are there any systems I (pun unintended) buy into when using a credit card over a debit card?
I'm still agreeing to a bank, for instance, when credit unions are an alternative.
Apologies for the naivete. Seems like my education failed me here.
But not too much! Some salt is good, but not the absurd amounts you'll find in prepared food from the food service industry.
Also, make sure the salt you use has iodine in it. Lots of people don't get that
They did have quality in the early 2000s, remember my grandma taking us their for their awesome bread. Sad to see it enshittify
Gala for me
What's the issue with a debit card again? Are you saying that we should be using credit cards, or physical currency?
I'm curious to learn more about how shit banks are and how much better credit unions are.
Or are credit unions the only alternative?
Sync has been my alternative coming from RiF. Very clean experience
Same thing with Brussels sprouts. Don't boil. Toss in salt, pepper, olive oil, and balsamic vinegar, bake at like 425 for 20 minutes, you're welcome
Not necessarily. All species need to scavenge for their own subsistence unless they want to die, so there is a motivation there to go out and get food (i.e. other species), among other resources from the environment specific to their capabilities.
There is no free lunch.
BUT species don't necessarily have to exchange resources with others to live in their habitat. They might need to defend it from other organisms of their same species or of other species, or they can share it with those. Exchange relationships can also arise, but they aren't necessary to happen.
Habitat can of course degrade over time, so there is a motivation to maintain and repair that habitat or move to a more suitable one nearby or far away.
This is all to say that humans, the exceptional beings we are at solving problems and doing amazing things, should be able to invent ways to get around entropy and inconvenience, which we have to a degree: not perfectly, though.
Regarding this article, I'm not sure I want people to own land for the sake of "owning". Perhaps a case can be made where people who use the land apportioned to them get to keep it over time (see what the Nordic countries are doing). This would exclude land and homes people have in other states or countries.
Not sure what the other consequences of this practice are tho, so I welcome any feedback anyone might have
Jfc, I hope all women in Texas have their sights on eventually moving out and away. This is absurd