ksdale

8 ms·

1.
by ksdale 4y ago
I don't really get it either. My biggest complaint is that they tell you to go see the doctor for everything and 9/10 of the time the doctor will tell you to go home and take ibuprofen and see what happens. I think it's gener
2.
by ksdale 4y ago
This. Patriarchy sort of collectively defines the "emotion" out of the ways that men act out. When women cry, they're being emotional, when men get angry, it's a rational response to people acting the wrong way. (Not to
3.
by ksdale 4y ago
I played some sports growing up, but I also really strongly disliked a lot of sports that I didn't play (which I now don't mind watching at all), and I think if you like anything competitive, it's possible to at least get i
4.
by ksdale 4y ago
Definitely what I said
5.
by ksdale 4y ago
This is exactly how I feel as well. There is a ton of stuff that lawyers do that is basically rote, there are a handful of questions you need to ask, and then you do the thing, and there's no reason someone with an associate's deg
6.
by ksdale 4y ago
I was under the impression that most attorneys are not litigators. You can easily spend a career writing wills or creating trusts or doing business formations, or helping people through real estate transactions without ever setting foot in
7.
by ksdale 4y ago
I disagree that it's overblown. For every study that's utterly failed to replicate over the past however many decades, people have been "sure it is more likely to be correct than the alternative" and that's literall
8.
by ksdale 4y ago
As a lawyer, there is so much more that falls under the umbrella of "practicing law" that is nowhere near as demanding as a trial or contract negotiations. I personally think the credentials that lawyers have are completely unne
9.
by ksdale 4y ago
I'm always complaining to my wife about movies with a detective/mystery component where the key to the whole thing is revealed after the mystery is solved and is is something that we, as viewers, could not possibly have known. I
10.
by ksdale 4y ago
I don't see any problem with that, I'm not the one who said it was ironic that a woman would marry an ambitious man and then have problems with moving to Asia. I don't see any conflict at all between loving someone's a
11.
by ksdale 4y ago
It will be rather difficult for the board to argue that it's satisfying it's fiduciary duty by rejecting an offer with such a high premium so the current shareholders can continue to own a company that's losing money.
12.
by ksdale 4y ago
Haha the parent post literally said that it was ironic that a woman would marry an ambitious man and then complain about said ambition. The ambition, implicitly, being wanting to move to Asia for a job. It seems to me if a woman isn't
13.
by ksdale 4y ago
Marrying a successful, ambitious man does not, in any way, mean that a woman should defer completely to every single career decision a man makes. I'm sure this executive's schedule was already plenty demanding without the burden o
14.
by ksdale 5y ago
Or perhaps a kiss on the cheek wouldn't even register as a kiss and would be recorded as a greeting instead?
15.
by ksdale 5y ago
Lawyers say a lot of stupid things to be sure, but generally not when it pertains to their practice area. Some things they say that sound stupid are actually how the law works, and in my experience as an actual lawyer, people who are no
16.
by ksdale 5y ago
Haha yeah, I was reluctant just because I don't personally know much of that particular history and it was hard to imagine that the Japanese intended to commit genocide against all of China, but I agree that genocide is fair classifi
17.
by ksdale 5y ago
Good question! Genocide is not just another word for mass-murder. It is defined as killing with the intention to destroy the targeted ethnic group/culture/religion completely. That certainly wasn't the American plan anywhere
18.
by ksdale 5y ago
So you're trying to argue that the U.S. is actually the bad guys? Perhaps the good guy/bad guy dichotomy simply isn't that useful. The U.S. did terrible things during the war, and there is no excuse for that. The U.S. is also
19.
by ksdale 5y ago
I'm not sure that's the lesson, based on this post, it sounds like the institutions were vital to the prosperity more than the growth. In a sense, growth is prosperity, but both were the result of institutions, and I'm not su
20.
by ksdale 5y ago
I feel like a bunch of the points on this list actually have an analog in Guzey's argument? Brushing teeth, for example - we do it to have a "clean" mouth, but a lot of people use mouthwash until the bacterial environment in
21.
by ksdale 5y ago
I really appreciate you saying that, in this day and age of internet discourse, I admire making an effort toward civility.
22.
by ksdale 5y ago
I'd also be fine with making casinos illegal, if that's what you're proposing.
23.
by ksdale 5y ago
Do you think most of the people who go to casinos think they're going to lose money? I think an unfortunate percentage do not realize at all that the odds are stacked against them. Their misunderstanding of statistics means they are qu
24.
by ksdale 5y ago
I personally find it less morally repugnant to let people make bad bets on companies than to let people lose their money at slot machines all day.
25.
by ksdale 5y ago
I think they're absolutely there under the pretense of protecting people, and they do protect people from scams, at the cost of preventing average people from participating in one of the biggest wealth creation events in modern history
26.
by ksdale 5y ago
It really depends on what you're investing in, doesn't it? We let people spend hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars in casinos over the course of their lives. When you go to a casino, you're paying for the thrill of g
27.
by ksdale 5y ago
That's what the story about, but non-accredited investors aren't only prevented from investing in those particular companies. They're prevented from investing in the good ones, too. You say that the casino will pay your unlik
28.
by ksdale 5y ago
"Number two is that it gives the zealots following their cause to clear their conscience by saying "see this article was factually correct" when, on the rare occasion, someone bothers to call them out on the lie." This i
29.
by ksdale 5y ago
It's always interesting to me, the mental gymnastics people will do to convince themselves that they're not doing something they believe to be morally wrong. Like, if your intent is to mislead, what do you care if you're tech
30.
by ksdale 5y ago
Just because their interests are opposed to mine doesn't mean I can't trust them. Teacher's unions can use their poor performance as a justification for increasing their own pay which comes straight out of my pocket and yet I

More ›