@besttrousers @texasgermanbre If the tweet said “Americans are surprised by the benefit level Germans receive for up to 12 months” would that be a problem?
@besttrousers @texasgermanbre Okay lol is this a distinction about what counts as brain-breaking? Why did you pick the 47% when the OP said for up to a year?
@besttrousers @texasgermanbre Yes, but the phrase that was presented as breaking American brains was “In Germany, if you lose your job the government replaces 60% of income FOR A YEAR”. You left out the last part, which is the part that breaks Americans brains
@tracewoodgrains@IleanaAlmog The caption itself is clearly the whistle here, and what has a direct connection to Nazi ‘blood and soil’ arguments. Better put here: https://t.co/aF01CoLacA
@nkulw -“without a hostage there is no ransom. That’s what ransom is. Those are the fucking rules”
-“his girlfriend gave up her toe. She thought we’d be getting a million dollars. It’s not fair!”
-“fair? who’s the fuckin nihilists around here you bunch of fucking crybabies”
@visakanv The smarmy and pushy one is only ‘lousy’ on the axis of “solving customers problems” because it’s easier to pretend to solve fake problems. A lot of them are not lousy at making money, just taking the rent-seeking path
@boss_on_here I’m from there too, I wrote a paper on this once, from umich study: “Historic exposures before 1980, including living in the Midland/Saginaw area, hunting and fishing in the contaminated areas, and working at Dow, contributed to serum dioxin levels”
https://t.co/70PkjtTk8t
Fish in the river near where I grew up are so full of polychlorinated biphenyls and dioxins that they're no longer safe for human consumption thanks to the DOW/Dupont chemical company
@cremieuxrecueil@unboxpolitics@kareem_carr “We” aren’t talking about anything. refusing to engage with his actual statement makes it seem like you don’t want to. If it helps you block me sooner, I have a statistics degree
@cremieuxrecueil@unboxpolitics@kareem_carr “We” aren’t talking about anything. refusing to engage with his actual statement makes it seem like you don’t want to. If it helps you block me sooner, I have a statistics degree
@cremieuxrecueil@unboxpolitics@kareem_carr It’s like talking to a wall lmao they asked you if the logic resonates. “NOOOO YOU MUST TAKE THE STATEMENT LITERALLY” is the least rigorous way to refute someone I’ve ever seen
@visakanv@sighswoon Good example of critics vs haters. Critics can articulate their disagreement with a statement like “it’s not climate change, it’s tweakers” and advocate for what they actually want without getting distracted