🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@mk

That only occurse when it happens through increasing the money supply and distributing it.

When the value comes from the generation of wealth (such as from running a business) then no reason to expect it would result in hyper inflation.

@icedquinn @realcaseyrollins

@trinsec Damn, sorry I must have bumbled it. I will try to beehive myself.

@trinsec Stop pollen my leg, we both know I was just winging it, and I didnt really mean bees-ness. Thats why I didnt charge for the joke, it was a free-bee.

Interesting fact of the day: Bees born in may are very indecisive. In fact may bees are the most indecisive of all the bees.

@icedquinn

Only results in inflation if the money supply were to rise and given away to make it happen. However if it happened because people started businesses and made things that were sold, and thus generated wealth, then it wouldnt result in inflation.

@realcaseyrollins

@lillyfinch

Indeed they are.

@georgetakei

@icedquinn

Everyone is out here trying to reduce the billionaire population to 0... meanwhile im out here trying to increase it to 100%

@realcaseyrollins

@voidabyss

> Where did I mentioned that?

Either I misread or you misspoke.. either way not important since you clarified.

> It is self-harm therefore it’s immoral, I posted research study that mentioned the harm of tattooing on the immune system.

Ok so i think i got your system down then... so this leaves me thining there are tons of examples that would be immoral by your example, but seems rather absurd (and i mentioned some.

* Tattoos and scarification - We covered this

* It is immortal every single time you eat anything unhealth.. a life of anything less than salads and exercise every day is immoral.

* Even little things like staying up late one night makes you an immoral person

@tripu

> The most basic example is: strict heterosexuals would rarely find “inspiration” in realistic depictions of gay sex, and vice versa.

While I agree this doesnt actually happen, I do think the fear is there all the same for hte aforementioned reasons.

> Similarly, is a “normal” person enticed to sex with children by watching paedophilia? I can’t speak for others, but my intuition (and my own experience) is: definitely not. Ditto about rape.

I guess it depends on what age we are talking about. Once the child is old enough to have breasts I think even a person who isnt a pedophile who saw such a person in a sex seen, assuming they were otherwise attractive, might feel some arousal... I mean raping a 4 year old... ewww i dont think any normal person would get aroused by that... but a 15 or 16 year old? I think that is a very real possiblity, after all they have "devloped" by that age, so the formula is there at least.

@georgetakei I rarely support wars, least of all the kind the USA gets in. But ukraine I'd support as there is a very clear right and wrong, and it involves the unilateral and unprovoked invasion of another nation.

@pawsplay

> COVID is disproportionately fatal to the elderly and people with disabilities.

Elderly yes, disabled no... i mean depends on your disability but for the most part, no. I thought me having asthema, for example, would put me at higher risk. Turns out at worse it doesnt effect my risk according to my doctor, at best i am actually at a slightly lower risk for some reason.

I am also disabled due to a spinal injury, also has no effect.

In fact I cant think of too many disabled people who would be at a higher risk except for a handful of things like diabetics or immune compromised...

> Our do-nothing attitude toward the virus isn't a policy failure. It's a cost-cutting measure by the worst, most powerful human beings on Earth.

I think the people have given up, long before policy... People just decided they were done. Even when the mask mandates were in force everyone decided to stop wearing them. I would say the policy, or lack there of, isnt the play here. It started with a decision the people made, at which points the mandates rolled off the books as there was little support to renew them if the public wasnt going to follow it.

This Neil Patrick Asshole thinks he can gaslight us into thinking he is Ryan Reynolds.... We arent buying it Neil, we know its you!

@lowqualityfacts

@lowqualityfacts Is this recent? it is still ongoing? What was this in response to? I imagine it is completely absurd whatever it was.

@louisrcouture less of a backtrack, more of a small tweak :)

@sdgathman

This gets into a bit of muddy water.. I agree with what you are trying to say, and thats the important part... but when it comes to science and the concept of falsifiability im not sure its the best.

When i think of most conspiracy theories all of them are falsifiable in general but not falsifiable by you (or any random member of the public for that matter).

Take the moon landing as an example. People claim it never happened... Well I cant personally prove it directly either way. To truly prove it youd either need inside access to NASA or you'd need the money to go to the moon and check... So while I myself cant verify it, in general it can be verified.

@futurebird

@voidabyss Ok so i think i may understand your rule system now, let me recap and you can tell me if its accurate:

> What determine self-harm is the net negative outcome on the individual and society unless it’s self-sacrifice.
>
> The rule here is if it bad for the individual, it’s bad for society unless self-sacrifice.

Ok so self-harm, when a sacrafice for others, is morally ok.

self-harm that is not a sacrafice for others is always wrong.

Does mental illness and distress form a requirement here at all, or is that just an explanation, that self harm will always coincide with mental health issues and it isnt the mental health issues that make it immoral but rather they are a symptom that is always linked to self harm?

> Self-sacrifice might be perceived as bad for the individual but it’s a net positive for society.

This part I get and am fine with.

Assuming my above interpritation is correct im still a bit confused. You said tattoos and scarification was **not** considered immoral. Yet it does objectively produce self harm (however small) some it still appears to be at odds with your wsystem since you said it is moral yet your "rules" would suggest it isnt.

Am I mixing something up?

@futurebird The scary thing is these people not only think its true, they think there are tons of facts to back it up, we are just "sheep" for not seeing it.

Interesting thing I just learned. While in the USA the landlord is considered a bad guy in Japan its quite the opposite. It is customary for renters to give ~1000$ tot he landord for free to thank them for renting you the house. You dont get that back.

@voidabyss I think you meant this as a reply to our thread?