I think there are a couple issues here. One is parents. I have a relative who worked in education and there is an incredible amount of "shopping for a diagnosis" that happens when a child has issues with some aspect of their education. Many parents simply aren't able to deal with the fact that there are things that their child may not be good at, or that they're not conventionally brilliant, etc. They then shop around for a psychologist who will attest to the kid having some "disorder" so that they get special treatment, exempted from normal rules, etc.

Some cases are legit, many are not. There was one student who had social anxiety during test taking to the point they would lock up and not be able to perform. Obviously this is something that needs to be worked on, but the solution there was that they got to take their tests at a different time than the rest of the class so they didn't feel the anxiety and could adequately prove their knowledge. Again, this isn't a perfect solution for the rest of their life since you'll have to do things with other people... but as something to build confidence and make sure the knowledge was "in there somewhere", it doesn't strike me as a terrible compromise.

The other thing is that young people are generally more open to talking about their struggles and issues than I think they were in the past. It helps build community and a support system. My kids have gotten calls from friends who say "hey, can you talk to me for a couple minutes, I'm having a bit of a panic attack". Ten or 15 minutes later, things are back on track, people are calmed down, and life goes on. Again, better to develop coping mechanisms so that the panic attacks don't happen, but that's a process.

Finally, I think you have a point about being "normal". There are still plenty of "normal" kids out there who don't stand around and talk about these things. They're off doing something else and you might not notice it because it's more what you expect. But there are undoubtedly some who "want" to have an issue so that they have something to talk about and "fit in" with a peer group. It could even take the form of "I was diagnosed with xyz, but look at how awesome I still am".

Just my completely non-professional, anecdotal thoughts.

I'm pretty sure that Spaceballs *was* Jews in Space.

Gotta disagree. Anything after Moore was just trying to recover from the shambles he left the series in. You want to disagree? Then justify the fucking slide whistle over the bridge jump in The Man With The Golden Gun. An actual fantastic stunt, just with a fucking Roger Moore overlay.

He was the worst. Period. Full stop.

It was still better than any Roger Moore film. Nothing sucked worse than the Roger Moore era.

George Lasenby? Better
Timothy Dalton? Better
Pierce Brosnan? Better
Fucking anything? Also better

Ooh, I paused before replying to this, but it's more prevalent than you might think. I work for a company right now that cannot retain talented female sales executives. I originally wondered whether this was just because there was a bit more competition, but that was just me being naive unfortunately.

Among a bunch of 30-40 year old people there is still a "bros before hos" mentality. I've talked to enough people to see both sides and and there's no other way to explain it. It sucks, but it's still a real thing. "Boys will be boys" is cool, where anything other than toeing the line as a demure female is an issue. Guy gets falling down drunk, cool. Woman has 2 glasses of wine at a dinner.. need to "evaluate".

Pretty sure that's not what that shows. Democrats overwhelmingly think that student loans should be forgiven, but there's no data on who actually has student loans.

I'd guess that Republicans have less student loans because not many of them finished high school.

Not sure if you're being sarcastic, but the regulating body of professional snooker just handled down several multi-year bans/suspensions for several Chinese players due to match fixing. And there have always been allegations against other players like John Higgins, etc.

The validity of an argument is independent of the entity making the argument. While motives may be called into question, the reasoning needs to be judged on it's own.

IMO, the attempt by Texas to achieve some over arching theocracy is absurd. The push to regulate access "on behalf of parents" is just a inversion of the typical "think of the children" mentality. Hysterical, overwrought, and lacking basis in actual fact

I can't think of many things that can't or shouldn't be blamed on boomers. They're objectively some of the worst people to ever exist. Every action they've taken is nothing but selfishness and greed.

Draft dodging and drugs in the 60s and 70s. Greed and drugs in the 80s and 90s. Lust for power and the refusal to just fucking die from 2000 on. They're garbage, and the sooner they all die, the better off the world will be

We weren't there before the 80's, and it's a false equivalency to suggest that's where we'll be if we change anything. But you're just a troll, and you know that.

Because a lot of the things that 'made America great' were financed by progressive taxes on the super wealthy. It wasn't until the advent of St Reagan and the flawed concept of 'trickle down economics' that we were put on this path. The rampant greed of the 80's has been obvious in public policy ever since. Just another reason the FYGM generation needs to die.

Nobody is taking about 16 shirts. They're taking about 1600 shirts, and the removal of even 320 not substantially impacting the number of shirts you own. Add to that the fact that most of the people supporting your ability to own 1600 shirts can't afford 16 themselves, and you can see why those 1600 shirt motherfuckers should be hung by their own entrails from the nearest tree.

Taxes are how we pay for society. The people who benefit most from that society can afford to pay more to support the society which made their success possible. Nobody is making paupers of millionaires.

That's the major failing of automation coupled with capitalism. Now it's just the owners of the robots vs that owners of the slaves.

How would widespread automation be perceived in a predominantly communist culture? And I mean actually all people working for the good of the whole, not Chinese/Russian communism.

I'd argue that people could still find purpose (ie, important 'work'), whether it was the creation of art, works of charity, or simply repairing the machines that allow individual humans more freedom.

You realize that John Henry doesn't live through that story, right? It's probably the bleakest outlook on automation. Work yourself to death to barely compete a machine, which will be fixed the next day.

Any time there is strife, you can count on somebody to step up to fuck over the desperate or simply less sophisticated. Capitalism at its finest. I hope they bring back the firing squad.