One that doesn’t have a strong taste, canola yes, olive no.

I think this comment really nails what’s irking me amount newer Trek. It used to be a show that was written in a way that regardless of your politics, anyone could watch, and it would make you think. It was a show that would sneakily slip in progressive ideas that could make you second guess your perspectives on the world.

Now there is no depth to it, it just slaps you in the face with politics.

This is probably gonna be a hot take, but I think Star Trek should be written in a way that is appealing for conservatives to watch, but regularly slips in metaphors which challenges their world view. Trek was at it’s best when on it’s surface it was a fun adventure show, and the politics was on a deeper level.

Does becoming a father make you less body conscious?

As someone who went through the NY public school system many years ago, I can confirm hats were/are hard banned. Like unless it was for religious reasons you really couldn’t even think about putting something on your head.

Cell phones were also banned in my youth but I guess times have changed?

Yes i understand what you are getting at there, but my question is precisely how long does one have before the wheels fall off while eating a strict vegan diet? Are we talking a matter of days, weeks, months, years, or decades?

So precisely how long are vegans able to survive without suffering ill effects? Because I mean we’ve all heard of people who have lived on that diet long term, so at what point do the wheels start to fall off so to speak? Is there some kind of extended latency period where you are okay before you get sick, or are vegan influencers just pretending to be healthy?

Also your how do you propose we change our agricultural practices so that our food supply isn’t tainted by sick meat grown in poor conditions? There’s a lot of evidence that there’s not enough land mass on earth to feed everyone a diet of free range grass fed beef. Or do you propose we run full steam ahead with factory farming and damn the consequences?

While I understand and respect your viewpoint, I’m not quite sure you understand what I’m saying here… The question is designed to be a no win scenario, it’s phrased in such a vague way that no matter how you answer someone else can chime in and say oh no, your not imagining the terrible scenario I’m imagining. There’s literally no way of answering it in a way that someone is going to chime in and tell your wrong.

It’s literally designed to be a test designed to gauge your reaction more than it is to be answered seriously.

Without more info one can’t possibly respond in a legitimate manner. And any responses without additional information is more of a mirror to your own personal disposition and fears than it is a legitimate response to the question.

Totally agreed, the question is so vague it’s absurd. Are we talking a panda or a grizzly? Is the man a locked-in paraplegic or an violent ex con?

Regardless how you answer there’s always another possibility that makes your decision look stupid.

One of the big issues I see with that proposal is that at some point, due to inflation an annual income in the ball park of 5 million dollars a year will be considered ‘middle class’. And then the average person will be hit with substantial taxes from a then archaic tax law.

At that point you’ll need a constitutional amendment to shift the goal post which is nearly impossible to do such. (At least at this moment in time it is.)

At that point the budget would likely have finally balanced itself out due to the higher tax rates. So of course there will probably be politicians arguing against making this change as it will effectively kill the federal budget, because shifting the tax laws will mean the government will be taking in substantially less.

It’s a super well intentioned idea at the moment but it’s really a disaster in the making for a future generation.

Plus the vast majority of the people from the states generally don’t drive to other countries, as the US is so large. It’s not that we can’t imagine it, it’s that it’s not relevant to our lives in general.

That may be true and all but I take it you didn’t read the article, because that not what it was about.

They polled people and those who are regularly vote in past elections tend to be pro Biden, those whom hadn’t voted in recent elections tended to be pro Trump.

Which is ironic because if everyone just got out and voted we might just have a send Trump presidency on our hands. I could be wrong, but I suspect that’s the opposite of what you are thinking would happen.

Could you clarify how not voting is specifically a fascist statement?

Like what if there aren’t any fascists on the ballot? Or why would not voting only be a vote towards fascism rather than towards libertarian, anarchism, moderatism or any other kind of “ism” out there?

Why do we always assume the ones who don’t vote aren’t going to vote to run us off the cliff?

My frustration with the get out and vote push is that there is always this weird assumption that the ones who aren’t voting are some how going to magically push things into the “right” direction. What if we are all better off if they don’t vote?

I’ve never heard people in an online forum go “I’m European” only to have someone argue back “Well ackchyually it’s Afro-Eurasia!” And yet this pedantic argument is constantly made for the Americas.

Thank you for being a voice of reason here. I’ve never understood this argument, yes the same word can refer to two different things and both sides can simultaneously be right (and wrong) about the usage of the word.

It’s like no one has ever met two people who share the same name, most reasonable people don’t argue with random people “You can’t be Joe! My friend is named Joe and you aren’t him!”.

And to compound the fact I’ve noticed that people’s native languages and place of birth tend to determine where they fall on the argument. You guys realize that words can sound and be spelled similar and mean something different things in different languages and cultures, right?

Nope, no plastic… Just a cardboard print it.

And then after all that they ended up killing him off a few episodes later… Wtf?

Yes the outside goes brown, but the inside slows down it’s ripening process. Eventually they will all go to mush, but you can keep them at peak ripeness for a few days longer by putting them in the fridge.

Then again most people won’t eat a banana if it has a single brown spot on it, so I’m probably wasting my breath by telling people they can prevent food waste by eating discolored but perfectly ripe food.

inconceivable!

I’m pretty sure that’s a stock image so I don’t think that’s a pic of anyone’s legit fridge.

But to answer your question, you can keep bananas on the counter until they reach your preferred level of ripeness and then put them in the fridge to slow down the ripening process so you have a few more days to eat them before they turn to complete mush. I do it all time to ensure I always have bananas around at my preferred level of ripeness.