All those silly "would you rather have [5 to 7 figure sum of money] or one-on-one time with a rich entrepreneur?" questions where we're supposed to think picking the facetime is the wise move because their advice is priceless.
If their advice is good, they'd tell you take the $.
Do you know how much money I could make for myself if I had $100,000 free and clear with no obligations on it?
So many entrepreneurial success stories start out with a gift or a "small loan of a million dollars" or a parent buying the first restaurant or whatever.
Money is the number one factor in money. Money is the reward for capitalist competition but also the pieces used to play the game.
If you've got a little bit of extra money, you can save money by buying the cheaper unit price giant bulk things instead of single uses, by buying the higher quality stuff that lasts longer, by fixing problems when they're inconvenient and not emergencies.
I've you got a bit more extra money... you can invest it, either passively or in a business that lets you pursue what you're actually *good* at, what you find fulfilling, instead of working 96 hours for three different jobs where your labor creates value for *them* and not you.
Money is the difference between paying rent to a landlord who has no loyalty towards your interests and owning your own property, which is somehow tax deductible while paying rent to have a place to live isn't.
Take the money, take the money, take the money. Even if you are not in a position to use it as seed money for your dreams, even if $50,000 or $100,000 would just pay your medical bills for a while or cancel your student debt... you'd be materially better off.
I know these are all ridiculous hypotheticals and nobody's going around offering "$75,000 or seven minutes in boardroom heaven with Jeff Bezos." but even as hypotheticals they exist to erase the relationship between having money and making money.
My fortunes rise and fall based on a lot of factors, but I can tell you, once I get on a streak where I'm making money... I make more money.
Because I have less stress, more opportunities, more shields against sudden expenses and disruptions.
I'm... not on such a streak right now, by the way. I was, had a very good fall and spring, but this summer was pretty brutal. Still rebuilding my income. Going to be rattling the cup more in coming days.
And one way that having money is less stressful and more fruitful than not having money?
It's way easier to crowdfund when you have money. Doesn't matter what it's for. The more people perceive that you *need* it, the worse a response you get.
This is why I love @KillerMartinis's devotion to direct aid/direct action on here, and the #ShowUpForWishes hashtag by @showupforthis - normalize the idea of people helping people because they need help, and because we can.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
"How can one person be a they? It doesn't make sense."
Same way one person can be a he or she.
"Those words are singular."
No. Those words, like all words, are shapes and sounds. Words don't make any sense. Words don't do anything.
We make words, and we make sense of them.
There's all kinds of other arguments that favor the validity of singular they, including the fact that even people who claim it's a contradiction use it reflexively when the *only* thing they know about the unknown antecedent is that it's one singular person.
There's the argument about established use, where "they" has been used as a singular pronoun for longer than "you" was standardized as the second person singular; "you" is still grammatically plural, as in "She is one person. He is one person. You ARE one person."
Here's a reason I'm a pro-mockery of the OceanGate fiasco: that whole "regulations stifle innovation" thing that crops up in their PR to present the whole "untested and unlicensed" thing as a feature rather than a bug: people who want us eating heavy metals for breakfast say that
The idea that safety regulations and oversight are anti-business, anti-competition, anti-future, and anti-human survival (because the geniuses who would save us have their hands tied)... that's a huge and consequential part of right-wing/libertarian mythology.
And no, I'm not saying that libertarian and right-wing are the exact same thing. That's why I said both of them. Because they aren't exactly the same thing.
But there's a lot of areas where their goals and methods overlap perfectly, even if their professed beliefs do not.
Don't disagree with Representative Raskin here about the principle, but we all need to be ready for the fact that the GOP attacks on Joe Biden via Hunter aren't likely to stop or even change no matter what he does or does not do.
And counting on the people - even those who aren't specifically part of the right-wing echo chamber - to notice the disconnect and the hypocrisy... well, I mean, a lot counts on the media not blandly reporting/repeating the attacks like they're normal and well-founded.
The idea that is prevalent in so much of the media that the proper thing to do is amplify both sides and if one of them is absurd or dangerous, "the American people will see and decide that for themselves".
But to the extent they trust the news, they trust the news.
...and how much more it felt like I was getting something done and communicating ideas clearly in the thread vs. when I try to write even a "gallop draft" or Pratchettian 0th draft of actual mechanics.
So I'm going to give my brain a break by threading about the ideas more.
Two things I mentioned in that thread, about things a Paladin can mostly *just do*, the idea of a Paladin's vow having a supernatural ring of truth that is *just believed* here, and sensing the presence of deceit, are both part of two important aspects.
The sentence "At some point, safety is just pure waste." is such a perfect distillation of something I've tried to articulate over the years about *gestures vaguely around at everything*.
Whatever happened to the sub now, it was cheaper at the time to assume it just wouldn't.
This logic goes into oil tankers and pipelines: sure a spill will be catastrophic and expensive, but what's the alternative... spend "extra" money forever to try to head off something that just might not happen?
And of course, the pandemic. All of the missed opportunities and half-measures... the long-term cost of not investing in safety is a problem for a future version of us who might not even exist. Cheaper to assume it won't.