[-] jaaake@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Oh, would you look at that. That's definitely an account that's parroting Russian propaganda.

I always forget that there's differing reasons to hate capitalism.

[-] jaaake@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

We have an issue containing wildfires already, this is a monumentally bad take.

[-] jaaake@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

The post telltale one is a return to form.

[-] jaaake@lemmy.world 12 points 3 days ago

That's a real weird response, homie.

[-] jaaake@lemmy.world 7 points 4 days ago

I'm pretty sure this is photoshopped, unless they got some ink removed around her eyeliner/shadow.

[-] jaaake@lemmy.world 110 points 5 months ago
38
submitted 6 months ago by jaaake@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

Every year, my partner of a decade and I have Christmas with her family. My family is Jewish and we also spend at least one night of Hanukkah with them. For all gatherings (including birthdays) the gifts are almost exclusively chosen and purchased by the one who is more directly related to the recipient. It always feels a little weird to me that their family gets me gifts, but they never receive anything exclusively from myself, it's just very vaguely implied that the gifts are from us as a couple. To be fair, their parents give gifts as a couple (always from their mom). Also, I would never ask my partner to purchase gifts for my family in addition to theirs, they're already stressed enough by finding something for their own family. I've never brought this up with my partner as I don't want to make them feel either obligated to or guilty about implicitly declaring that they don't want to.

36

I see news articles that the vote to release the files might not happen until the first week of December, but yesterday saw a massive dump of emails.

Are these two separate things? Why are they categorized like this? Do we know how different they are from each other? Who has actually seen what's in the files?

[-] jaaake@lemmy.world 146 points 8 months ago

Maybe it's just me, but if the president can fire them at a whim and replace them with whoever he wants, they don't seem very "independent."

[-] jaaake@lemmy.world 140 points 1 year ago

Cornell, who has led the Minneapolis-based retail chain since 2014, received $9.9 million in total compensation for 2024, an 87% drop from his 2020 peak of $77.5 million.

What the actual fuck? Why are humans being paid $10m A YEAR, let alone over $75m?!

[-] jaaake@lemmy.world 89 points 1 year ago

The tax system is so complicated, most people can’t handle navigating it on their own. Most people have jobs where taxes are automatically removed from pay checks and sent to both state and federal tax agencies. However, that amount is just an estimate and once a year (or quarter) you need to file paperwork to confirm whether you over or underpaid and then you either get a rebate (without interest), or you’ll need to send in a payment to make up the difference. That paperwork has been lobbied to remain as complicated as possible so that companies like Intuit can provide services that tax payers find useful and continue to pay for. This is more complicated for business owners, both big and small.

-19
submitted 2 years ago by jaaake@lemmy.world to c/usa@lemmy.ml

Nobody likes voting for the “lesser of two evils.” Casting a vote in favor of someone who is diametrically opposed to your viewpoint(s) absolutely sucks. The shitty reality is that we aren’t going to change the electoral process in the next two months.

If you don’t see either major candidate as a champion that you can support, it seems more beneficial to see it as selecting your enemy for the next four years. I would rather fight against someone that I have a chance of changing. At minimum I would rather protest against someone that I think has a lower chance of authorizing lethal force against a march that I attend.

Voting for a 3rd presidential candidate (or not voting at all), is letting someone else make that decision for you.

That said, we have got to get out of this constant cycle of only having two options. There’s too much money at a national level to start there. We’ve got to start local and get third party candidates into offices at a city level, then state, then national. It’s going to take a long time and it should have happened so very long ago. We can’t change the past, we can only change the future. The only time to start changing the future is in the present.

[-] jaaake@lemmy.world 129 points 2 years ago

john hancock's john hancock

You can tell it’s shopped because of the pixels

[-] jaaake@lemmy.world 84 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Stupid people always say no. There are no rules given for what smart people say. One could answer no to the question and the stupid people rule may not be applicable.

view more: next ›

jaaake

0 post score
0 comment score
joined 3 years ago