Interesting way of saying "my human rights aren't up for debate every 4 years."

Because 2 of those seats bring in more revenue than 6 of the economy seats, but you'd never fill a plane of only first-class seats at that price point and the benefits compared to the cheaper seats make them more desirable for those who can afford them.

As for shrinkflation, maybe it started earlier with airlines when they started nickel-and-diming people for everything and cutting out in-flight meals and the like. It's crazy to see how the luggage fees and such effectively increased their gross profits by about 33%.

Main character syndrome, aka "Don't you know who I am?!"

10-hour shifts are very common in the US. Working 50 hours a week is fairly common, though sometimes people work four 10-hour days instead of the usual five 8-hour days that people know as a "9 to 5 job."

I was recently looking at a job listing where they were hiring for 2 shifts of the same role. The first was 50 hours a week working 10-hour days from 7am to 5pm, and the second shift worked 42 hour weeks with four 9-hour days where you worked from 3pm to midnight and then a shortened 6 hour day on Fridays. These kinds of schedules are the norm in manufacturing and logistics jobs, and in my experience, the higher your salary and the more senior your role, the fewer hours you're expected to work. And you might even get benefits like vacation time and sick days/pay!

And local colloquialisms as well. I can tell you the secret to a Boston accent is to replace the r after a vowel with an h, and that'll help you pahk the cah at Hahvahd yahd, but won't do a damn thing when somebody tells you the food at a restaurant is wicked pissah, but warns you that it's rainin' feckin' hahd out deyah so yeh better off takin' the T to Southie.

But the fear isn't so rational. It's like a fear that the cocktail in your example will replace the original vodka whether they want the cocktail or not, or that the vodka will be so diluted by seltzer that it will functionally cease to exist.

It's like a fear of gentrification of the country as a whole.

It's also important to remember that the US is a huge exception in this regard as well. Most other countries are like 90%+ native population, and immigrant populations tend to be sort of isolated from the wider national culture due to things like language barriers, and they often set up little "bastions" of their native culture locally wherever they live. We even see plenty of that in the US as well. While there are many distinctly US cultures across the country that are derived from a variety of backgrounds, there are tons of "enclaves" of European culture that make it blatantly clear where immigrants from certain countries settled. In Boston, the culture of Chinatown is distinctly unique and separate from the wider culture of the city, which largely has ties back to Ireland (and is very proud of it). And both of those are distinctly different from where the Italian immigrants settled, who effectively have their own districts of cultures descended from Italy regardless of where they immigrated to.

Because of the American Puritannical values, which dictate what the credit companies and advertisers are willing to do business with and the cultural zeitgeist along with it.

The Puritans were some of the earliest British colonists in the US, and were either thrown out of England for attempting a coup to replace the king with a puppet to force their more extremist form of Christianity on the country, or left by their own choice because they felt that the Church of England was too liberal. They were basically a bunch of prudes who believed that the human body and sex were shameful and disgusting.

This has led to the dichotomy where advertisers want nothing to do with sex/nudity, except when it comes to implied sex in advertisements. Because sex is bad, but it also sells, which is good.

PG-13 and rated T for teen, respectively

Once again, I am tapping the sign for people to go watch the two hour video by Shaun on the subject.

The moral of Harry Potter is that the status quo is correct and should never be questioned, and nobody should ever try to change anything.

Harry doesn't defeat Voldemort or change any of the issues inherent in the bumbling bureaucracy of the wizard world. Voldemort kills himself on a magic technicality, Harry becomes a magic cop and helps to ensure that magic is never used to help the undesirables of society (Muggles), and Hermione is ridiculed for being a girl with blue hair and pronouns who tried to end the chattel slavery system before she "grew up" and became a much more sensible person who realized that the slaves actually want to be oppressed, and it's for their own good.

You can see Rowling's morality change practically in real-time as the books go on, from criticizing the system to defending it as she began to benefit from it as her wealth grew. And underneath it all, you can see her discriminatory opinions of people. That was always there. When she wants you to hate a woman, she makes them fat or gives them masculine features. If I have to read the phrase "mannish hands" one more time, I might vomit.

I always assumed that tech bros were the client, not the developer. They're the frat bros of the tech world. They don't know or care what a technology does. They're just going to slap it into anything and everything and hype it up like crazy to make that tech bubble money before it inevitably bursts.

Don't forget that it's also effectively a pay cut due to the added expenses and time lost in commuting. They should ask if the company is going to at least pay for the maintenance of the car if they aren't going to pay for the time spent commuting.

I saw some context for this, and the short of it is that headline writers want you to hate click on articles.

What the article is actually about is that there's tons of solar panels now but not enough infrastructure to effectively limit/store/use the power at peak production, and the extra energy in the grid can cause damage. Damage to the extent of people being without power for months.

California had a tax incentive program for solar panels, but not batteries, and because batteries are expensive, they're in a situation now where so many people put panels on their houses but no batteries to store excess power that they can't store the power when it surpasses demand, so the state is literally paying companies to run their industrial stoves and stuff just to burn off the excess power to keep the grid from being destroyed.