The president in Idiocracy sought the help of someone smart.

Y’all need to remember that and realize we are way past this movie.

This is one of those “I’m explaining, not justifying” moments. Having said that: I think these threads give us a skewed view of the whole situation, leading to a completely unresolvable “whyyy???” Reaction.

The thing that made these people do something was probably some typical aging flaw like wrinkles or sagging skin. We don’t see that in the photos.

What we do see in the photos is:

1. a “before” photo that’s probably 10-15 years old, showing the person when they were young. We think “what was wrong with that???” But you have to age them 15 years to answer that question.

2. an “after” photo that’s as unflattering as possible. We all know that from one photo to the next, a person can look more or less photogenic depending on lighting, their expression, etc. Photos in a post like this are hyperselected for unattractiveness, especially of their surgery.

I believe in aging realistically but I’m also a man and my career isn’t bound up in the entertainment industry where my appearance is literally everything.

So given all this, I can still have a distaste for cosmetic surgery and shake my head at people doing it, but I don’t QUITE have total bewilderment over why WHY WWWHHHYYY??? because I can mainly see how the post is manipulated to produce that reaction, and I opt out of that manipulation.

You’re SO close to getting it!

The thought drivers are supposed to have when glancing over at that nice clear lane is: “Hm it might even be faster if I biked.”

Instead, you apparently think “we should throw that lane down the throat of car overload rather than allow anyone alternatives.”

It takes some practice, and you have to understand how the blade engages based on the angle you’re holding it at. If you can figure that out, these are awesome. It doesn’t even have to be a fancy one or more expensive tape.

People have a natural desire to pursue their own interests. Capitalism takes advantage of this and thereby fuels the most dynamic economies in the world. Even China’s success only took off once they started allowing entrepreneurial enterprises some breathing room.

When you’re stuck in a collective system where everyone gets the same regardless of what they do, you get a bunch of unmotivated people who don’t do much. Why should they?

This is the age old debate. Pure communism sounds like a paradise: from each according to their ability, to each according to their need. So fair! So inclusive! But in practice it is a nightmare and lead la to famine every time.

In this thread we have a bunch of Americans who complain that capitalism is robbing them blind for the benefit of billionaires, but those same Americans doing all the whining are still wealthier than than 90% of the globe for 90% of history. The fact that someone is obscenely rich doesn’t take away from the fact that you are fed and housed and employed. And those things can’t just be taken for granted. Learn history. A lot of people have suffered without them.

Capitalism has ugly excesses, but they aren’t as ugly as the deprivations that communism has caused. Taming a tiger is dangerous, but I’d rather tame a tiger than try to get a dead corpse to plow the fields. In the same way, I think our best bet is to tame capitalism, even if it is dangerous and difficult. At least there’s something to work with. I mean really, look at the main problem that people have with capitalism: that it’s OBSCENE WEALTH isn’t shared equally. That does suck, but at least there is obscene wealth for us to fight over.

Do you want to show me these very strong pure socialist societies? Are you really going to claim that pure socialism is a perfect system but it’s never been allowed to work, even one time, and has been sabotaged 100% of the time? I am aware of such sabotage, but I refuse to believe that the sabotage has been flawless and never allowed this perfect system to succeed, even once. Pure socialism has more than just capitalist sabotage against it.

The only thing making stronger regulation impossible is self-defeating apathy.

The hard truth is that none of us here in this thread are out in the streets rioting because we are fed, housed, and have a job to get to. We talk about capitalism as if it only benefits Elon Musk but we’re all riding the same bus. He just has a better seat.

It’s self interest that fuels capitalism. The reason it has succeeded is that it takes advantage of this primal instinct. But obviously selfishness, while very motivating for an individual, does not magically add up to collective good. So you have to also have a plan for that, ideally funded by all the self interested wealth-getting. But if all you have is that collective good, and no offering for the instinct to serve self-interest, then all you have is a bunch of people standing around looking at each other, wondering who’s going to make it happen.

No, it’s like saying that the best form of transportation is some form of forward locomotive force kept in check by brakes and steering. Like, you know actual cars.

Basically you’re looking at a Toyota Corolla and saying “What? Some of its parts move it forward, and some of its parts stop it from moving? That’s a total contradiction! It’s central to the definition of a car that it move forward!”

Yes regulation and social safety nets run counter, that’s the point.

There’s no one concept which makes for a good system in a totally undiluted form. Pure centralized economy: disaster. Pure capitalism, disaster.

Capitalism tempered by regulation and socialism: a balance of economic dynamism and humanist restraint.

The core of your argument seems to be that the only form of capitalism is unrestrained capitalism and we just don’t agree on those semantics. I believe a free market system can be governed and taxed to support social welfare. You believe that capitalism can only be unrestrained. Well, my version of reality is everywhere we look: both Europe and the US are examples of free market economies with some safety net and regulation attached. Europe is stronger on the latter two but the US is hardly at zero.

Not as laughable as thinking you can throw the system out. Incremental improvement is the only thing that has ever worked, and many generations have faced challenges. This is not the first time that wealthy interests have squeezed the working class. This is not the first time that politics has been dysfunctional.

I can attest. I’m told all day long every day to use AI use AI use AI. It’s going to transform us / we must use it to survive / we won’t be left behind / these tools are changing the world / if we don’t use AI others will and they will eat our lunch. It’s so intense that performative AI use has begun: “look everyone I did an AI!!”

I was average people and watched a lot of layoffs happen over it.

It’s the best system when combined with strong regulation and good social safety nets. I wish everybody would focus on those things falling down and needing to be fixed instead of pretending we’re going to throw the whole system out tomorrow.

It seems like that’s just about everybody, most days.

Red hat = no cat, no cap

And some people don’t read much, talk to very many people, or ever leave their home country.

Metafilter

Some people say “make a decision” and some people say “take a decision.” In my experience most Americans say “make a decision,” but both are valid and mean the same thing.

Controlling the meeting calendar for the president is more than just the clerical work of a personal assistant. The president works and makes decisions by meeting with people. She decides who gets access to him today. She deflects people she doesn’t think are worth his time. Over the long run she can have extraordinary influence over him and what choices he has in front of him to make. She can effectively block people she doesn’t want to have any access. Thats a lot of power for someone most people don’t know by name.

I have kids and wanted them when I had them in my early 30s. I did not feel that want at 22. But neither did I think “I never want kids.”

A lot of people’s view on this eventually crystallizes based on who they choose to spend their life with. You could meet someone who changes you and changes your view and who definitely wants kids and with whom you feel good about doing it. You could change your mind and that’s what it would look like if you did.

I have had a vasectomy and when you do it you’re supposed to tell them if you have any chance of ever changing your mind. If I were you I’d answer yes to that.

There’s no guarantee a vasectomy can ever be reversed. However they can perform the procedure in a way that leaves as much of your tubes as possible in the event that you might someday want to reconnect them. In my experience they will also make damn sure you know that there’s no guarantee. However though people lean hard on emphasizing that lack of guarantee, the fact is that many vasectomies are successfully reversed, so it is possible.