Lord Ratner

It's funny, in a way. After decades of progressive action to de-shame sexuality, we are now right back to the pre-1960's mindset of hiding any and all evidence of a functional libido. So sex and sexuality, the only thing we have in common with 99.9999% of the other humans out there, is once again taboo. Strange. Be careful when seeking to change the world. You might just succeed.

It's true, but it was an issue with the A350 training capacity that allowed a few (I think 3?) Captains to make a killing. Once they finally fixed the glitch, their incomes returned to "normal."

Crazy isn't what it used to be. I had a serious conversation 2 days ago with my dad about aliens influencing the building of the pyramids. I've flown with captains who believe the Epstein demonic bloodletting conspiracy. It turns out that in the age of information is not difficult or unusual to believe something absurd, even if you are otherwise intelligent and coherent.

The reason: to further their careers and enrich their families. I'm no socialist, far from it, but the AOCs of the world are not entirely wrong. Something is broken. They think it's rich people. I'm more inclined to believe it's politicians. But either way, "we the people" are being Punk'd.

Actually, it protects you from consequences from the government.

What happened?

Yes, exactly. You talked about lacking the moral courage in having an honest discussion. I quoted what you said and gave another example of the phenomenon, since comparison is valuable when discussing such things. It also demonstrates that the phenomenon is not limited to the abortion debate, or the political left. Good talk.

What? Condemning them it's easy. Admitting that your stance on firearms *enables* a higher death count in violent events, yet you support it anyways, is not.

I think he was responding to this And this is the best summation of the debate. When you know you're arguing for something uncomfortable, it's easier to just pretend it's not a real consideration. Pro-gun folks (which I am) do this with mass murder all the time. "But knives kill people too!!" Yeah, dingus, but not as easily. The Vegas Shooter, Quest nightclub, Ft Hood, Columbine, Sandy Hook, etc etc... None of those would have had nearly the same fatality rate with a knife. Guns should still be legal. Freedom is paid for in blood, and it's always less that the blood price of tyranny.

Overwhelmingly the people I've met who have adopted have been pro-life. Most have been deeply religious.

Well it's not. Narrow body example. I fly highly inefficient trips. 2-4 hours of flying for 10:30 pay, two days. So to get a full month, I do 8 of those for 84 hours. 16 days of work, 16-32 flight hours, 8 nights away from home. A highly efficient trip might pay 13:00 for a 2-day or 19:00 for a three day. So two of the first and three of the second equals 83 hours. 13 days of work, 78-83 flight hours, 8 nights away from home. A third efficiency option are 8:00 turns (single day, two legs). Fly 11 of those, 88 flight hours for 88 hours of pay, home every night. Goes very senior. I'm getting a much better pay/flight-hour, but pilots two and three get more days off. And a lot of guys I fly with who do just that will say "I don't mind flying the hours, I want more time off." More power to them. 8-hour turns are my hell. What we want is not what they want. Thank God, because I wouldn't get what I want if the 12,000 pilots senior to me wanted it too.

So you have a counter survey of biologists or scientists to cite?

Can't do that without a lot of information about you. As an example, most consider AA to have the worst contract. And even if we had profit sharing like Delta, our profits were far below theirs. But. I'm the type who enjoys loopholes and technicalities, so our contract (and the associated chaotic operations) are fabulous for me. I don't want the maximum income, I want the maximum pay/hours-worked. Depending on if you count deadheads (when you ride with the passengers) as working, in the last twelve months I've made 2.7 hours for every hour I flew (3.5 if you don't count deadheads). That's on a non-reserve schedule, so I chose my days off and never have to take a trip I don't want. Each contract will offer different opportunities. Are you the guy who just wants to get a schedule and fly it? Make the most money possible? Spend the most nights at home? Fly widebody international? Be closer to family? It's hard to even know what you would want to do when you haven't been in the industry yet, which is why most will tell you to just pick the airline that has a domicile where you want to live. If you'll live anywhere, then look at the seniority projections, but realize those are about as reliable as the weather.

Obviously the definition of life is not the appropriate framing for the conversation, especially within the context of a single celled organism on mars. I'm sure you would also concede that a spider, a mosquito, a cow, and aging family pet, or a mouse would be considered "life." We do not debate these intentional life-endings with nearly the same furor. Ironically, if you were to correlate political ideologies, the people who are against the murder of non-human-animal "life' are equally for the protection of abortion. But that's because the environmental movement is more anti-human than it is pro-earth. Tangent. Each side of the abortion debate is trying to frame it using precisely chosen words to bolster their argument. Every single person knows exactly what the debate is about. Killing a fetus. It doesn't matter what we would do on Mars with a single cell. It also doesn't matter that a fetus can't function on its own. Debate the issue, not the semantics. And in case it seems like I'm waffling, I'm personally against all abortions that aren't for rape or health concerns for the mother or child. However I concede, as an atheist, that my views are based on a personal analysis of humanity and not some magical graybeard in the sky telling me what to do. In such instances where the population is clearly split, the tie goes to the citizen. So I would make abortion legal up the the point of viability (currently hovering around 22 weeks, so let's call it 25 for now). After viability only serious risk to the mother or child would be ground for an abortion. A middle ground solution to a deeply divided issue. But like so many conversations in American politics today, we now spend more time talking about the semantics of the issues than the issue itself.

Take the pay cut. Live like many Americans have to for their whole lives, and in a couple years you're golden. It's worth it. You are choosing between doing something that makes you miserable and living a median lifestyle. You may be surprised how easy it is to be very happy making very little. And in a few years, you'll be making a ton.

You literally wrote "religion" In your second sentence. Can an infant be an individual if it is wholly reliant on another person for existence?

They all agree huh? I'm anti-abortion, but to act as though it's a settled topic is pretty obtuse. Using your words, define "person."

Oppression olympics. Both sides seems equally susceptible. Even the term mainstream media is rapidly losing its relevance. I suppose we could use the term "legacy media," which would represent the longest running news sources, which have always been and are still overwhelmingly liberal. The difference is that sometime in the 90s those sources decided it was no longer their responsibility to hide their bias. Fast forward 30 years, and the result is that a number of equally ideological conservative news sites have formed, many of which are dominating the legacy Media at their own game. My point is that we have a tendency as humans to operate on feelings we had a long time ago, even when a dispassionate review of the present landscape would suggest the source of those emotions has been remedied. Just look at how many race warriors are complaining about imbalances that haven't existed in America for decades. They use present-day anecdotes as example of a systemic problem. If you remove the content of their argument, it sounds similar to conservatives complaining that the media landscape hasn't changed. In both cases they are wrong.

There is no intellectual basis for the policies of the progressive left anymore. Even the marxist part of the party is at odds with the critical race theory nonsense. "Reason" implies that there are such things as right answers. Debate is a form of multi-party reasoning, so if you're entire ideology is based on falsehoods, debate is a threat. The only logical thing the left does these days is stifle debate. Reminds me of the conservatives when they were nonstop railing against gay marriage. A bunch of small-government warriors demanding the federal government protect their religious ceremony from copy cats. Funny seeing the parties completely switch which one gets to be insane over 20 years.

No, it was the government jumping in front of the parade. If you think the very famous incident you are citing was at the beginning, rather than the end of the process that led to the civil rights of black people being recognized and enforced in America, you are mistaken. Where does government get it's power from? How well does it work when the government does something that the majority opposes? Were all the civil rights advocates voted out of office during the next election cycle? The government could have stepped in 50 years earlier, why didn't it? Remember that Jim Crow laws were *governments* forcing private citizens to segregate their business. Those laws were passed because citizens were desegregating on their own.

Exactly. And when the federal government steps it it's usually well after the tide has shifted. Gay rights, civil rights, the legalization of weed, women voting, prohibition, unprohibition... All driven by the lower levels of society with national politicians jumping in front of the parade at the finish line to pretend like they were leading it the whole time.

Shack. It's absolutely insane that Amazon can hold a nationwide contest for which city can provide it the most tax breaks while any one of us would be laughed out of the room for asking for similar treatment of we started a small business. As long as conservatives keep reflexively defending the globalization of American jobs and the asymmetrical treatment of immensely powerful corporations, millennials and Gen Zers will continue flocking to the bankrupt and dangerous philosophies of Marx/Bernie/progressives.

Net neutrality had zero to do with the threats we are dealing with from tech companies. But then most NN supporters didn't know any more about it than a few reddit memes.

I spent hours looking at what was presented in the Chauvin trial. If not a single juror could find reasonable doubt to any of the charges brought against Chauvin, we have a real problem with media influence. I was in the "lock him up" group until recently. Now I can't help but wonder if the media is intentionally focusing on cases that are "questionable" in order to further divide the population. Michael Brown, George Zimmerman, and now Floyd. Either outright fabrications or very difficult to parse, but never clearly racist murders. Those cases seem to just fade into the noise. This man had 3 times the fatal dose of fentanyl in his system. Plus meth. He was foaming from the mouth, a clear symptom of Fentanyl overdose. "I ate too many drugs." Saliva covered pills in the back of the police cruiser. The prosecution witnesses were almost comically irrelevant in the first couple days, yet they were permitted to take the stand. The MMA "effort" witness was a joke. The prosecution's own witnesses confirmed the validity of the restraint method used by Chauvin. The paramedics had to drive three blocks away before administering first aid because of the angry crowd. The video showing Floyd fight his way out of the cop car, already screaming that he couldn't breath (also a symptom of Fentanyl and meth overdose). Innocent? Who knows. But not a single reasonable doubt? Between holding the trial in Minneapolis, a sitting congresswoman calling for increased confrontation, the mayor saying the police are at fault regardless of the verdict, and the judge failing to sequester the jury until the end, I hope his appeal judges have more courage than the jury did. I don't suspect this is going to do any favors to the rapidly rising murder rate in America.

Super impressive