TechyDad

My company switched up retirement plans and they held a seminar to explain them. The person running the seminar said that we should be putting 15% of our salaries into retirement.

Nice idea, but if I put 15% of my salary into retirement, then I wouldn't be able to pay my bills. I'm not living extravagantly or anything (buying something for $20 for my enjoyment seems like a splurge to me). Still, whenever I seem to be getting on a better financial footing, life throws me a curve ball. Need new hearing aids ($3,600). New a new dryer ($750). Might need a new car soon.

So either I need to be paid a lot more, I will be working until I'm 90, or I put away the money and go deep into debt but can retire. (Just kidding. I'm nearing 50. I likely won't have enough to retire. Maybe when I'm 80.)

And his followers will excuse it in one of two ways:

1. It's all fake. They'll claim that the Democrats swapped the real list for the released "fake" list and that the real list has Biden's name, not Trump's. Their proof? Some YouTube video linked to from a Facebook post where a white guy wearing sunglasses in his truck says he saw the real list with Biden's name on it!

2. Trump was undercover. They'll claim that Trump was actually working undercover to expose these people. Being on the flight logs "proves" that he was only there to spy on these people. Why? Non-specific Excuse! Therefore, Trump's name on Epstein's list is actually a good thing and they support him more!

Meanwhile, the rest of us will scream in frustration.

Yes, they did. Before that, LEGO also released blind bag minifigures for Steamboat Willie and Minnie Mouse. I'm currently designing a LEGO MOC to display my figures with a small rendition of the Steamboat Willie boat. (I purchase my parts used from BrickLink to reduce costs.)

Weren't some hostages also drugged so they'd be "happy and smiling" for the cameras when released? I heard that, but don't know the authenticity.

Edit: I found many news sources that said they were. I know some folks don't trust anything Israel says so take reports like this with a grain of salt. Still, it's been confirmed that many of the hostages were drugged while in captivity. Especially the kids - to keep them quiet. (Anyone with little kids knows they can be loud while scared and this must have been extremely scary. As a father, the reaction of "drug the little kids" makes me angry.)

Don't forget that the Hamas leaders are living in luxury as billionaires in Qatar. If the Israeli response kills a few thousand Palestinians, then Hamas' leaders will shrug their shoulders and say "sounds like good PR" while lounging in a hot tub.

I've never ridden a motorcycle, but I have had a bug (and part of its web) go into my mouth and down my throat while biking. Just thinking about it makes me want to gag. If, after that, you offered me a bike helmet with a front visor, I'd have put that thing on ASAP.

Now take that bug incident and make it happen at 30-50 mph? No way would I have my face hole exposed for bugs to invade! (And that's totally apart from the safety issue.)

$175,000 for 50 years? He's 71 now so he went into prison at 21. That means he spent virtually his entire life in prison. He could have done so many things, but instead he needed to sit in a prison cell. All because he was wrongly convicted.

And because I'm a math geek and need to figure this stuff out, $175,000 over 50 years is $3,500 a year. If we calculate what he would have earned at the federal minimum wage over that time frame (ignoring bank account interest or inflation just to keep things simple), we'd get over $500,000.

They're giving him a third of what he should have earned at bare minimum. (And that ignores all the other horrible things involved with being wrongfully imprisoned for 50 years.)

I needed Unicode symbols for a story I'm working on. (I want to use them as "magic runes" so I could type them into a document, but without using the standard "runes" that are typically used.)

Shape Catcher let me draw what I was looking for and then get a list of Unicode characters that matched that drawing. It's not exact so if there's no perfect Unicode match, it will give you ones that are close. This actually turned out to my benefit as I found shapes I hadn't considered but which worked nicely for my uses.

Hey, I may feel old, but I'm not THAT old! Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to yell at some kids to get off my lawn.

Back when I was in high school, a friend of mine introduced me to his friend. This kid, knowing that I'm Jewish, started to go on a rant ending with "the only thing Hitler did wrong was not finishing the job!"

Him saying that me and my family should be killed for the "crime" of being Jewish... Well, offended seems too light of a word. I blew right past offended and landed in ANGERED.

Now, usually, I'm a pretty relaxed guy. I typically don't get angry even if I should. But this made me want to punch the guy right in his Hitler loving face. My friend had to hold me back.

(And before anyone asks, this wasn't the kid being "edgy" or trolling me to get a reaction. He actually worshipped Hitler and thought he was a great man.)

Did you read what I wrote? It's not that they decided they weren't going to do anything. It's that the rules of the government limit what they can do with a small majority. They can't just unilaterally decide that they are passing a new constitutional amendment with a few vote majority in the House/Senate. They could try for a bill, but there they are limited by various other rules not to mention the conservative Supreme Court. If the Democrats had a big enough majority, they could get more bills passed.

And that being said, what's the alternative? Allow the Republicans to get into power and hope that they don't take away women's rights too much? Many Republicans have already declared that they want a national abortion ban. Others have said that they want to criminalize miscarriage and ban contraception.

Voting third party (thanks to our First Past The Post system) won't work. Sitting out the elections and not voting won't work. The best thing to do is get as many Democrats in office as possible from local positions to the highest offices. Then, put pressure on the higher up Democrats to get a women's rights bill passed.

At this point, and with our current political system, not supporting the Democratic candidate is essentially supporting the Republican one.

The Democrats could have passed a bill, but "enshrining it in the Constitution" would mean passing a Constitutional amendment. First, they would need a 2/3rds vote of Congress. That means that the Democrats couldn't have a slim majority - they'd need a large majority. Or they'd need to find Republicans willing to vote for a Constitutional amendment protecting abortion rights. Basically an impossibility.

Even if the Democrats managed to get the Constitutional Right To Abortion passed, they would need to have 75% of the state legislatures pass it. Democrats don't control that name state legislatures.

So perhaps the Democrats could have passed a national law, right? Except that the Republicans would inevitably filibuster this in the Senate. The Democrats could have changed the filibuster rules, but not all of them supported changing these rules. (Mainly because it would prevent them from stopping the Republicans if the Republicans regained the Senate.) Any law that was passed would inevitably have been challenged up to the conservative Supreme Court.

You could definitely criticize the Democrats for not pushing harder to pass a law guaranteeing abortion, but a Constitutional Amendment was out of reach.