• SeverianWolf@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    People who litter. Throw their rubbish out the window of the car. Or who throw rubbish in public, like into drains or sidewalks.

    It’s in the mentality, and I say the lack of education is the reason for it.

    It’s sad to see the people of my country do this, and to see it with your own eyes.

  • pH3ra@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Whataboutism”, or if you are unfamiliar with the term:

    “The act or practice of responding to an accusation of wrongdoing by claiming that an offense committed by another is similar or worse”

    People that use this mechanism are “poorly educated” and unable to hold a conversation and they should just be mocked by whatabouting even harder, so they can maybe understand that they’re dumb and that’s not how you should debate.

    Example of the last argument I had recently with my dumb c*nt father:

    • Me: You shouldn’t idolize that politician, he evaded literally billions in taxes and that befalls on citizens like you
    • Dumb c*nt father: Yeah? And what about that other politician?
    • Me: What about the disappearing middle class?!
    • D.C.F.: What…?
    • Me: WHAT ABOUT THE BEES!?!
  • salarua@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    taking Ayn Rand’s work seriously. five seconds of critical thought and her entire philosophy comes crashing down

    • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      One thing that few people seem to accept when saying that they believe in Ayn Rand’s philosophy is that you are supposed to pay people what they are worth, not what you can negotiate with them.

      For instance, in Atlas Shrugged, it is made explicit that Rearden pays his mill workers far above typical salaries because it is worth it to him to have the best staff working in his mills. Rearden is also the kind of person who isn’t going to make racist or sexist jokes because he wants the best person regardless of sex or color.

      What Objectivist is that moral?

      • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        That’s actually the root of all social philosophies: they require decent people.

        No matter which system you take, capitalism, communism, anarchism, monarchy, democracy, etc. they all would work perfectly fine, if people wouldn’t be stupid, selfish and about 1% downright psychopaths. And I’m not even talking about real crimes. In your example it would be perfectly legal, to pay the workers the absolute minimum possible, but it would be a dick move.

        At the end of the day, a system always has to answer the question: How do you reign in assholes? That’s it. Designing a system based on Jesuses is trivial.

        • metallic_z3r0@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s not enough to reign in assholes, the system has to be designed in such a way that carriers of “dark triad” traits (i.e. the usual bad faith actors in a system) are still incentivized to contribute to or improve society without gradually dismantling it to increase their wealth/power/status. That’s a hard problem to solve.

  • atlasraven31@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not being able to entertain ideas. “What would the world be like with 100% renewable energy?” “Would basic healthcare for every person help our country?”

    I tried to explain the 4 day work week to someone that gets paid by the hour. You make the same money but work 4 days a week instead of 5. Insisted he got paid less. Had to explain like a Bingo card with a Free Space, 1 day he is paid even if he stays home.

    • utopianfiat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t know if that’s necessarily wrong of them. There isn’t any precedent for hourly workers to be paid when they’re not working. The “four day workweek” as described simply means that any time over 32 hours a week is overtime. Hourly workers in general don’t really have a “workweek” anyway because they will often have multiple jobs or will work whatever shift they can pick up that works with their schedule.

      They understood how the 4-day workweek works based on how the 5-day workweek works. I think maybe you need to listen more to them and try to understand your own proposition better.

      When companies voluntarily implement 4-day workweeks, they are literally either cutting 8 hours or doing 10-hour shifts. They do not pay for hours not worked.

  • CorrodedCranium@lemmy.fmhy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Parents feeding their baby cola in bottles and smoking while pregnant are two things that usually cause me to make assumptions

  • Fleppensteyn@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Associating with arbitrary groups, such as football fans, nationalists, wearing certain clothing brands

  • DePingus@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Thinking that someone without a formal education is somehow beneath you.

    • ram@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      On the flipside, the belief that someone with a formal education is somehow beneath you or brainwashed for it.

  • fluffy_birb_01@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Using terms like ‘u’, ‘ur’, etc when writing. No one charges by the letter, it’s simply lazy.

    • max@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Doesn’t this depend on the stylistic environment of the text? Personally, I’d consider it alright given that the sender and the receiver are in a casual relationship. It only makes one seem uneducated if they are using it in a more formal, or perhaps a public context.

      • Monkeyhog@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        If I know someone personally and they text me with abbreviations and such like that. I do judge them for it.

  • NutWrench@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    MAGA Hats. Those people are dumb by choice. And that’s less forgivable than people who just don’t know any better.