@chooky's banner p

chooky


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2023 August 01 00:33:52 UTC

				

User ID: 2597

chooky


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2023 August 01 00:33:52 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 2597

Yes, I am 100% sure that HSA providers used by big companies have procedures that will guarantee everything is fine forever. I'm more interested by the financial argument than a receipts argument.

I am not very up on Roth stuff, but wpuld things change if receipt storage were completely trivial? The way my, and I assume nearly all, HSA works is that I submit receipts to the conpany that manages the HSA, and then those credits for withdrawal and ready for me whenever I want to use them. There is no receipt tracking because I just submit immediately.

But children of the 90s are like 40 now and would have also grown up entirely under the post-1970s paradigm, while the rise of incel culture (and various other apparent symptoms of dysfunctional romance) seems like a phenomenom of the past 10-15 years. I am having a hard time ascribing this to the 1970s rather than technology shifts (Tinder, etc), high pace of housing inflation (which reduces incentives for household formation and makes it much harder to not rely on also-expensive daycare, aka the two-income trap), or the transition of church and religion out of mainstream (which I would argue began to rapidly occur during Bush 2 and was basically complete mid-Obama).

I am far more nail reliant in Silksong than I was spell-reliant in HK, partly because the upgraded spells in HK were just completely OP. It always kind of hurts to use tools because shards are not actually that easy to rapidly acquire if you are aggressively using tools.

I do greatly appreciate tool repair being free for some tough act 3 battles.

I am sure this has been asked before, but why is it that these purported consequences of the 1970s sexual revolution have not shown up until the past 10-15 years? It really took 50 years to come to a head?

My point is that if Erika Kirk did not genuinely forgive her husband's murderer and inwardly longed for violent vengeance, her taking a public stance either way almost certainly has zero impact on the actual outcome. Indeed, I would argue that there are strong incentives, both social and financial, to take on the forgiveness stance. While I am not doubting her sincerity (and I certainly approve of these incentives' continued existence as a plus for contemporary Christianity), I am not impressed by it.

What would it mean to not "forgive"... to proclaim a desire for vengeance? If so, that seems like a much more staggering path. Even after seeing his previous career, Trump's words at the funeral are the ones that are shocking to me, as I have no wish for ill to befall my American political opponents and indeed would like policies that I oppose to prove me wrong by being beneficial. (For one, it costs me money when the economy is bad!) All this to say that I think that you are simultaneously too cynical about basic standards for human behavior and not nearly cynical enough about the extent to which this is a cost-free, potentially calculated position: Erika Kirk doesn't legally really get any say in the punishment already.