domain:streamable.com
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_United_States_incarceration_rate_with_other_countries
Sure, countries with a lot more criminals per capita will imprison a lot more criminals.
Chicago had 573 homicides last year; the entirety of Australia had 409 homicides in 2023. Australia has about 25 million more people.
Corvos
1d ago
Stormveil Castle is a beef gate. The fact that you get pasted when you try and go through the lower gate is a sign that you need to do more exploring - there are at least two areas other than Limgrave to explore from your position, try playing around.
2rafa
1d ago
It is extremely clear to me that allowing low-level casual brutality against those the local beat cops deem repeat troublemakers is absolutely critical to keeping societal order.
It’s also merciful to its victims. Many a repeat shoplifter or drunk who likes starting fights might be saved from a lifetime in and out of jail by getting beaten up by the cops a few times as a teen.
the_Culture_is_great
1d ago
I meant what I said.
There should be no surprise about why people would think you're a "bad person" then. Explicit lack of caring about others is kind of what makes one a "bad person".
I am also not okay with the status quo either, but I think there is some minimum level of support that must be provided (or possible to achieve) before you violate people's autonomy willy-nilly.
(my preferred solution is low-quality, cheap housing, that doesn't have to be right in the most expensive locations for some freaking reason. If you make that available that justifies a lot more force when removing people from public, as they actually have somewhere to go.)
What did you do for the late game? I'm a bit stuck: winged spear + (erdtree seal + lightning spear). VIG: 22, Mind: 22, Stamina: 20. Str: 16. Dex: 16. Faith: 45.
It did pretty well as a high damage-output glass cannon in the early/mid game but just doesn't seem to have the stopping power it used to once I get to
Magusoflight
1d ago
Ashley Madison was a scam site populated with almost exclusively female bots. Pretty sure there was a data dump that confirmed this, there were no women, not even prostitutes
netstack
Texas is freedom land
1d ago
There aren’t any catalysts which directly boost spells based on STR/DEX, but there are plenty of weapons with the relevant scaling.
Magusoflight
1d ago
Just give police discretion to knock heads around like they used to. A summary judgement followed by public lashing of a sort. Or put them into those public mocking where passers by can throw garbage at them while they’re locked into something. That would end the problem in most cases I would assume.
2rafa
1d ago
Like SeekingArrangement, AshleyMadison was low key just a prostitution site on which more expensive ‘escorts’ found clients and vice versa. Most women who desperately want an affair don’t need a dating site to find a partner. Poor johns are of no interest to self-respecting and moderately expensive escorts who do even the most basic background checks.
I presume that poor men who want to cheat do so with women in their social circles, on hookup apps (they’re usually higher time preference and from families with more divorce so care less about the consequences of being found out) and with cheap street walker or truck stop prostitutes.
the_Culture_is_great
1d ago
I worded it like that because the OP worded his comment like it was surprising people think these opinions are seen as "bad person" opinions. I think if you say "this group of people is annoying, I want them removed by the state and and don't care what happens to them" you've eliminated any possibility of having yourself seen as good, at best you're amoral. You need to at least give some thought to the well-being of these people, who in some cases are in their situation through only minor fault of their own.
When you say "Remove them first" I think you need to specify more precisely what that involves. There are absolutely moral lines you can cross. If you just get them to "move along" they just switch locations and annoy a different group of people. If you want to throw them all in prison you should keep in mind the cost (both moral and financial) of doing so.
That's not to say I think the desire is wrong at all! I also want these people removed, and I also don't think the standard western liberal approach is working. I think you need to provide some level of reasonable alternative before forcing people out of public spaces. I think that alternative does not exist in many places, due to housing and healthcare costs, and we are therefore forced to endure the ruin of our public spaces.
I think the correct approach is some combination of:
- provide housing as cheaply as possible (that standards for what is acceptable to provide should be much lower than they are today, but still provide a stable, permanent space) and the force these minorly disruptive people into them
- increase policing of minor offences like yelling at people, force them to move along (if they have their own space, then they have an actual private place to go to not annoy the public rather than just shifting the issue around)
- institutionalize the most severe ones - this is expensive and difficult, so you want to minimize it's necessity as much as possible
High earning men seem to want class peers.
Well. That's who they want on their arm when they're seen in public. Certainly selection bias in terms of what we actually see.
My inherent issue with this is its not differentiating between what they chase as sexual partners vs. what they might actually settle in for a long term relationship.
So what's going on here? The Red Pill explanation of men preferring younger women doesn't seem to fit,
Red Pill would suggest that a wealthy man can and would keep a soft harem of younger women, discarding them as needed, which isn't really refuted by the data here.
Or it might be that richer men are more sensitive to judgement from their peers, who would disapprove of larger age gaps.
Possible. I'll also throw out that younger women are a little less likely to successfully keep up the right appearances and are probably somewhat more likely to do something that is blatantly embarrassing to you either intentionally or unintentionally.
So even if your peers 'approve' of large age gaps, you're still risking reputational damage if the woman you choose is actually immature.
The thing that surprises me most is that you don't see richer men marrying younger women
There's the key word. Marry. Leo DiCaprio has gone through 12 younger women in the last 20 years alone (is he an outlier? Probably, but not by much). No wedding in sight.
Broaden the question to more general 'relationships' and I'd imagine age gaps are more prevalent.
So yeah, is there anything in the data to suggest that rich men wouldn't pump and dump as many young women as they can (Elon sure goes that route) and only marry one that actually matches his personal status more closely?
I'm genuinely not trying to be contrarian, I'm just put off when I see a claim like this, backed up by a narrowly-defined set of data that purports to refute an idea that is making a substantially different claim.
At a cursory inspection, 1 million was the cheapest I could find, but far from the average: many houses were a significant multiple of that. Rathgar is posh but admittedly not as posh as, say, Foxrock.
I thought there was a tech driven housing crisis.
There is, although I prefer the term "shortage" to "crisis".
Antisemitism was always extremely high in the Muslim world (moreso since 1947) and was rising in the West long before October 7.
Charlottesville with the ‘Jews Will Not Replace Us’ chant was in 2017. Online antisemitism exploded after 2015/6, although it was growing on /pol/ and in conspiracist parts of YouTube many years before then. Polling suggested rising antisemitism too.
I think the response to the war in Gaza accelerated things, but it was very clear things were heading in this direction long before then. A combination of a new reactionary right and mass immigration from the third world (the latter accelerating the former) meant a renewed antisemitism was long inevitable. Maybe if October 7th had never happened (or had been thwarted in advance) things might be 3-5 years behind.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
1d ago
Love this game so much.
As others have said, mixing combat is fine. Great, even. It’s really nice to have a bow or spell on hand.
What you want to avoid is conflicting Scaling. If you’re investing in STR for a hammer and FTH for incantations, and you get a bow that really wants DEX, then you have to split your points even further. Wouldn’t it be nice if you had a bow that mostly wanted STR, too?
The good news is that Elden Ring is probably the best souls game for mixing and matching. There’s gear which suits (or can be made to suit) any combination of stats. The trick is finding it.
I recommend checking out that castle. You don’t have to clear it, but there’s some really useful stuff around there!
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
1d ago
The Red Pill explanation of men preferring younger women doesn't seem to fit, since the men with the most options (high earning ones) are more like to choose women the same age.
TRP has a tremendously difficult time conceiving of women as individual humans who have their own desires, interests, and other properties that aren't fully exhausted by their status as women, so that can help explain their blind spot in regards to this issue.
The guy I know who's really into TRP is always saying, "I don't care if she's into what I'm into, I don't care if she's good conversation, I don't care about any of that. I have male friends for that. Why would I go to a woman to socialize?"
Obviously you tend to share more in common with people who are of a similar age and education level to you. And, surprise surprise, the majority of men do want to be able to have reasonable social interactions with the person they're going to be spending the rest of their lives with, funny how that works out.
Totalitarianit
1d ago
I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying, but I don't see a real or workable idea that results in the dissolution of Israel for those reasons.
A significant portion of Israel's population, along with its ruling class, seem to me to fully embrace tribalism to an extent that the Western mind can barely comprehend anymore, let alone embrace. What's fair or beneficial in the grand scheme of things is secondary to their survival. Israel clearly demonstrates this over and over, and so many Westerners (having had their tribalistic instincts redirected to focus on things like social, gender, or racial power dynamics and "fairness") are just completely baffled by it.
From what I can see, it's not about them being the most safe place, or the most fair, or making the rest of the world as prosperous as it can be. It's about Israelis' survival instincts being far more easily triggered than most Westerners can begin to imagine, and thus anything that can even be perceived as being a threat to that survival is dealt with, harshly.
I'm not saying I agree or disagree with it. Israel has clearly engaged in disgusting tactics, acts of violence, manipulation, etc. I guess what I'm saying, or rather asking is "What is your realistic alternative?"
Ioper
1d ago
For reference, Rathgar is a very posh suburb, with houses going for €1 million at the minimum.
Does a 1 million price flooe make something a 'very posh suburb' in Dublin? That sounds just like your regular middle-class suburb for a European capital.
Are house prices really that low in Dublin? I thought there was a tech driven housing crisis.
Does it really matter that the US is topping the charts? Similarly rich countries are probably going to be less violent and criminal (certainly with the cases listed like Canada and Australia) and poorer and more criminal societies probably have less state capacity.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
1d ago
High earning men seem to want class peers. A woman's qualifications are a marker for class, and a woman's high salary is a manifestation of her class. Of course, once married, they can afford for her to stay home more easily than poorer families.
The thing that surprises me most is that you don't see richer men marrying younger women, as all of the older-younger pairings I've seen in real life have involved high-earning men. It might be that richer men marry younger, and therefore there is simply less scope for large age gaps. Or it might be that richer men are more sensitive to judgement from their peers, who would disapprove of larger age gaps.
Princeton Mom strikes again. College is the place to meet your partner.
I read The Original Preppy Handbook from the 1980s recently, my wife loved it and wanted me to read it. The whole book is built around a guide to being part of the preppy, mostly Northeastern, old money upper class. And the majority of the book is built around the social life of educational institutions: you go to this school, not so much to learn as to learn who to talk to. You meet people at your prep school, or your undergrad, or one of the sister/brother institutions to those schools, and those are pretty much your friends for life.
That's a fantasy of a past subculture that maybe never quite existed, but it does reflect the centrality of education to the modern American upper class. A young lawyer who goes K-JD is in full time schooling until they are 25 or 26, and basically that entire time their peer group is age-gated such that they have neither opportunity nor reason to get to know people much older or younger than they are. The median age at first marriage is around 30, and the median couple knows each other for a little over three years before getting engaged, followed by a year long engagement before they get married. So a huge number of our young professionals barely form a peer group or life outside of school before they meet their future mate.
That said, I definitely see some problems with their method.
What he wants (according to the data) is a woman around his age, with the same academic qualifications. Men with younger (and indeed, older) wives are the ones earning less money. What rich men want, it seems, is a (cultural, educational) peer.
With earnings is becomes a bit more complicated. As a man's income goes up, so does the income of his wife. But richer men earn a larger proportion of household income, and the women married to these men are the most likely to not work at all.
My own wife had an easier time getting her degree because she was married to me, I helped support her through school. She probably earns more money as a result of the family connections we have in the area. She would have been successful on all those things on her own, but...lots of people don't finish their degrees because they can't afford it. She is very smart and very good at her job, but being Mrs. FiveHour has helped her a bit at times. And in turn, being her husband has started to help me in business, people know her and like her and that helps me get my foot in the door.
A rich man might marry a woman who is on her own a well-educated high earner; but it's also a lot easier to get educated and to become a high earner if you're married to a wealthy man. Connections, support, sinecures. A rich wife can choose to continue her education, and if she wants a job it's easy to secure a highly paid one through her husband.
Corvos
1d ago
This sounds very likely.
Why divorce and remarry to a woman your age when he is surely wealthy enough to enjoy the company of endless 20 year old models? I suspect because he enjoys her company and they have fun together
And it's probably bloody difficult for a billionaire to find someone they feel genuinely comfortable with.
pigeonburger
1d ago
Maybe, that's possible.
NYTReader
1d ago
Israel treats its non-Jewish citizens and residents far better than South Africa treated its black citizens.
Slowly over the last 150 years (the roots predate the Victorian era but it was cemented in it, long before most wealthy women worked much outside the home) the primary purpose of marriage moved from children to romantic companionship. This was to some extent true even when upper class Victorians were having 6 kids each. You can trace in literature, the press and so on the concept of a ‘love match’. And then, in accelerated form since the 1970s, married men and women began spending much more time together. The world of a century ago had fraternal and women’s organizations.
A husband and wife would live together but often sleep in separate beds (if they could afford it) and would spend perhaps every evening of the week doing different things. A married man would be at the pub, at an organization like the Freemasons, at a men’s political meeting, whatever. A married woman would be with the children, often with other women in the community and extended family around her, and in free time (or more regularly if she had money for a governess, maid, nanny) at what were effectively sororal (if often more informal) gatherings, lunches, meetings and so on.
The family might be together at church, but that was it.
As Coming Apart narrates to some extent, the rise of suburbanization, the small nuclear rather than multigenerational extended family and then the slow withering of both male fraternal organizations and extended familial/communal women’s groups of the kind that existed in the Victorian city and town ended much of that.
Today, married couples spend an amount of time together, alone (by which I mean with only each other and possibly children for company) that would have been hard to fathom for most of our ancestors in recent centuries. That means that the personality and interests of a spouse are much more important. Money is more important now that women work too, but it isn’t the only central thing about the enterprise.
It reminds me of (I think @Gaashk) the recent discussion on Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sanchez. Why divorce and remarry to a woman your age when he is surely wealthy enough to enjoy the company of endless 20 year old models? I suspect because he enjoys her company and they have fun together, and in the modern age (when even most billionaires spend a lot of time with their spouses, at dinners, events, other gatherings and so on) that is the most important thing.
Walterodim
Only equals speak the truth, that’s my thought on’t
1d ago
I meant what I said. I have trouble imagining any plausible solution that any modern state has taken to this problem that I would object to as long as it resulted in people not camping in the park, throwing trash on the ground, and yelling obscenities at passersby in the public square. I might have preferences about solutions, but it's hard to imagine proposals that I would consider worse than the status quo on this front. Singaporean harshness would be fine by me. Softhearted liberal utopian visions would also be fine by me. Huge public spending would be fine by me if it actually removes the problem. As long as the problem is solved, I am not that concerned with the exact solution.
No, I'm not surprised by it, I am accustomed to it and acknowledging that I am simply at an impasse with people that differ on this. We have irreconcilable moral intuitions and I'm articulating where I think that comes to a head.
Yeah, obviously I just disagree with this. I consider myself a good person, most people I know consider me a good person, and many other people that both think I'm a good person and see themselves that way agree with my perspective on this matter. I actually don't see my opponents on the issue as intrinsically bad, I understand them to be softhearted people that are unwilling to accept mean solutions to problems. The exception to that would be people that seem to revel in things sucking, that suggest that there's something wrong with people that don't want bums camping in parks, but I actually think this is a pretty small minority view even if it's overrepresented on social media.
Much of what I'm pointing at here is what I see as an actual, real difference in preferences though. You're back to the root cause end of things here with the implication being that the individual I'm referring to is either mentally ill or homeless. As mentioned, that wasn't clear to me at all, and I have certainly encountered individuals that are just aggressive assholes that enjoy bullying other people in public spaces; they would stop if they were forced to stop, this isn't some uncontrollable tic or a product of them not having a nice enough abode in which to blow off steam. I'm fairly confident that there are already statutes that could be enforced against this, there is just a cultural norm of not doing so in blue cities, so everyone gets to enjoy the serenade of belligerence.
More options
Context Copy link