I’ve not served in the military, but my brother did. He spent four years in the army. His account was that service in the army was mind-numbingly boring. He was an officer in a tank unit and his job consisted mainly of tracking and reporting on the maintenance of the equipment. He spent approximately 1 hour a day compiling reports and had nothing to do for the other seven hours. Of course, there was field training and activities sometimes, but many days consisted of doing very little.
He was also of the opinion that rank and advancement was mostly just a reflection of tenure. Of course, experience does matter, but he didn’t see much in the way of a real meritocracy. If you were willing to put up with the crap and tow the line, you’d advance in rank over time.
I recognize that this is not necessarily the experience in every role and unit and certainly deployment to a war zone would be very different. Also, the purpose of the military is to be ready to deal with threats and that inherently implies a bit of waiting. But Tim Walz spent 24 years in the national guard and then left a month before his unit was deployed to a war zone. Maybe that’s a coincidence and I don’t think it’s fair to hold it against him. But I also don’t see that as impressive service. It also seems that he has at least implicitly exaggerated his service for political gain by implying that he carried a rifle in a war, which he didn’t, and is a retired CSM, which he apparently technically isn’t.
I don’t see either side winning the game of not trying to legislate morality. Just saying, you can hate this, as I do, but it is just different flavors.
You can’t just siphon air from one tire to another and expect the car to drive smoothly. All you’d end up with is four underinflated tires, a vehicle that’s a danger on the road, and a high risk of damaging the wheels and rims. You are just setting everyone up for a bigger disaster…oh, wait…
We’re just making fun of the DEI movement. No need to try to analyze it.
But since you did, I’ll explain.
DEI and progressives se rich people which there are only a few of, and poor people, of which there are many.
But 1 person = 1 vote. So to appeal to the most people, they say clever things like “eat the rich!” Or pepper speeches with something about " Their fair share! ".
So they want to treat income disparity by reducing rich peoples income, instead of facilitating better earnings for everybody.
They don’t want to inflate the flat tire. They want to incite people to vote for them based on malicious intent- envy.
The pump air is money made from the economy. The air from the 3 full tires is taxed money going towards services to get the flat tire back on its feet so it can make money in the economy.
Actually, you could. Pressure wants to equalize, so you could do it pretty easily with a two sided air hose. And if you’ve ever been 4wheelin you’ll know that you can still get places safely with tires aired down (if your compressor breaks in the field).
But we’re getting too technical for the simple analogy proposed.
You would need a hose with two female ends to attatch to the schrader valves.
Kinda complicated and essentailly useles, but definitely a nice money pit for a new tax that everybody would have to pay and very few would benefit from.
Hmmm. .
Reducing rich people’s income is the best way. That money needs to go to the workers.
People can barely afford a house or children nowadays.
Look at what these rich fucks did to society and there’s so little of them. They have too much power and…we the common man…do absolutely nothing about it.
If, and it’s still a big IF at this point, Kamala wins the election in november, will Republican election officials certify the results, or will they refuse to certify under direction from trump (who has historically pressured elections officials)? What are the chances of a clean, peaceful transfer of power?
Happy now?
.