At that price point, I would be looking for pre-owned iPhones. Why iphone? Because they keep updating their software longer than any other manufacturer.

I have 21 crowns plus a partial in my mouth, being this shit on!

Are you under the impression the democrats don’t do that? Every time I’ve seen a democrat scandal in recent history at least, they call for the guilty to step down and, where possible, remove them.

This implies that the republicans had a good idea, which should have given you pause for thought in and of itself.

You do realize anyone can just make another sub right? They don’t even have to call it something trump related, they can just make the sub and direct known members there. Only difference is that we no longer know where they are.

Yup. I was banned for telling someone “if you think cops should be able to shoot innocent people with impunity, that’s all you are, I’m not gonna look past it.” (Different username than this one)

Reddit, Facebook, Twitter, here.

Those assholes getting banned isn’t any different than anyone else, those sites are useful tools and they will continue to be used.

And as soon as he created Facebook, he used it to spy on his fellow students without their consent.

The libertarian party website says in multiple locations that they support the right to abortion as an individual matter.

Want to hand over all reproductive control over your body to the state legislation.

I like to make fun of libertarians as much as the next guy, but this is not a common position of theirs and it doesn’t check out with the basic tenets of libertarianism, or diet anarchy as I like to call it. Their positions are usually more along the lines of “abortion should be legal, but the government shouldn’t be paying for it.” Which I strongly disagree with because I can do very basic math, but I think it’s a distinction between libertarians and republicans because you would have a different approach in trying to address their stance. I can at least work with someone who thinks they should be available but not free, I will not try to find common ground with someone who thinks they should be restricted, there’s absolutely no room for “proudly ignorant but otherwise innocent” in the latter, they’re just ghouls who should have been aborted.

Do what you want w/o stepping on another persons rights.

That’s not a libertarian ideal, that’s just being a normal person. Though I can see, in this political climate, why a libertarian would want to express it. Libertarianism comes more into play when the topic is how we as a society decide what to do in order to preserve those other persons’ rights and what we should do to someone who violates those rights. It also comes heavily into play when discussing what those rights actually are and where they apply.

I mean, that’s just happening in your head, we hate the Russian government and the subset of the Russian people who support it. Hating some rando for being Russian is still wrong.

You’ve never heard of people responding to rule breaking with rule breaking of their own? Your assertion that it has no military advantage is flat out wrong, this attack has a military advantage. It brings the fight closer to Putin and requires them to divert forces. It also makes the Russian people more likely to revolt against the war.

Are you like an anti-historian or are you just trying to be uselessly hyperbolic?

The only people who know why the target was chosen are probably not hanging out on Lemmy.

But really there’s no reason whatsoever to put restrictions on the smaller weaker country who is being invaded. War is hell. Russian civilians can rise up against Putin if they don’t feel safe in their own country. 100% of this is on Putin.

Surely at least one, but that doesn’t matter. Everyone does at least one thing right.

No, it doesn’t work like that at all. The difference is in the demand. You go to your bank and you demand the money in your account and you get it, simple as that. You can’t do that with debt. Me owing you a dollar doesn’t mean you have a dollar to spend. Ease of collection is literally the most important aspect of what we’re discussing.

Think about it this way, if I’m going after your money, do I sue you, or do I sue the bank?

It’s funny you mentioned bailment, the bank is absolutely required to keep enough cash on hand in order to satisfy what the FDIC deems to be a reasonable amount of coverage for their deposit accounts. (search “demand deposit account”)

You own the money in your account, simple as that for individual accounts.

Former banker here. You’re just fucking wrong about that. You’ve said zero true things.