Because everyone is broke af

Well, have fun, I guess?

Well, they’re not a mod here. I’m one of the poor saps with that role. Is… Is that what you want…? That’s not even a rule here.

Hi there. Would you please reply to this comment to show that you’re not a spam bot? I would like to stop receiving reports about your posts

I’m gonna need you to clarify your point some more

But you didn’t. And not only does the first half of your comment contribute nothing to the conversation, but your second half is just outright disrespectful.

Please refrain from both aspects of such commentary in the future. They’re not conducive to good discussion in this community.

Just going to go on record here. It’s not okay to harass anyone here because they’re autistic. We’re not opening this door, it gets ugly real quick. Further commentary will result in comment removal and potential bans.

No, it doesn’t matter if they’re billionaires. There’s plenty of actual reasons you can give them shit. Don’t touch autism or any other form of hate speech.

Thanks for the thoughtful response. You’ve raised great points and changed my mind. I’ll be removing these moving forward and will remove this one after sending this comment.

Hi there. I understand your perspective on the matter. On the other hand, I don’t consider this community active enough to be too restrictive on content. This place gets an average of one post a day. Op has made comments, indicating they’re an actual human being, and the post has not actually broken any rules.

Considering that this post has brought forth actual discussion, I’m going to leave it up.

You’re welcome to post other content from other preferred sources if you like.

And people are allowed to not want to fuck them.

That’s the face value goal, if they were being honest and following classical economics. It’s entirely moot when tariffs are put on goods that can’t sufficiently be brought stateside.

For example, coffee and chocolate.

Please allow me to clarify my perspective on this discussion.

This commenter associated a bunch of effects with the progressive era.

You then replied with a thoughtful response that questioned most of their points.

But then you wrote

Japanese Internment

Two major Red Scares and a collapse in union membership

Legitimate criticisms.

At this point, I read that as you acknowledging those two points as legitimate criticisms against the progressive era. This is what I disputed. I think those are unfair criticisms, as far as I understood the words you wrote.

This is all I said. I’ve jumped to no other conclusions. I’ve said nothing against you or your character. I’ve made no other assumptions. I simply wrote a response based off the words you used.

I see you’ve further clarified your perspective as well, and understand that we’re of the same perspective on the matter. You have no need to be so defensive anymore, my dude.

Edit: the other commenter essentially proved that they were just baiting people into inflammatory discussion. They kept resorting to personal attacks and flip-flopped on their position solely to continue arguing. This behavior is not tolerated here. Please report such trolls in the future.

By asking for clarification instead of jumping to some inflammatory assumptions. I was civil to you, and made no accusations against your character. Yet you were very quick to attack my character. Would you please refrain from such incivility in the future?

My apologies, I guess I wasn’t clear enough. My point was that it’s unfair to blame those things as results of progressive policies.

But hey, thanks for the gross mischaracterization of my perspective.

Japanese Internment

Two major Red Scares and a collapse in union membership

Legitimate criticisms

No they’re not. Those two things were caused by far greater international factors. Like, you know, the 2nd World War.

Well, see, a buttplug is basically a plug, but for your butt. Would you like to know more?

Internet’s older than you think. Tim Berners Lee, the dude who invented the World Wide Web, opened it up to the public a year earlier.

Explain

Sorry, op. I’m locking this thread, the discussion is getting too ugly for individualized moderation.

Allow me to help give context. This is Leonardo DiCaprio we’re talking about, a very famous movie star. This man can afford to have eccentric personal relationship rules. These women, while much younger, are still adults who can make informed decisions about their own lives. It’s even easier to grasp when you realize this just means they know the relationship has a predetermined max limit.

Thi2nk of it like a summer fling. Someone comes into town, just for the summer. You really hit it off and both of you want to spend more time with the other. But you both know at the end of Summer, they’re leaving town again. Would you still be willing to enjoy that time together?

It’s kind of like that, except the other person is Leonardo fucking DiCaprio, and they’re leaving town because they’re rich celebrities who can do whatever they want.

So yeah, it’s definitely fuckin weird, but that doesn’t exactly make it bad. Those are independent variables.