The premise of minimum wage, when it was introduced, was that a single wage earner should be able to own a home and support a family. That was what it was based on; a full time job, any job, should be able to accomplish this.
The fact people scoff at this idea if presented nowadays, as though the people that ring up your groceries or hand you your burgers don’t deserve the luxury of a home and a family, is disgusting.
(via funeral-gnome)
The Guardian‘s website decided to have a rainbow “G” in its title during the past few days in order to support LGBT rights, and to thumb its nose at Russia (a few other news broadcasters/outlets did, too), just as Google did last week with its rainbow doodle. I’m sure they feel very pleased with themselves. But did they do anything symbolic in support of Nigerians, Ugandans, Malawians, Zambians when they needed support most, when the hate that US televangelists were funding throughout subsaharan Africa was coming to fruition, in tandem with opportunist political manoeuvres by savvy local politicians? Nope. These are powerful corporations. They can do a whole hell of a lot more than include pretty pictures and colours in “support” of causes (this sort of gesture is similar to other inane nonsense like buying red stuff to spread “awareness” of HIV and AIDS). Google and the Guardian: what about doing something substantial, like countering the monies that US evangelical churches siphon to African countries with funding for the LGBT communities in those key warzones?
Russia’s disgraceful treatment of LGBT people has also given US liberals a fake moral premise to take the piss out of Russia (see US internet passim – reporters have even started making stuff up to get hits). These are the same people who have nothing to say about the US’s own anti-LGBT laws, who are uncomfortable saying anything about how political prisoners like Chelsea Manning have been relegated to the rubbish heap of US history, while those whose actions she spoke up against remain quite free to receive my taxpayer dollars as part of their salaries/retirement. While companies with cute graphics project themselves as serious, sophisticated, ultra-modern advocates of LGBT rights (and don’t do “evil”), they are just old-fashioned nationalists who do nice things that don’t cost them politically or financially.
This just in: the Cold War is over, people. And anyway, that war was actually fought in Africa and South/S.East Asia all along. For all the morally superior US Google-liberals, over the weekend one of our readers posed a question for you: “Should other countries boycott if the US hosts an Olympics because of its drone program?”
—Enough of the liberal pieties on Sochi and gay rights on Africa is a Country (via thefemaletyrant)
IF I COULD BOLD EVERY WORD OF THIS I WOULD. IF I COULD MAKE EVERYONE READ THIS SEVENTEEN TIMES UNTIL IT SUNK IN, I WOULD.
By the way, the whole “reporters making shit up just to get hits” thing is really not a joke.
LGBT solidarity and awareness of oppression is great, but this endless hypocritical, worthless posturing, I can’t. Maybe Google and the Guardian doing those things actually helped LGBT people in the US/UK by giving them more recognition that their lives and issues matter? Maybe, IDK. If so, that’s the only benefit to come out of this, and the self-congratulatory bullshit is really starting to pile up from where I’m sitting.
(via ofgeography)
See, what you need to understand is that “Not all guys are like that” is never going to work. Because you’re answering an entirely different conversation than what women are actually saying.
You think women are saying “Every man is a predator and a danger to me.” And…
(via roachpatrol)
Still hungry?
Absolutely!
The average active adult needs 2,000 calories per day in order to function in a safe and healthy manner. If I’m active to the point where I consistently run 1+ hour every day, then it is far more likely that my caloric needs are around 2,400-2,500.
Considering that, a meal of 1,200 calories would perfectly suit my needs. It would supply roughly half of my calorie requirements, which is a God-send since a fast food meal is relatively cheap. It’s a great value, especially if I don’t have much time to cook or have the resources to prepare my own meals!
The average burger is going to supply me with significant protein and carbs. That’s exactly what I’d need in order to build more muscle and have enough energy to make it through a workout. Even the sugar within the meal can be beneficial in supplying me with a boost of energy and can stop me from feeling hungry for a prolonged period of time. Not half bad.
Is this the most healthy meal known to man? Of course not. But it’s still a very reasonable deal and the calorie count is well within the average adult’s daily needs.
Don’t let calories scare you! You need them. If you were capable of burning off an entire meal within the hour, you’d probably be dead by now.
1200 empty calories in a meal
next to no nutrition. all the calories are sugar and fat. that’s it. you’ll have no energy and have glucose spikes in your blood because the lack of fiber because of the lack of complex carbs. this is diabetes in a meal.
so no, you should not be hungry for diabetes
Nutritionally, this BK meal contains roughly 28g of protein and 3g of dietary fiber. It potentially also includes 35% of our Vitamin C daily requirements, 2% Vitamin A, 12% calcium, and 27% iron. Of the 1,010 calories (that I could verify directly from the company’s nutritional information guide), only 410 are from fat. That isn’t a terribly significant amount of fat, in the long run, nor are the nutrients small enough to be viewed as negligible.
Eating this will not cause you to get diabetes. Eating this meal is perfectly fine if you do have diabetes, as long as you are able to adjust your insulin intake accordingly. So don’t use an illness as your debate point - Diabetic people are not a prop.
“So don’t use an illness as your debate point - Diabetic people are not a prop.” I want that and variations of that on t shirts.
(via witchydarling)