Caitlyn Jenner Jokes
Caitlyn Jenner Jokes

Caitlyn Jenner Jokes

Quadrupled
Quadrupled

Quadrupled

were
were

were

butts
butts

butts

donks
donks

donks

kidding
kidding

kidding

seeing
seeing

seeing

gag
gag

gag

parent
parent

parent

youre
youre

youre

🔥 | Latest

Abc, Children, and Doctor: WEAR ABC 3 News, Pensacola shared a V link. 1hr. CVS puts out generic competitor to EpiPen at a 6th the price weartv.com 263 26 Comments 99 Shares Like Comment Share lethargicactionhero: erykahisnotokay: runawayhurricane: totalharmonycycle: southernrepublicangirl: Ah the free market at work. (Similar to when I went to CVS to pickup a 90$ prescription and they had their own generic version for 7.99). This is important! Tell your Friends. I can’t believe some insurances quit covering them 😐 From Slate: The generic Adrenaclick will cost $109.99 for two doses, compared with $649.99 for the same amount of drug in an EpiPen. That’s good news, both for financial and safety reasons: STAT reported last year that some parents and institutions had begun filling up syringes with epinephrine as a cost-cutting measure, a DIY solution that could pose great risk to the children who may have eventually needed injections. A more affordable alternative will help ensure safer epinephrine injections. That’s assuming, though, that the people who need these devices know exactly what to ask for when they’re sitting in their doctors’ offices. Otherwise, they’ll still be stuck with the overpriced product. Here’s why: The mechanism by which Adrenaclick injects the drug is slightly different from EpiPen’s mechanism, so the Food and Drug Administration has ruled that the two are not therapeutically equivalent. That distinction is important because it means a prescription for an EpiPen cannot be filled with Adrenaclick. If you want the cheaper option, you have to have an Adrenaclick prescription. You must ask your doctor for an Adrenaclick prescription!  I also found a coupon from Impax on 0.15mg and 0.3mg epinephrine injection, USP auto-injectors, which appear to be the generic version of Adrenaclick; these coupons cover up to $100 per pack for 3 packs of these injectors (6 total injectors). Some customers may be automatically eligible for $100 off the retail price thus only paying $10 for a pack, but this may be good backup for those who for whatever reason do not meet those requirements. Pass this information on, potentially save a life.
Abc, Children, and Doctor: WEAR ABC 3 News, Pensacola shared a V
 link.
 1hr.
 CVS puts out generic competitor to EpiPen at a
 6th the price
 weartv.com
 263
 26 Comments 99 Shares
 Like
 Comment
 Share
lethargicactionhero:
erykahisnotokay:

runawayhurricane:

totalharmonycycle:


southernrepublicangirl:

Ah the free market at work.
(Similar to when I went to CVS to pickup a 90$ prescription and they had their own generic version for 7.99).

This is important! Tell your Friends.


I can’t believe some insurances quit covering them 😐

From Slate:
The generic Adrenaclick will cost $109.99 for two doses, compared with $649.99 for the same amount of drug in an EpiPen. That’s good news, both for financial and safety reasons: STAT reported last year that some parents and institutions had begun filling up syringes with epinephrine as a cost-cutting measure, a DIY solution that could pose great risk to the children who may have eventually needed injections. A more affordable alternative will help ensure safer epinephrine injections.
That’s assuming, though, that the people who need these devices know exactly what to ask for when they’re sitting in their doctors’ offices. Otherwise, they’ll still be stuck with the overpriced product. Here’s why: The mechanism by which Adrenaclick injects the drug is slightly different from EpiPen’s mechanism, so the Food and Drug Administration has ruled that the two are not therapeutically equivalent. That distinction is important because it means a prescription for an EpiPen cannot be filled with Adrenaclick. If you want the cheaper option, you have to have an Adrenaclick prescription.
You must ask your doctor for an Adrenaclick prescription! 
I also found a coupon from Impax on 0.15mg and 0.3mg epinephrine injection, USP auto-injectors, which appear to be the generic version of Adrenaclick; these coupons cover up to $100 per pack for 3 packs of these injectors (6 total injectors).
Some customers may be automatically eligible for $100 off the retail price thus only paying $10 for a pack, but this may be good backup for those who for whatever reason do not meet those requirements.

Pass this information on, potentially save a life.

lethargicactionhero: erykahisnotokay: runawayhurricane: totalharmonycycle: southernrepublicangirl: Ah the free market at work. (Similar...

Bad, Books, and Clothes: he Swiss are voting on a plan to end poverty forever. Step one: give every adult $33,600 a year, no strings attached. There is no step two. Photo: Flickr/twicepix tank-grrl: hello-missmayhem: cptprocrastination: doomhamster: belcanta: nikkidubs: attentiondeficitaptitude: belcanta: Guaranteed basic income to every citizen, whether or not they are employed to ensure their survival and that they live in a dignified, humane way, preventing poverty, illness, homelessness, reducing crime, encouraging higher education and learning vocations as well as helping society become more prosperous as a whole.  Wow. Forget raising the minimum wage. This is much much better idea. The minimum wage could actually drop if we had basic income. But Americans would never go for it. Miserably slogging through 12 hour days and having businesses open 24/7 is too engrained in our culture. “BUT WHERE WILL THE GOVERNMENT GET THE MONEY?” screamed Joe Schmoe, slamming a meaty fist onto the table and getting mouth-froth all over the front of his greying tank top. “You libt*rds all think money grows on TREES!! HAHA!”“But where will people get the incentive to work?!” Mindy Bindy cried, flapping her hands in front of her face. She’d had a fear of the unemployed lollygagging about ever since she was a child and her mother told her to be afraid of the unemployed lollygagging about. “You think people should get paid for nothing? I work hard for my money!” “But who will serve me?” grumbled Marty McMoneybags. “Who will make me feel important? Who will do my laundry and cook my food and stand in front of me wearing a plastic smile while I take out all my stress—because I do have a lot of stress, you know, being this rich is stressful—on them?” He paused and straightened out the piles of hundred dollar bills on the desk in front of him, then raised his two watery, outraged eyes up to the Heavens. “Lord, if there are no poor people, how will I know that I’m rich??” I laughed. This is perfect! Well said! The thing is, while I’m sure you could scrape up a few people who’d be willing to just float by on a guaranteed minimum income? For most people the choice to work would be a no-brainer. “Hmmm. I can get by on 33k a year, or I can take that part time job and make 48k… enough to move to a better apartment, maybe take the family on vacation. Sold.” Hell, most people would want to work simply because it gives one a sense of dignity and something to do with one’s time. (Speaking as someone who’s been unemployed, on extended sick leave, etc. in her time, the boredom and sense of isolation that comes with not having a job is almost as bad as the humiliation of having to depend on other people for one’s survival.) And with this system, part-time jobs and “non-skilled” jobs would be much more readily available because nobody would need to work two or three jobs just to stay afloat! Which would ALSO mean that employers and customers couldn’t shamelessly exploit employees the way they can today, because if losing a job weren’t necessarily a financial disaster, more people would be willing to walk out on jobs where they weren’t being treated with dignity. And if this also applies to students (and it should) then student loans would become much less of a problem, and fewer people would flunk out of school because of having to juggle studies and work. Far fewer people would be forced to stay with abusive partners, parents or roommates because they couldn’t afford to move out. And the thing is, all those people who suddenly had money? They’d be spending it. They’d be getting all the stuff they can’t afford now - new clothes, books, toys, locally-produced food, car repairs - and with each purchase money would flow BACK to the government, because VAT, also income tax. The unemployed and/or disabled wouldn’t need special support any more - which would also mean the government could fire however many admins who are currently engaged in humiliating - *cough* making sure those people aren’t getting money they don’t deserve. Same for medical benefits and pensions. And I’m no legal scholar, but I somehow imagine less financial desperation would lead to less petty crime, and hence less need for police and security everywhere? TL;DR Doomie thinks this is a good idea, laughs at those who protest. reblogging for more top commentary They tried something like this out in Canada as a sort of social experiment, called Mincome. What they found was that, on the whole, people continued to work about as much as they did before. Only new mothers and teenagers worked substantially less hours.  But wait, there’s more. Because parents were spending just a little more time at home and involved with their families, test scores increased. Because teens didn’t have to work to support their families, drop-out rates decreased. Crime rates, hospital visits, psychiatric hospitalizations and domestic abuse rates all dropped, as well. More adults pursued higher education. Those who continued to work reported more job flexibility and more opportunity to choose employment they preferred. Basically, now you can go prove to your asshole family members that society won’t collapse without poor people for you to feel better than. The picture is awesome, but read the commentary, that’s what I’m reblogging for.
Bad, Books, and Clothes: he Swiss are voting on a plan to end poverty forever.
 Step one: give every adult $33,600
 a year, no strings attached.
 There is no step two.
 Photo: Flickr/twicepix
tank-grrl:
hello-missmayhem:

cptprocrastination:

doomhamster:

belcanta:

nikkidubs:

attentiondeficitaptitude:

belcanta:

Guaranteed basic income to every citizen, whether or not they are employed to ensure their survival and that they live in a dignified, humane way, preventing poverty, illness, homelessness, reducing crime, encouraging higher education and learning vocations as well as helping society become more prosperous as a whole. 

Wow. Forget raising the minimum wage. This is much much better idea.
The minimum wage could actually drop if we had basic income.
But Americans would never go for it. Miserably slogging through 12 hour days and having businesses open 24/7 is too engrained in our culture.

“BUT WHERE WILL THE GOVERNMENT GET THE MONEY?” screamed Joe Schmoe, slamming a meaty fist onto the table and getting mouth-froth all over the front of his greying tank top. “You libt*rds all think money grows on TREES!! HAHA!”“But where will people get the incentive to work?!” Mindy Bindy cried, flapping her hands in front of her face. She’d had a fear of the unemployed lollygagging about ever since she was a child and her mother told her to be afraid of the unemployed lollygagging about. “You think people should get paid for nothing? I work hard for my money!”
“But who will serve me?” grumbled Marty McMoneybags. “Who will make me feel important? Who will do my laundry and cook my food and stand in front of me wearing a plastic smile while I take out all my stress—because I do have a lot of stress, you know, being this rich is stressful—on them?” He paused and straightened out the piles of hundred dollar bills on the desk in front of him, then raised his two watery, outraged eyes up to the Heavens. “Lord, if there are no poor people, how will I know that I’m rich??”

I laughed. This is perfect! Well said!

The thing is, while I’m sure you could scrape up a few people who’d be willing to just float by on a guaranteed minimum income? For most people the choice to work would be a no-brainer. “Hmmm. I can get by on 33k a year, or I can take that part time job and make 48k… enough to move to a better apartment, maybe take the family on vacation. Sold.” Hell, most people would want to work simply because it gives one a sense of dignity and something to do with one’s time. (Speaking as someone who’s been unemployed, on extended sick leave, etc. in her time, the boredom and sense of isolation that comes with not having a job is almost as bad as the humiliation of having to depend on other people for one’s survival.)
And with this system, part-time jobs and “non-skilled” jobs would be much more readily available because nobody would need to work two or three jobs just to stay afloat!
Which would ALSO mean that employers and customers couldn’t shamelessly exploit employees the way they can today, because if losing a job weren’t necessarily a financial disaster, more people would be willing to walk out on jobs where they weren’t being treated with dignity.
And if this also applies to students (and it should) then student loans would become much less of a problem, and fewer people would flunk out of school because of having to juggle studies and work.
Far fewer people would be forced to stay with abusive partners, parents or roommates because they couldn’t afford to move out.
And the thing is, all those people who suddenly had money? They’d be spending it. They’d be getting all the stuff they can’t afford now - new clothes, books, toys, locally-produced food, car repairs - and with each purchase money would flow BACK to the government, because VAT, also income tax.
The unemployed and/or disabled wouldn’t need special support any more - which would also mean the government could fire however many admins who are currently engaged in humiliating - *cough* making sure those people aren’t getting money they don’t deserve. Same for medical benefits and pensions. And I’m no legal scholar, but I somehow imagine less financial desperation would lead to less petty crime, and hence less need for police and security everywhere?
TL;DR Doomie thinks this is a good idea, laughs at those who protest.

reblogging for more top commentary

They tried something like this out in Canada as a sort of social experiment, called Mincome. What they found was that, on the whole, people continued to work about as much as they did before. Only new mothers and teenagers worked substantially less hours. 
But wait, there’s more. Because parents were spending just a little more time at home and involved with their families, test scores increased. Because teens didn’t have to work to support their families, drop-out rates decreased. Crime rates, hospital visits, psychiatric hospitalizations and domestic abuse rates all dropped, as well. More adults pursued higher education. Those who continued to work reported more job flexibility and more opportunity to choose employment they preferred.
Basically, now you can go prove to your asshole family members that society won’t collapse without poor people for you to feel better than.

The picture is awesome, but read the commentary, that’s what I’m reblogging for.

tank-grrl: hello-missmayhem: cptprocrastination: doomhamster: belcanta: nikkidubs: attentiondeficitaptitude: belcanta: Guaranteed bas...

Bitch, Cars, and Children: The DIS @TheDIS Follow DIS The Walt Disney Company Donates $5 Million to the Notre-Dame Cathedral Rebuild wdwinfo.com/news-stories/t .. The Company tea jay Follow @teejiay @teejiay 11 % of Disneyland Resort cast members are homeless The DIS @TheDIS The The Walt Disney Company Donates $5 Million to the APISN Notre-Dame Cathedral Rebuild wdwinfo.com/news-stories/t Unmet Health Needs health care services. ge s adequate in Many Disneyland Re Even those who have erims of providing basi services Copy Select All The Walt Disney Company asks its employees to adhere to what it calls the "Four Keys" to good customer service. Among them are "smile" and "make eye contact." Many Disneyland Resort employees, however, need but cannot afford dental care, or glasses and contact lenses, making it harder to adhere to those guidelines For example, 43% of Disneyland Resort employees report that in the past year they needed, but could not afford, dental care, as shown in Exhibit 12. Among single parents, over half(56%) could not afford needed dental care Nearly a third (30%) report that in the past year they needed, but could not afford, glasses or contact lenses, as shown in Exhibit 1.3. Another quarter (24%) report that in the past year they needed, but could not afford, follow-up medical care. One fifth (21%) report that in the past year they needed, but could not afford, prescription medicines, while 16% report that in the past year they needed, but could Exhibit 12: Disneyland Workers Who Needed but Could Not Afford DENTAL CARE in the Past Year ALL WORKERS FULL-TIME/PART TIME STATUS Part-Time HDURLY WAGE $15+ YEARS WORKING AT DISNEYLAND Less than 1 year 1-3 years 4-6 years 7-10 years 11-15 years More than 15 years GENDER Female Male PARENTS WITH CHILDREN 0-17 YEARS Sing Precariously Housed Workers Disneyland Resort employees have a hard time paying the rent. They devotea large part of their household incomes just to put a roof over their heads. Even so, many Disneyland Resort employees live in o place to live, many rent homes a great distance from Disneyland Resort and have long commutes to get to work. Disneyland Resort employees' wages do not align with southern California's high housing costs As a result, some Disneyland Resort employees find themselves in precarious circumstances. They fear getting evicted because they cant afford the rent. They move vercrowded conditions. To afford a Some Disneyland Resort employees find themselves on the brink of homelessness and some actually find themselves with no permanent place to live, making do by sleeping in their cars, "couch surfing" between friends and family, or ending up on the street or in a homeless shelter Even full-time Disneyland Resort workers confront the spectrum of precarious, uncertain, unstable, and insecure housing conditions which creates chaos and hardship for themselves and, in some cases, their families. Among Disneyland Resort employees, only 20% own their own houses or condominiums and 63% rent their houses or apartrnents. Another 18% live with family members or friends but do not pay rent or otherwise help with housing Exhibit 40: Homeownership Rates for California, Selected Counties and Disneyland Workers Occupy without ppying rent Seming Artist @ sewingartist 9h Replying to @teejiay LadyDamfino I was offered a position in the costume department at $10.56 an hour down in FL. I high tailed it out of there. I now make above $15 an hour at a similar position in Indiana. Disney is crap. 244 7 Witch Bitch Jane Rayi @YandereJane 6h Replying to @teejiay @stormflowercos A cast member died in her car last year during winter; where she lived because the resort refused to pay a living wage despite her many years of service. endangered-justice-seeker: what a fucking hypocrisy
Bitch, Cars, and Children: The DIS
 @TheDIS
 Follow
 DIS
 The Walt Disney Company Donates $5 Million
 to the Notre-Dame Cathedral Rebuild
 wdwinfo.com/news-stories/t
 ..
 The
 Company

 tea jay
 Follow
 @teejiay
 @teejiay
 11 % of Disneyland Resort cast members
 are homeless
 The DIS @TheDIS
 The
 The Walt Disney Company Donates $5 Million to the
 APISN Notre-Dame Cathedral Rebuild
 wdwinfo.com/news-stories/t

 Unmet Health Needs
 health care services.
 ge s adequate in
 Many Disneyland Re
 Even those who have
 erims of providing basi services
 Copy
 Select All
 The Walt Disney Company asks its employees to adhere to what it calls the "Four
 Keys" to good customer service. Among them are "smile" and "make eye
 contact." Many Disneyland Resort employees, however, need but cannot afford
 dental care, or glasses and contact lenses, making it harder to adhere to those
 guidelines
 For example, 43% of Disneyland Resort employees report that in the past year
 they needed, but could not afford, dental care, as shown in Exhibit 12. Among
 single parents, over half(56%) could not afford needed dental care
 Nearly a third (30%) report that in the past year they needed, but could not
 afford, glasses or contact lenses, as shown in Exhibit 1.3. Another quarter (24%) report
 that in the past year they needed, but could not afford, follow-up medical care. One
 fifth (21%) report that in the past year they needed, but could not afford,
 prescription medicines, while 16% report that in the past year they needed, but could
 Exhibit 12: Disneyland Workers Who Needed but Could Not Afford DENTAL CARE in
 the Past Year
 ALL WORKERS
 FULL-TIME/PART TIME STATUS
 Part-Time
 HDURLY WAGE
 $15+
 YEARS WORKING AT DISNEYLAND
 Less than 1 year
 1-3 years
 4-6 years
 7-10 years
 11-15 years
 More than 15 years
 GENDER
 Female
 Male
 PARENTS WITH CHILDREN 0-17 YEARS
 Sing

 Precariously Housed Workers
 Disneyland Resort employees have a hard time paying the rent. They devotea
 large part of their household incomes just to put a roof over their heads. Even so,
 many Disneyland Resort employees live in o
 place to live, many rent homes a great distance from Disneyland Resort and have
 long commutes to get to work. Disneyland Resort employees' wages do not align
 with southern California's high housing costs As a result, some Disneyland Resort
 employees find themselves in precarious circumstances. They fear getting evicted
 because they cant afford the rent. They move
 vercrowded conditions. To afford a
 Some Disneyland Resort employees find themselves on the brink of homelessness
 and some actually find themselves with no permanent place to live, making do by
 sleeping in their cars, "couch surfing" between friends and family, or ending up
 on the street or in a homeless shelter
 Even full-time Disneyland Resort workers confront the spectrum of precarious,
 uncertain, unstable, and insecure housing conditions which creates chaos and
 hardship for themselves and, in some cases, their families.
 Among Disneyland Resort employees, only 20% own their own houses or
 condominiums and 63% rent their houses or apartrnents. Another 18% live with
 family members or friends but do not pay rent or otherwise help with housing
 Exhibit 40: Homeownership Rates for California, Selected Counties and Disneyland
 Workers
 Occupy
 without
 ppying rent

 Seming Artist @ sewingartist 9h
 Replying to @teejiay LadyDamfino
 I was offered a position in the costume department at $10.56 an hour down in FL.
 I high tailed it out of there. I now make above $15 an hour at a similar position in
 Indiana. Disney is crap.
 244
 7
 Witch Bitch Jane Rayi @YandereJane 6h
 Replying to @teejiay @stormflowercos
 A cast member died in her car last year during winter; where she lived because
 the resort refused to pay a living wage despite her many years of service.
endangered-justice-seeker:
what a fucking hypocrisy

endangered-justice-seeker: what a fucking hypocrisy

Apparently, Bad, and Children: the "police officers risk their lives to protect us" starter pack Savannah Danielle lol who knew there was something wrong with actually having a car, a nice house and a clean put together family who lives in a safe community while spending your hard earned money on paying your bills rather then expensive sneakers and supporting the authorities of the neighborhood you take pride in Like Reply 11 minutes ago living-for-fiction: unbossed: theflowerfish: saaavx0h: jaime-foxxx: OKAY BUT SOME OFFICERS ACTUALLY DO RISK THEIR FUCKING LIVES. It’s cute how tumblr users are liike “ahhh not all _____ people” but when it’s cops, they’re all awful apparently. Good god.  yes they do and it’s a shame some people don’t recognize or appreciate that! Cops who don’t check and report explicitly bad cops are not good cops. The culture of the blue wall of silence logically makes it so that cops are inherently bad, not good. The good cops who do report their constituents get labeled as rats and get harassed by other cops for snitching or even lose their jobs. The police are nothing more than a glorified gang. Come live in the communities that the police continuously harass, brutalize, and murder then let me know how you feel. Come hang in Philly for a minute, get a taste of how it feels to have the cops hold a magnifying glass over you. Ask my friend who got shot while delivering pizza in Southwest Philly by plainclothes officers who never identified themselves how it felt to have a bullet removed from his face. Or head to Camden where the cops don’t even respond to calls in these communities, and if they do they just show up to beat and arrest the people there. Go to Washington Heights in NYC where they stop and frisk mostly black and Latino men, even though almost 90% of those searches end up with nothing (stats available on NYPD website). Imagine a world where you get stopped and harassed by the police because of where you live or how you look, regardless of whether you’re innocent or not. Then tell me how much you just loooooove the police. Y'all don’t see shit over that white picket fence of yours, do you? The “good cop” going by the book will use violence to evict a homeless family from their car if they’re parked illegally. The “good cop” going by the book will use violence to arrest them, tearing the children from their parents, if they try to sleep in a foreclosed home left empty by the bank as a tax write-off. The “good cop” going by the book will use violence to keep that family from eating food that grocery stores and restaurants throw away in their locked dumpsters. The “good cop” going by the book will use violence to enforce even the most unjust law. And badge lickers will always try to justify the injustice. For the people who missed the point, this post doesn’t say that cops never risk their lives - it’s inviting you to take a good long look at the characteristics of the people they DO protect and risk their lives for, and note that there is a huge disparity in how cops treat people based on race, socioeconomic status, etc. Also I love it when people use “coppin’ is DANGEROUS” to handwave the numerous civil rights violations cops are routinely guilty of in the process of “just following orders”. Plenty of jobs are dangerous. Plenty of jobs are more dangerous than being a cop. But cops seem to be the main ones stomping around demanding endless respect and unquestioning obedience just because their “job is dangerous”.
Apparently, Bad, and Children: the "police officers risk their lives to
 protect us" starter pack

 Savannah Danielle lol who knew there was something wrong with actually
 having a car, a nice house and a clean put together family who lives in a
 safe community while spending your hard earned money on paying your
 bills rather then expensive sneakers and supporting the authorities of the
 neighborhood you take pride in
 Like Reply 11 minutes ago
living-for-fiction:
unbossed:


theflowerfish:

saaavx0h:

jaime-foxxx:

OKAY BUT SOME OFFICERS ACTUALLY DO RISK THEIR FUCKING LIVES.
It’s cute how tumblr users are liike “ahhh not all _____ people” but when it’s cops, they’re all awful apparently. Good god. 

yes they do and it’s a shame some people don’t recognize or appreciate that!

Cops who don’t check and report explicitly bad cops are not good cops. The culture of the blue wall of silence logically makes it so that cops are inherently bad, not good. The good cops who do report their constituents get labeled as rats and get harassed by other cops for snitching or even lose their jobs. The police are nothing more than a glorified gang.
Come live in the communities that the police continuously harass, brutalize, and murder then let me know how you feel. 
Come hang in Philly for a minute, get a taste of how it feels to have the cops hold a magnifying glass over you. Ask my friend who got shot while delivering pizza in Southwest Philly by plainclothes officers who never identified themselves how it felt to have a bullet removed from his face.
Or head to Camden where the cops don’t even respond to calls in these communities, and if they do they just show up to beat and arrest the people there.
Go to Washington Heights in NYC where they stop and frisk mostly black and Latino men, even though almost 90% of those searches end up with nothing (stats available on NYPD website). Imagine a world where you get stopped and harassed by the police because of where you live or how you look, regardless of whether you’re innocent or not. Then tell me how much you just loooooove the police.
Y'all don’t see shit over that white picket fence of yours, do you?


The “good cop” going by the book will use violence to evict a homeless family from their car if they’re parked illegally. The “good cop” going by the book will use violence to arrest them, tearing the children from their parents, if they try to sleep in a foreclosed home left empty by the bank as a tax write-off. The “good cop” going by the book will use violence to keep that family from eating food that grocery stores and restaurants throw away in their locked dumpsters.
The “good cop” going by the book will use violence to enforce even the most unjust law. And badge lickers will always try to justify the injustice.


For the people who missed the point, this post doesn’t say that cops never risk their lives - it’s inviting you to take a good long look at the characteristics of the people they DO protect and risk their lives for, and note that there is a huge disparity in how cops treat people based on race, socioeconomic status, etc.
Also I love it when people use “coppin’ is DANGEROUS” to handwave the numerous civil rights violations cops are routinely guilty of in the process of “just following orders”. Plenty of jobs are dangerous. Plenty of jobs are more dangerous than being a cop. But cops seem to be the main ones stomping around demanding endless respect and unquestioning obedience just because their “job is dangerous”.

living-for-fiction: unbossed: theflowerfish: saaavx0h: jaime-foxxx: OKAY BUT SOME OFFICERS ACTUALLY DO RISK THEIR FUCKING LIVES. It’s c...

Children, Community, and Facebook: Verizon 1x 3:15 PM 61%D Post Turns out cutting off 15" of her hair last time she touched scissors wasn't a big enough lesson.she cut her bangs AGAIN. So now she's BALD. I think this time the lessons gonna sink in a little deeper! Write a comment.. Post News Feed Requests MessagesNotifications More thetwelvewords: matt-ruins-your-shit: jackpowerx: savage-affinity: Context to the story: The girl cut her hair once so that she could have bangs. The mother disapproved and decided to cut off 15 of her hair as punishment. The girl later again decided to change her hair style and the above was the result; she shaved her daughters head. Having a few personal experiences with this kind of invasive behaviour it really hurts to see someone go through these kinds of things, where the parent tries to live vicariously through their childs life, to attempt to shape them and make their decisions for them depending on what THEY would do and give their child NO independence or self expression. Thankfully, this mother thought her actions were 100% justifiable and posted it to Facebook as a bit of a “haha, teach my kid a lesson” and has been hit with brutal recrimination from her community and has had visits from Child Protective Services. For so many young (and older) girls their hair is their self expression, and in several months I hope this girl will have hers back. Children are not their parent’s possessions. Children are NOT their parents’ possessions. CHILDREN ARE NOT THEIR PARENTS’ POSSESSIONS!!! CPS is an overreaction but still what a cunt, that girl looks more than old enough to be making decisions about her own fucking hair. Here’s a helpful guide for parents, if another kid were to do it to your child and you would be incensed and call it bullying/assault etc…don’t do it yourself you stupid fat fuck. I know I am a throwback but why would the child not fight? I fought back physically over so much less than something like what a shaved head is to a female. Not a virtue signal blah blah… just an expression of amazement that the child would not stand up and say no decisively. Are you fucking seriously wondering why a literal child being abused by their parent didn’t “fight back”? This is the woman willing to forcibly cut her own child’s hair and then post pictures to humiliate her publicly. If the kid had “stood up and said no decisively” there’s a good chance she would’ve gotten her teeth knocked in.
Children, Community, and Facebook: Verizon 1x 3:15 PM
 61%D
 Post
 Turns out cutting off 15" of her hair last time
 she touched scissors wasn't a big enough
 lesson.she cut her bangs AGAIN. So now
 she's BALD. I think this time the lessons
 gonna sink in a little deeper!
 Write a comment..
 Post
 News Feed Requests MessagesNotifications More
thetwelvewords:

matt-ruins-your-shit:

jackpowerx:
savage-affinity:

Context to the story:
The girl cut her hair once so that she could have bangs. The mother disapproved and decided to cut off 15 of her hair as punishment. The girl later again decided to change her hair style and the above was the result; she shaved her daughters head.
Having a few personal experiences with this kind of invasive behaviour it really hurts to see someone go through these kinds of things, where the parent tries to live vicariously through their childs life, to attempt to shape them and make their decisions for them depending on what THEY would do and give their child NO independence or self expression.
Thankfully, this mother thought her actions were 100% justifiable and posted it to Facebook as a bit of a “haha, teach my kid a lesson” and has been hit with brutal recrimination from her community and has had visits from Child Protective Services.
For so many young (and older) girls their hair is their self expression, and in several months I hope this girl will have hers back.

Children are not their parent’s possessions.
Children are NOT their parents’ possessions.
CHILDREN ARE NOT THEIR PARENTS’ POSSESSIONS!!!

CPS is an overreaction but still what a cunt, that girl looks more than old enough to be making decisions about her own fucking hair. Here’s a helpful guide for parents, if another kid were to do it to your child and you would be incensed and call it bullying/assault etc…don’t do it yourself you stupid fat fuck.

I know I am a throwback but why would the child not fight? I fought back physically over so much less than something like what a shaved head is to a female. Not a virtue signal blah blah… just an expression of amazement that the child would not stand up and say no decisively.

Are you fucking seriously wondering why a literal child being abused by their parent didn’t “fight back”? This is the woman willing to forcibly cut her own child’s hair and then post pictures to humiliate her publicly. If the kid had “stood up and said no decisively” there’s a good chance she would’ve gotten her teeth knocked in.

thetwelvewords: matt-ruins-your-shit: jackpowerx: savage-affinity: Context to the story: The girl cut her hair once so that she could hav...

America, Bad, and Books: he Swiss are voting on a plan to end poverty forever. Step one: give every adult $33,600 a year, no strings attached. There is no step two. Photo: Flickr/twicepix lazorsandparadox: tank-grrl: hello-missmayhem: cptprocrastination: doomhamster: belcanta: nikkidubs: attentiondeficitaptitude: belcanta: Guaranteed basic income to every citizen, whether or not they are employed to ensure their survival and that they live in a dignified, humane way, preventing poverty, illness, homelessness, reducing crime, encouraging higher education and learning vocations as well as helping society become more prosperous as a whole.  Wow. Forget raising the minimum wage. This is much much better idea. The minimum wage could actually drop if we had basic income. But Americans would never go for it. Miserably slogging through 12 hour days and having businesses open 24/7 is too engrained in our culture. “BUT WHERE WILL THE GOVERNMENT GET THE MONEY?” screamed Joe Schmoe, slamming a meaty fist onto the table and getting mouth-froth all over the front of his greying tank top. “You libt*rds all think money grows on TREES!! HAHA!”“But where will people get the incentive to work?!” Mindy Bindy cried, flapping her hands in front of her face. She’d had a fear of the unemployed lollygagging about ever since she was a child and her mother told her to be afraid of the unemployed lollygagging about. “You think people should get paid for nothing? I work hard for my money!” “But who will serve me?” grumbled Marty McMoneybags. “Who will make me feel important? Who will do my laundry and cook my food and stand in front of me wearing a plastic smile while I take out all my stress—because I do have a lot of stress, you know, being this rich is stressful—on them?” He paused and straightened out the piles of hundred dollar bills on the desk in front of him, then raised his two watery, outraged eyes up to the Heavens. “Lord, if there are no poor people, how will I know that I’m rich??” I laughed. This is perfect! Well said! The thing is, while I’m sure you could scrape up a few people who’d be willing to just float by on a guaranteed minimum income? For most people the choice to work would be a no-brainer. “Hmmm. I can get by on 33k a year, or I can take that part time job and make 48k… enough to move to a better apartment, maybe take the family on vacation. Sold.” Hell, most people would want to work simply because it gives one a sense of dignity and something to do with one’s time. (Speaking as someone who’s been unemployed, on extended sick leave, etc. in her time, the boredom and sense of isolation that comes with not having a job is almost as bad as the humiliation of having to depend on other people for one’s survival.) And with this system, part-time jobs and “non-skilled” jobs would be much more readily available because nobody would need to work two or three jobs just to stay afloat! Which would ALSO mean that employers and customers couldn’t shamelessly exploit employees the way they can today, because if losing a job weren’t necessarily a financial disaster, more people would be willing to walk out on jobs where they weren’t being treated with dignity. And if this also applies to students (and it should) then student loans would become much less of a problem, and fewer people would flunk out of school because of having to juggle studies and work. Far fewer people would be forced to stay with abusive partners, parents or roommates because they couldn’t afford to move out. And the thing is, all those people who suddenly had money? They’d be spending it. They’d be getting all the stuff they can’t afford now - new clothes, books, toys, locally-produced food, car repairs - and with each purchase money would flow BACK to the government, because VAT, also income tax. The unemployed and/or disabled wouldn’t need special support any more - which would also mean the government could fire however many admins who are currently engaged in humiliating - *cough* making sure those people aren’t getting money they don’t deserve. Same for medical benefits and pensions. And I’m no legal scholar, but I somehow imagine less financial desperation would lead to less petty crime, and hence less need for police and security everywhere? TL;DR Doomie thinks this is a good idea, laughs at those who protest. reblogging for more top commentary They tried something like this out in Canada as a sort of social experiment, called Mincome. What they found was that, on the whole, people continued to work about as much as they did before. Only new mothers and teenagers worked substantially less hours.  But wait, there’s more. Because parents were spending just a little more time at home and involved with their families, test scores increased. Because teens didn’t have to work to support their families, drop-out rates decreased. Crime rates, hospital visits, psychiatric hospitalizations and domestic abuse rates all dropped, as well. More adults pursued higher education. Those who continued to work reported more job flexibility and more opportunity to choose employment they preferred. Basically, now you can go prove to your asshole family members that society won’t collapse without poor people for you to feel better than. The picture is awesome, but read the commentary, that’s what I’m reblogging for. With debt levels spiraling out of control as they are, america might have to do this in the near future, in order to prevent economic collapse from people just not having money to spend. The only problem i forsee with this is that, in order to get the money to distribute, taxes on rich people would have to increase by a lot, and if taxes raise too high, they just fucking move to another country to avoid paying them. If there was a way to prevent this, or if the whole world implemented a standard like this at the same time thereby removing the incentive to flee tax hikes, then this would absolutely work out great
America, Bad, and Books: he Swiss are voting on a plan to end poverty forever.
 Step one: give every adult $33,600
 a year, no strings attached.
 There is no step two.
 Photo: Flickr/twicepix
lazorsandparadox:
tank-grrl:

hello-missmayhem:

cptprocrastination:

doomhamster:

belcanta:

nikkidubs:

attentiondeficitaptitude:

belcanta:

Guaranteed basic income to every citizen, whether or not they are employed to ensure their survival and that they live in a dignified, humane way, preventing poverty, illness, homelessness, reducing crime, encouraging higher education and learning vocations as well as helping society become more prosperous as a whole. 

Wow. Forget raising the minimum wage. This is much much better idea.
The minimum wage could actually drop if we had basic income.
But Americans would never go for it. Miserably slogging through 12 hour days and having businesses open 24/7 is too engrained in our culture.

“BUT WHERE WILL THE GOVERNMENT GET THE MONEY?” screamed Joe Schmoe, slamming a meaty fist onto the table and getting mouth-froth all over the front of his greying tank top. “You libt*rds all think money grows on TREES!! HAHA!”“But where will people get the incentive to work?!” Mindy Bindy cried, flapping her hands in front of her face. She’d had a fear of the unemployed lollygagging about ever since she was a child and her mother told her to be afraid of the unemployed lollygagging about. “You think people should get paid for nothing? I work hard for my money!”
“But who will serve me?” grumbled Marty McMoneybags. “Who will make me feel important? Who will do my laundry and cook my food and stand in front of me wearing a plastic smile while I take out all my stress—because I do have a lot of stress, you know, being this rich is stressful—on them?” He paused and straightened out the piles of hundred dollar bills on the desk in front of him, then raised his two watery, outraged eyes up to the Heavens. “Lord, if there are no poor people, how will I know that I’m rich??”

I laughed. This is perfect! Well said!

The thing is, while I’m sure you could scrape up a few people who’d be willing to just float by on a guaranteed minimum income? For most people the choice to work would be a no-brainer. “Hmmm. I can get by on 33k a year, or I can take that part time job and make 48k… enough to move to a better apartment, maybe take the family on vacation. Sold.” Hell, most people would want to work simply because it gives one a sense of dignity and something to do with one’s time. (Speaking as someone who’s been unemployed, on extended sick leave, etc. in her time, the boredom and sense of isolation that comes with not having a job is almost as bad as the humiliation of having to depend on other people for one’s survival.)
And with this system, part-time jobs and “non-skilled” jobs would be much more readily available because nobody would need to work two or three jobs just to stay afloat!
Which would ALSO mean that employers and customers couldn’t shamelessly exploit employees the way they can today, because if losing a job weren’t necessarily a financial disaster, more people would be willing to walk out on jobs where they weren’t being treated with dignity.
And if this also applies to students (and it should) then student loans would become much less of a problem, and fewer people would flunk out of school because of having to juggle studies and work.
Far fewer people would be forced to stay with abusive partners, parents or roommates because they couldn’t afford to move out.
And the thing is, all those people who suddenly had money? They’d be spending it. They’d be getting all the stuff they can’t afford now - new clothes, books, toys, locally-produced food, car repairs - and with each purchase money would flow BACK to the government, because VAT, also income tax.
The unemployed and/or disabled wouldn’t need special support any more - which would also mean the government could fire however many admins who are currently engaged in humiliating - *cough* making sure those people aren’t getting money they don’t deserve. Same for medical benefits and pensions. And I’m no legal scholar, but I somehow imagine less financial desperation would lead to less petty crime, and hence less need for police and security everywhere?
TL;DR Doomie thinks this is a good idea, laughs at those who protest.

reblogging for more top commentary

They tried something like this out in Canada as a sort of social experiment, called Mincome. What they found was that, on the whole, people continued to work about as much as they did before. Only new mothers and teenagers worked substantially less hours. 
But wait, there’s more. Because parents were spending just a little more time at home and involved with their families, test scores increased. Because teens didn’t have to work to support their families, drop-out rates decreased. Crime rates, hospital visits, psychiatric hospitalizations and domestic abuse rates all dropped, as well. More adults pursued higher education. Those who continued to work reported more job flexibility and more opportunity to choose employment they preferred.
Basically, now you can go prove to your asshole family members that society won’t collapse without poor people for you to feel better than.

The picture is awesome, but read the commentary, that’s what I’m reblogging for.


With debt levels spiraling out of control as they are, america might have to do this in the near future, in order to prevent economic collapse from people just not having money to spend. The only problem i forsee with this is that, in order to get the money to distribute, taxes on rich people would have to increase by a lot, and if taxes raise too high, they just fucking move to another country to avoid paying them. If there was a way to prevent this, or if the whole world implemented a standard like this at the same time thereby removing the incentive to flee tax hikes, then this would absolutely work out great

lazorsandparadox: tank-grrl: hello-missmayhem: cptprocrastination: doomhamster: belcanta: nikkidubs: attentiondeficitaptitude: belcan...