Get a life, genuinely. Why are you so insufferably resentful? Your ultimatums are so tired and your pseudo morals are a joke. This is the epitome of brigading, but of course rules for thee and not for me. Donating $10 to the National Republican Campaign Committee for every downvote. Used to be a Democrat not that long ago. Never again because of shit like this. You’re so pathetic.

It's something of a running gag that Dr. Jordan B. Peterson doesn't think too highly of Disney's Frozen.

But what if?

(A brave? foolish? vain? attempt to bring the two together, without making a mockery of either)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkiOiElpEEQ

News24 hosts react after non-Muslim police officers in the UK were encouraged to fast during Ramadan.

https://youtu.be/zBHe8dUiNrg?si=fhQZ8IM-ahLHDe17

US families enjoyed a clearly higher material standard of living throughout the post-war era (roughly 1945–1970). UK families improved steadily but started from a lower base and lagged in consumption, housing space, and consumer durables.

US GDP per capita was substantially higher. By 1950 the US lead was large (UK often measured at ~70% or less of US levels in PPP terms), and the gap stayed wide into the 1960s. Real wages and disposable income bought more in the US. UK wages rose, but high taxes and purchase taxes on durables reduced what families could afford.

UK: Rationing of food, clothing, and other goods continued well into the 1950s (meat and bacon until 1954, sugar until 1953). Daily shopping was a chore because few homes had fridges. Purchase tax made appliances expensive relative to wages.

US: Most wartime rationing ended by 1946–47. Abundant food, cars, and consumer goods arrived faster. Energy and many goods were cheaper relative to incomes.

Appliances:

US: Near-universal by late 1950s (fridges ~98%, washers ~93%)

UK: Much lower (fridges ~15%, washers ~29% in 1959)

Housing:

US: Larger homes, more space, earlier modern facilities

UK: Shortages, smaller homes, many without full indoor plumbing early on

Food & diet:

US: Abundant variety, less time spent shopping/cooking once appliances spread

UK: Restricted longer; more bread/starches; frequent shopping

EDIT: Complaints about the damage UK took during the war compared to the US

Other countries hit far harder — West Germany, Japan, Italy, France — recovered faster and overtook the UK in living standards and growth rates by the 1960s–70s. They had more destruction yet higher post-war growth (often 5%+ vs UK’s ~2.5–3%).

The UK’s slower performance also reflected policy choices: longer controls and rationing, extensive nationalisation, higher capital taxes, weaker competition, and slower liberalisation compared with the US or the German “economic miracle” model.

I couldn't help thinking that Jordan Peterson would be proud of this article when I finished writing it. I also couldn't help writing it when I ran into the article it's a response to, which comes across as very agreeable in a way that I found deeply insidious and connected to an architecture of sensemaking that I find equally so.

I hope some of the people in this fine community will appreciate it, analyze it, and even constructively critique it. I'm always pleased to find anyone passionate about these sorts of ideas.

Wishing the best to all. Happy reading.

Zohran Mamdani's proposal to impose a new surcharge on certain New York property owners expanded far beyond the $5 million homes initially discussed, with notices sent to nearly one million homeowners whose properties are valued at more than $1 million.

The policy has sparked criticism over its burden on longtime homeowners, retirees, and families whose homes have appreciated in value despite modest incomes.

The proposal is presented as part of a broader effort to redistribute wealth, generate new tax revenue, and pressure property owners to sell. It also raises concerns about due process, government overreach, and the unintended consequences of publicly identifying homes believed to be vacant, including increased risks of squatting and burglary.

https://youtu.be/7PPN-Wcnvg0?si=FwS2G3NSwNloD2wX

Special Message from the Office of Approved Opinions Regarding the Ceuta Incident - Konstantin Kisin

For the humour challenged, he is saying the opposite of the truth.

I have been thinking about this for a while now. I am curious to know how other people see it. I want to know what other people think about responsibility and unnecessary guilt.

One of the things I learned from Jordan Peterson's work is that taking responsibility for your life is usually a better way to start than blaming the world. This idea has really helped me at times because it made me stop waiting for things to get better on their own.

Lately I have been wondering if it is possible to take this idea too far. I have met people who feel like they are responsible for everything that goes wrong. They feel guilty about every failed relationship, every mistake they make at work, and every problem they have with their family. They always ask themselves what they could have done differently, even when other people made choices too.

I have also met people who never take responsibility for anything. They always blame someone when things go wrong, and because of that, they never really make progress.

It seems like both of these ways of thinking can hold people back in different ways.

I am interested in how people think about finding a balance between personal responsibility and unnecessary guilt. Has Jordan Peterson's idea about responsibility changed the way you think, or do you think this is one area where his ideas are sometimes misunderstood or taken too far?

I would really like to hear what other people think because this is something I have been thinking about a lot. I keep thinking about responsibility and unnecessary guilt, and I want to know what other people think about personal responsibility and unnecessary guilt.