2,449 karma · joined November 19, 2016
> So most likely, the lucky tank was actually too close for the NLAW to work as intended.
Vaccine-induced immunity is acquired through the introduction of a killed or weakened form of the disease organism through vaccination.
Vaccine-induced immunity is acquired through the introduction of a killed or weakened form of the disease organism through vaccination.
Look how much I'm up by buying close to the money options instead of buying shares at $80: https://i.imgur.com/vYHl1LY.png
Because women don't really have to settle for 1 man anymore (less stigma nowadays about being single into your 30s/single mother), it becomes more of a hookup market, and naturally women will always have more leverage when it comes to the hookup market due to men's natural higher levels of horniness/willingness to hookup with a wider variety of women than vice versa. If it was a relationship market where everyone has to eventually choose 1 person to settle with like in the past, women wouldn't have as much leverage. You can only have things like '80/20' rule if the market isn't about monogamy (it's not actually 80/20 in reality, but the general dynamic of a minority of men having most of the success with women). Everyone would end up with the same level of success, because everyone would end up with 1 partner if the market was about monogamous stable long term relationships.
> Hard to imagine anything good will come from a discussion hinging on that.
Genuine question, why does it sound like you find me advocating for a 2 parent household almost offensive? Is it because you don't believe any of the data about kids raised in 2 parent households is valid? From my perspective, I genuinely don't understand your reaction here at all because I thought this was a generally accepted fact in psychology/sociology.
I'm just asking out of curiosity for your perspective, I promise I'm not baiting you into a debate :)
Kids raised in married 2 parent households are less likely to end up homeless, achieve better academically and earn more, have less depression/suicide rates etc. Literally every outcome is better for stable 2 parent homes. The decline of the 2 parent nuclear family means more kids will suffer.
I don't really understand why it has to be either or. You can have your population decline if you want, but why does that have to mean single parent homes?
Can't you raise your 1 or 2 kids in the context of marriage to give them a higher chance of a better outcome, and still have your population decline?