Beemo Dinosaurierfuß

I mean he defrauded rich people.

Off course he gets the book.

Right to jail.

Believe it or not… jail.

So I have no idea about guns but would you say there is no legislative way to end the fact that the USA is the only first world country with a mass shooting like every other day?

Again I am not arguing for or against any one particular measure or ban.
I don’t know anything about high cap mags or whatever.
But I do know that other countries seem to show a correlation between stricter gun laws and less fatalities by gun.

Or is it your 2nd amendment that stands in the way of effective legislative measures?

It just seems like a problem that should be so easy to solve and as a European it just seems strange that you guys seem to be completely unable to even make improvements.

the same way we know that ‘T’ is for ‘Tuesday’ and ‘Th’ is for ‘Thursday.’

As a non native speaker I have to admit I actually didn’t know that.
But in German you also use two letters for all the weekdays.
Mo, Di, Mi, Do, Fr, Sa, So.

But it is a popular riddle for children to ask M, D, M, D, what comes next?

Just fucking do it.

Maybe then other media will finally stop reporting shit like
“Person Z said Y on X (formerly Twitter).”

What?

Musk might be the number 1 person in the whole world when it comes to losing money this past year.

Yeah thank you.

The part that I still don’t quite get is why giving both people 10 hours of classes is equality but giving both 0 hours of lessons isn’t.
(Or giving both kids 1 ladder vs. giving both kids 0 ladders.)

I get that the analogy to a real situation would be to just let inequality run its course and that is obviously not the same as giving everyone the same assistance. I still don’t think the picture makes this point very well.

Thank you for taking the time.

I think I get now what panel 2 wants to tell me.
I still think it would make the same point (or a similar one) more clearly if the left child had a ladder from start on.

Then you could see that just equalizing the tools is not enough.
Here I think it looks as if giving tools is worthless to even harmful, which I don’t agree with.

But again thank you for writing it up, it was well written and very good to understand for me as a non native speaker.

Thanks for the benefit of the doubt I guess.

I think I will stay at my own conclusion that this picture doesn’t do a good job of pointing out the differences between the panels.

They could just as easily have given the left child the ladder from panel 1 on. That would show that just equalizing the tools and assistance doesn’t create real justice in a flawed system.
I am not convinced that starting with no tools and assistance (aside from the tree that somehow is assistance in panel 1 and isn’t in panel 2) and then giving them both the same ladder makes that point very well.

But maybe I still just don’t quite get it.

I did consider no tools on both sides to be equal tools.

Can you maybe eli5 why there is a need to have something in this example?
I just don’t get any real difference from the first two panels.

The exact same circumstances that punish the one kid in the first panel still punish them in the second. If anything they are worse off in comparison since the additional provided tools don’t serve any purpose for them but do help the other kid.

I really don’t mean to be contrarian but I simply don’t understand how a leaning tree can be assistance in panel 1 but not in panel 2.

Wouldn’t then in the second panel still not be equal assistance?

I didn’t think the tree was either a tool or assistance.
Especially since it is still the same in the second panel where tools or assistance are supposed to be equal.

But I am not good at those things. I just don’t seem to get it.

Doesn’t the first panel also have equal tools and assistance?

I am not sure what you are saying here.

And I don’t know how stuff works in America, but where I live with most public offers like libraries, public pools, graveyards and stuff like that the amount that the user has to pay is almost never enough to completely fund that thing.

It is still good to demand a certain price, since that increases the appreciation of this public good, decreases wasteful or careless usage and obviously helps to lessen the necessary subsidies from taxpayer money.

I am pretty sure the people enacting those policies understand that perfectly well.

If you would demand so much money from library users to fund the whole library, then noone would use it and a valuable public good would be lost.

At least in the earlier seasons.

I think it fell off very heavily, which sucks, because now I also don’t want to rewatch the awesome early seasons.