Alkali

This is always the question, and there is never an answer.

I ... Don't believe you are correct here. The US has the most destructive military (non-nuclear) on the planet. The country simply does not have the appetite to actually commit blood, sweat, and money to this war. If they start striking the US, the US people will see it as an existential threat and be far more willing to dedicate as many resources as nessesary to eliminating the threat regardless of the fact that the US started it. That would be bad for everyone, but especially Iran.

It is far better to have the US population largely split in their support for the war effort.

Yes, letting the guy who actively supports the genocide win was a much better option. I'm sure she learned her lesson.

I'm a bit confused, are you saying Obama was not center left and occasionally right leaning? I would have sworn he relied on market-based solutions for healthcare, supported for free trade agreements, aggressively used executive military power and drone striked the shit out of the middle east, and the maintained many Bush-era tax rates. He even had a beer with a cop who arrested a black man trying to get into his own house as an "apology" for stating the cop acted stupidity (the cop did) during his first term. So, he went to the right during his actually presidency. Am I mis-remembering these things or something?

Id honestly appreciate if you could educate me on this. My understanding is that Biden never even supported socialized healthcare. I'm a bit surprised to hear anyone say he was left of Sanders.

It was how Biden won his election, so... it has won elections. It was just a bad strategy for Harris.

I mean... trying to win over moderate, independent, and anti-Trump Republican voters seems like a reasonable approach given the way the current voting system works.

If anything, it seems that Biden and the DNC fucked us by not having a primary. Biden should have committed to a one and done. She may have fucked us by accepting the nomination without a primary, but I honestly blame Biden for that far more.

I do agree that Kamala didn't help the situation all that much. But I still don't see how she really fucked us.

I'm not a Harris fan by any means, but what did she do to "fuck us?"

I mean, her stance on Israel and Palestine wasn't great, but it was massively better than Trump.

They are trying to go back to a system where the rules are universal but selectively enforced against people they consider to be "other." Their shock and confusion is when the rules they create also apply to them.

They can't comprehend a world where laws are applied equally. In this situation, she is arguing that the law was only applied equally because the "left" spread information that the law would need to be applied equally, and would have negative consequences for everyone.

Basically, she wanted white privilege and got the oppression she was trying to force on others.

"I'm not sure where you're getting anything about spitting in your food, typically in a sit down restaurant the bill and tip are reconciled at the end of the meal so there's no opportunity for that even if they wanted to."

Tips are collected prior to pick up for many sit down restaurants if you plan order take out (which is independently more BS given you weren't even waited on). Delivery services and restaurants have suggested they would tamper with food if no tipe is provided. Perhaps that was more localized to California or the Bay Area though.

"And are you implying that being expected to tip is the same as being raped?"

Umm... No.

My point is that it is an exploitative process that has been normalized by US society. If you think rape is horrific then that's good. You should. You should also be absolutely horrified that it has been treated as a running joke for prison sentences for generations in the US at this point. My general annoyance is that so many exploitative aspects of US society have been just... Accepted. Tipping is probably the most benign.

Thanks for the links on the history of tipping, I'll have to take a look.

Although, I don't see how this takes away from the general issue of owner exploits employee, employee exploits costumer, if costumer does not give in to the (voluntary) exploitative system the exploited worker turns on exploited consumer instead of employer.

It just seems your suggestion is to keep being exploited until the system fixes itself because otherwise the worker can't afford their cost of living. Luckily for me I can't afford to go out anymore so I'll just pay the excessive cost of groceries and GET ASKED FOR TIPS IN THE GOD DAMN GROCERY STORE NOW!!!

Anyway, this is probably not a debate worth having, but thanks again for the links.

So, what is the solution then?

1. No one go to restaurants anymore.

• Employer probably has some form of insurance and will get paid out after claiming low demand for the service in the area.
• Employees still get fired.
• Community lose a restaurant and there is a lower chance of another one coming.

2. Go but don't tip.

• Worker gets screwed because their wages aren't worth the work without tips.
• worker either needs to quite or unionize (strike) to get a higher pay.
• Worker is afraid(?) to do that so blames the costumer for not tipping.

3. Grass roots campaign to change tipping laws entirely

• Workers are against it because they tend to make more with tips than with flat wages because some people can and will tipe very high.
• Owners are against it because they lose more money on labor.
• Costumers are for it because it doesn't guild them into having to pay an undisclosed fee with a guilt trip assigned. However, they are unlikely to rally in favor in larger numbers than employers and employees because it does affect their day to day life as much.

It may be just me, but this seems like turning serfs on serfs while everyone goes to the powers that be rather than actually addressing the issue. I mean, I'm fine with just eating out less and tipping when I do, but I don't see how not tipping is morally wrong when they entered system was about morally exploiting the costumer.

Also, the process only exists because restauranteurs had difficulty paying their employees during the great depression and encouraged them to accept payment To Insure Promptness (TIP). Can we just go back to a system when I only tip when my food is delivered quickly and the service is above average rather than to prevent people from spitting in my food because that is somehow now socially acceptable?

Am I missing something though? Because this whole thing seems like a less horrific version for rape being an implied additional punishment of jail in the US.

I'm fine with this idea. But just so I understand, doesn't not going to the restaurant also hurt the staff? Is the idea to hurt the owner and the staff at the same time?

I ask because during COVID restaurant staff were definitely calling for people to go to restaurants more to "keep them alive." At least they were in my area.