Can’t sperm be frozen? What if each cis male got the snip after their sperm was frozen. Do it while they are young men, then the sperm is heathy as, and they can use that sperm if and when they find a mate to breed with. Pity I’m not president of the world.

Not the gay men of course. Shouldn’t have to say it, but Mr Venn does get particular.

The day after The Donald won a female coworker announced that she was cancelling her Florida vacation and going to California instead. Seemed drastic and unnecessary. She loves a melodrama as long as she’s the star

@100 fred2: Belated congrats to scoring this week's Lucky Hunsky (@100) Award. Savor the coveted riches wisely.

@112: Dadddy, I've never heard that. Would you please link to some data?

BUT, freezing sperm indefinitely costs a pretty penny.

I just remembered I saw Dan suggesting this, though his idea is it can be reversed.
Rearing kids cost a lot of money too.

To clarify, Dan was suggesting men voluntarily had the snip then later on reverse it if they want babies. Risky, sure. Then bc for women can be risky. Many can’t fall pregnant after being on it for years.

I am SO grateful to be entering menopause in the currently disastrous Err of Trump.
@111 tim bonehead: Your MAGA cap is on too tight. Seek medical attention before you lose any more vital brain tissue. Cutting Big Macs from your diet might also help clear your head and lose the pot belly.

Would anyone hate me for nominating one of my own comments, @77, as a winner in this week's thread?

Amazing---once again Griz has proven to have consumed red, red wine (another movie night) and commented without a single typo. When I hit menopause I'm throwing a wild party.

Thank you, Fred @100 and John @102. The US has led the world in making tax a dirty word. If only people thought of it as being blessed/fortunate enough to have the means to contribute to a society where everyone has health care and no one goes hungry, regardless of their personal circumstances.

Hunter @106: Men don't generally have maids of honour, so I think we're safe in deducting EMPATH is female.

Lava @110: And why shouldn't gay men freeze their sperm too? Sure, they're unlikely to cause accidental pregnancies, but if you discriminate based on sexual orientation you'd get a lot of straight guys suddenly claiming to be gay.

Griz @117: Right!? I am SO glad I'm no longer in either my reproductive-risk years or the United States.

@119 Thanks.
I think the left needs to get better selling 'reasonable tax' and welfare spending to people. The right have conned the population into thinking tax is wasted money or pointless altruism. It's really not. I consider a desire to pay tax for a social safety net as largely self-interested.

If my community is full of people living in poverty, people suffering on drugs, people who are unhealthy, people who are uneducated, it will make my life and the lives of my loved ones tangibly worse. It will drag down my opportunities, harm the economy that I work in, and result in me living in an uglier, sicker place.

And a dollar given the government in tax? Is a dollar spent in my economy, often locally, to employ my family, friends and neighbours. And what do they do? Pay tax to the government, who spend it all over again. It creates a virtuous circle of economic 'churn'. It's not going to China to pay for electronics, it's getting cycled again and again through my economy. Paying tax is one of the most efficient ways of spending and contributing to the economy.

The way I think of it is like this. If my neighbour's house is on fire, I help put it out. Not because I'm a nice guy (although, like, I totally am), but because I don't want the damn fire spreading to my house.

"Be a selfish asshole: pay more tax" is my suggested slogan for progressive parties. Maybe that wouldn't work as a Democratic slogan in 2020, but getting a lot smarter about explaining the benefits of progressive policies is a must. Saying 'boo-hoo, Republicans are jerks' won't work. We need to say (or your countrypeople need to say) "paying tax makes you richer".

The mystic chords of memory will yet swell the chorus of the Union, if the left starts appealing to the worser angels of our nature.

Second your nomination Grizelda; @77 is this week’s thread winner.

@100, 120, fred2, we don’t disagree as much as it seems. I can tell you love out country as much as I do. I bleed orange, I’m a socialist from a long line of them and I’ve never voted Conservative. I agree that if we paid a little more taxes and actually strengthened our social programs we’d have a far better system than now.

But even in the “good old days” of well-functioning social programs, they weren’t funded solely by tax dollars. Government corporations and assets were an important revenue stream. For way too long now, every time the Conservatives get in they privatize this, sell off that, disband the cooperatives (and mismanage the rest!) and expect to run the social programs off taxes. Which of course they can’t. And the left party of the region is left to try to rebuild, and of course they can’t. The social programs are slowly chipped away and we’re left to make up the difference out of pocket. What I’m saying is that a socialist system can’t possibly work if the whole country can’t agree on it.

And the difference is more and more each year. Each year, cost of living goes up, taxes go up, social programs cover less, and wages stay the same or go down. Without getting into details, we have ill parents and kids in school, and we’re making up for a lot that’s slipped through the social safety net. It truly is getting to the point that we can’t afford the taxes. Not “I want an SUV and another TV and a beach house” but “I want to eat fresh vegetables in the winter and be able to save for retirement”.

Taxes are like anything else you spend money on, whether they’re expensive or not depends on what you’re getting. Our social programs are broken, and we’re paying a lot for broken down garbage.

Maybe it’s a regional thing, because there is a lot of poverty in my community. The shelters don’t have enough beds, and the food bank doesn’t have enough food. I hope it’s a regional thing! I hope things are truly that good in your area and I hope we can get back to it.

It’s not a useful metric to compare our tax rates to other countries. Our population density is far lower than somewhere like the UK or Scandinavia, and bringing social programs to our remote communities is just one of our many unique challenges.

These posts don’t make me seem like it, but I’m no fan of Scheer I swear. Were you referring to anti-choice legislation when you said he’ll make Canada into Alabama North though? Scheer has committed to not touching our abortion laws, and I believe him. Not because I like him, but because he’s not stupid and he knows the vast majority of Canadians are pro-choice. Harper had a majority for a long time and never tried to take our right to choose. We have to be careful about fear-mongering like that, the result of that attitude is people being so afraid of a Conservative government that they vote Liberal to stop them, which takes votes away from Green andNDP where we might see some real change.

I'm not going to get into the bigger discussion though it's very interesting to read, thank you.

Just want to point out really fast that in the US, there is a lot of resentment among the middle classes for their tax rates plus property, sales and state taxes, and I think they are correct to be pissed about it. The tax burden should be shifted upward- it's incredibly stupid that people who are just upper middle class pay roughly the same percentage as people who are among the richest in the world (and many of them in fact pay even less). What bothers me is when people direct their understandable resentment about taxes at the government that taxes them rather than at the very rich who are hoarding wealth and have tax rates lower than in decades.

My point, when you reduce revenue by lowering the tax burden on the rich (something that has been happening for a couple decades now) then the government does have to compensate by increasing the burden on the middle class. People are correct to be pissed about this even as they support infrastructure and social investment and tax revenue generally. Meanwhile, Amazon made billions in profits last year and paid 0 in fed taxes and Bezos is the richest man in the world. Going after the rich is not just a moral issue like some seem to think it is. We have a crisis of over accumulation right now- it's what's behind all those empty luxury buildings and investment properties, etc. But I said I'm not going to get into the conversation egads.

Taxes is a dirty word in the US because something like 70% of the federal budget is used on defense spending. We recently had a government shutdown over spending, but the military budget had already been approved so they weren’t affected by our chief toddler’s tantrum while things that affect Americans daily lives were. A lot of people wouldn’t mind paying slightly more for better social programs, but the likelihood that it will be spent that way is very low and it isn’t just one party’s fault.

EmmaLiz, I’m not quite sure how I got into the conversation either. I usually only lurk in the comments and it’s probably best I go back to it!

I agree that the American middle class bears an atrocious tax burden, and as tachycardia points out, a really good military isn’t much to show for it. And I want to acknowledge that I’m writing from a position of privilege, I’d far rather pay my taxes than yours. It is wild that a huge corporation like Amazon can pay no taxes, even under our Conservatives that would never happen in Canada. Which I suppose is why you don’t hear about many multinational, billions-earning Canadian businesses. I suppose a lot of people think the economic stimulus of having a company like Amazon locally is worth forgoing the tax revenue.

@119 BiDanFan: Any chance Great Britain accepts exiting U.S. citizens? I feel there may be a mass exodus soon before things get (dare I say it?) even crazier. What is the accepted fuel emissions rating on cars in the U.K.? My VW Beetle and I would have to get used to driving on the left side of the road. Or would Brits openly reject nuts like us? At least we're fortunate to live in a blue state.
@121 LavaGirl: Thank you, Lava. I humbly accept the honor.

@84 BiDanFan: If men were ever forced to give birth, there would guaranteed abortion clinics on every street corner, open 24/7, and outnumbering the gas stations and churches.

@128: Damn it! There I go again! And once again, Griz can't blame it on the booze.
Correction: My comment should read: "If men were ever forced to give birth, there would be guaranteed abortion clinics on every street corner, open 24/7, and outnumbering the gas stations and churches."

I have a helluva lot to say when my back is up.

Love you Grizelda, and your humble acceptance.

Borg it was interesting to read about - it's fun to hear perspectives from other countries and at 130 comments in I think it's fine to go off on tangents. I'm most guilty of that anyway. I hope you don't go back to lurking.

Ms Fan - It all depends on the starting ratio. What's yours? If S outnumber B by 9 to 1 (which would produce something overall between 81% and 82.8% of the population against 9% to 9.2%), then the scale tips on the seventh couple, and the chance that eight partners of straight people are all straight themselves is just over 43%. If the ratio is 19:1 (89.3%-91.2%:4.7%-4.8%), then .95 to the eighth power is nearly two-thirds (.6634), while a 15:1 ratio (90% to 6%) to the eighth power comes to .5967.

Now, reduce the ratio to 4:1, and the scale tips on the fourth couple, with the chance that all eight couples are both straight just barely over one-sixth. That would require some of those self-reporting surveys, which suggest a bi boom, to hold up over time.

Usually I end up using these maths to calculate bridge odds. This reminds me of a hand recently on which partner showed a seven-card spade suit and the player in question had to decide whether to bid a grand slam with four-card support for spades, a void in clubs, the ace in one red suit and the ace-king in the other, so that the grand slam would make if three or more of partner's six non-spades were clubs. My apologies to the non-bridge-playing majority, but this sort of calculation is often what I am in the middle of performing while commenting.

The first article made me miss the "Hey Faggot" days (and they were before my time. They sound insufferable in the way Evelyn Waugh characters are insufferable, without the self awareness.

Turns out elections have consequences. Thank you so much, Millennials, for deciding that both parties are the same and you were too good to lower yourselves to voting for #her.

EmmaLiz @123: The powers that be have done a very good job of ensuring that middle income people who are angry about the taxes they pay (they may not be so angry if they didn't have to pay for health insurance and student loans on top of them) blame the people -below- them on the pecking order, not those above them. Their high taxes aren't the fault of greedy corporations or rich people seeking tax breaks and havens, they're the fault of immigrants and poor people on welfare. It's a convenient narrative for keeping the rich rich while the less-rich squabble amongst themselves.

Tachy @125: That's as may be but most people aren't mad that their taxes are going on defense, because that's what "makes America great again." They are hopping mad that their taxes might go to help a fellow human being in need. Because capitalism teaches that those people should be working; if they're not, they're lazy, "leeching" in the words of a recent commenter. Such a toxic and self-defeating mindset.

Griz @127: If you're going to make the effort to leave the US, don't put us at the top of the list! Try a country that -isn't- trying its best to adopt every boneheaded policy America puts out and leave the EU...

Venn @134: I'm not digging out a calculator, I'm just making the point that there are a lot of bisexuals that fly under the radar because they are opposite-sex monogamously partnered, so that someone like you might round them up to straight if they showed up to your bridge party.

Millennials, Montex @137? Far more old people voted for Trump.

Where was the sex?

Empath sounds like she needs a screen detox idk. Go out, run around, fuck your fiance like crazy.. Go tell BFF what you've been up to outside of the bedroom, and what she's been doing.. Then as awful as it is, talk to her about her feelings about the wedding, if she's upset, talk about rearranging the party, think about things you could accept beforehand.

When men have figured out how to terminate a pregnancy by saving and raising and adopting out the baby, then they will have some good reason to stigmatize partners who choose abortion instead ok.

Men who pressure their partners to have abortions or otherwise disrespect the bodies and choices of my gender are pretty creepy.

Ms Fan - I showed my work; I was just asking what your starting ratio was. It's legitimate to say that you think 60% of the population is "really" bisexual and that the vast majority of them round. You'd probably need at least that big a proportion to reach your six out of eight as a plurality outcome. But, even if we use one of the methods of determination that most aggrandizes the numbers placed into box B, my point that an OS couple is exponentially more likely to be SS than an SS couple is to be GG or LL still holds.

@138 BiDanFan: At this point, I'm not sure where my beloved little VW and I could go, especially countries that wouldn't be Griz / air cooled VW friendly (how many Brits would openly call me a 'dumb American', even after voting for Hillary?). The fact that hate groups are spreading all over the globe like cancer is troubling.

I am delighted to see a greater presence of Canadians on SLOG lately; borgcube and fred2, welcome!

Hope I haven't missed anyone else.

Bi @ 138 My point is that we pay taxes and instead of getting healthcare, education, etc. we get a bigger military. More taxes won’t change the fact that the government cannot be trusted to use the money for its intended purpose, so no one wants to give them more of it. We need it to pay for all the things the government isn’t helping with.

@142: I didn't say that. However, I have been trying to be very careful with how I use the word itself. By hate groups I am referring to those of Joey Gibson and Matt Shea, just for starters here in the PNW. I find the growth of these groups in the Divided States alone troubling because they are led by neofascist bullies, many of whom believe the Hitler was right, and worship the evil that is Trump.

@145: Take off that ridiculous MAGA cap. Your comment makes no sense at all. The U.S. military is already getting shitloads in government funding. Climate change is here and we need to slow it down. Medicare for ALL, abort the GOP, and tax the wealthy already.

LW1’s emotionally exhausting letter has already been covered at length, and I agree that she has a friendship problem. However, she might be the problem, not her friend. She says friend called her “late on Friday” and she didn’t respond til Monday. I don’t know how late is late to her, but in my circle, if you get a call unusually “late,” someone died, or someone’s In jail or the hospital or experiencing some kind of crisis. You always pick up “best friend” unusually late call or at least, listen to the voicemail and call back.
Boundaries are good and needed in many situations but this doesn’t look like one of them. Your best friend calls “late” and you don’t get back to her until Monday? That’s not a boundary, that’s being a bad friend yourself. No wonder your bestie is taking a step back. Maybe you were overly available before forevery little thing, but you’ve dialed it back too far. You should be able to rely on your “maid” but she should also be able to rely on you when the chips are down. You are overdue for a conversation about boundaries and support.

Griz@ 146, Please re-read what I wrote in 2 separate comments. I stated that the government uses our taxes for the military, instead of any kind of social programs that would help Americans. Raising taxes (I'm talking about on everybody, because you know damn well it is NOT just the wealthy whose taxes will go up) doesn't mean we will get those programs. It just gives the government more money that they will continue to waste. I DID NOT say that we need more military spending, and I SPECIFICALLY stated that the government can NOT be trusted to spend on social programs because they are already constantly looking for ways to defund those things. A little quick to judgment on calling people right wing extremists there, my dear.

@148 tachycardia: I stand corrected, and couldn't agree with you more. Forgive me for jumping the gun. I obviously missed your previous comments. Thank you for calling me on it.