This is not the first time I read this sentiment, but kidnapping sounds softer to me than disappearing someone.

Kidnapping usually has a ulterior purpose and therefore the implication there’s conditions for return. Like money. Kidnapping is rarely itself the point.

That’s not the case here with government shipping people off to some foreign concentration camp, never to be seen again.

I’m more worried about why he’s doing it, than that he’s doing it to be honest, because the only realistic use case I see for this is eugenics.

Double income, single household, no kids. (and even then just barely, i will add)

Or, if you’re talking time wise, live in a country that isn’t run by and for corporations and you can still enjoy some paid time off.

Is it that common? How do they handle backpackers?

I’ve literally never gone on a single multi-week vacation in my entire life with fully booked accommodation for the whole thing. I book the majority of the first week and I know when I’m flying back, but in between I’m mostly guided by the wind.

I can’t book hotels in places I don’t know I’ll be going.

He is a complete character like Borat, he just doesn´t know.

I love how this is the hill people finally die on, and not the other absolutely wild shit this guy has said before he even got this gig, like collecting roadkill or his extremely well documented conspiracy-esque, anti-vaccine history.

Diplomacy is fine, but the US wanting to change something in the UK that is neither a humanitarian issue or something that affects them at all, is like your car mechanic telling you what kind of furniture you’re allowed to have in your house if you want him to work on your car.

He could technically do it, but it’s also fucking absurd and you’d most definitely go to a different mechanic.

And also the correct thing, from any position of reason.

Trying to control the way other countries are run is fucking wild, the notion of which should never even be remotely entertained.

You’ve been here for year and blocked 264 people, I mean this in the nicest way possible, but ever consider the problem is not the people you block? I think i’ve legitimately blocked maybe 20 people in my whole entire online life (I’m almost 40), most of it spent on platforms like Reddit.

But then I have a high aversion for echo chambers and only block obvious trolls, mostly to keep them from blowing up my notifications. I feel it’s much better to just not give random strangers on the internet the power to actually affect your mood.

It was still sold until recently? That’s pretty wild.

If America wants people to stop hating, maybe instead of trying to wipe it’s ass with the first amendment, it should stop cultivating hate with it’s actions.

What do you mean with fully banned in this example?

Pretty sure here in Europe there are also still plenty of cases where you’re not forced to remove asbestos, like inaccessible old plumbing that’s embedded in the utility shafts of apartment blocks. So it’s also not fully banned here yet either, in that sense.

Sony: we‘ll make it a little more expensive for everyone else, so no one feels left out

Let me fix that for you:

Sony: We‘ll make it a little more expensive for everyone else so our US sales don’t sink harder than a brick in a pond.

Companies really don’t care about people feeling left out. Company’s fear loss of sales. And that Trumps senseless antics by proxy of Sony make the PlayStation more expensive in my end of the world low key aggravates me, even if it’s only 50 bucks.

America voted for this, we didn’t.

deleted by creator