If they advocate attacking a black person, they know they'll get immediate blowback.
Attacking the "race traitor" is a level of obfuscation. There are more people who believe that races shouldn't mix than believe that people of color should be targeted directly.
It's like water - they're going to find the path of least resistance and pick up as many as they can along the way.
You need to stop giving regressives the benefit of the doubt. They will couch their rhetoric in as much plausible deniability as you're willing to extend them, exactly so that you'll go into the comments and carry water for them.
You and I both know beyond a shadow of a doubt that this will be prime fodder for AM talk radio, pulpits, and other bastions of the culture war. They are out there right now saying, "This is sad, but the boy [sic] was confused and was groomed by society." Framing it as grooming, dead naming, etc. is all a way for them to muddy the waters and poison the well. If it isn't blood libel, it's a single step away. Here's one example, I am sure you can find more if you look: https://twitter.com/Jermont_II
It was their children, engaging in terrorism they support (this is the natural consequence of the rhetoric they spew against LGBTQ+ people), against someone they consider subhuman.
If they haven't expressed their displeasure yet yet, it's because they're waiting for Fox to tell them which spin it needs to be "acceptable."
Remember Kyle Rittenhouse? The judge literally posed for pictures with him, and they turned him into a media darling and will probably run him for office if he can stay relevant and out of jail for a few more years.
They become the darling of regressive media. Even if that doesn't happen for them, they get to feel like an underground hero that is being repressed.
These people have literally built persecution fantasies into a religion.
There's a great book on the subject of food fraud called Sorting the Beef from the Bull.
It's insane what people will sell as food.
This is a long standing joke - what do you call someone who believes in Satan?
A Christian.
Not going to lie, my first thought was to wonder whether and how they controlled for this.
But I took a step back and reminded myself that REDLINING HAPPENED. Well into the modern day. It was only outlawed in 1968, and there's evidence that banks continued to do it through the 70s.
It's absolutely no surprise that there are still disparities, and I would be further unsurprised to find out that the deciding factor was zip code.
If you're reading my comment and you didn't click expand on the one above...go back and do so. It gets better and better.
There was just a story about starlink slowing down as more customers joined the network.
Seems like a good call. The option is nice for rural areas, but it's a stopgap measure at best while those areas wait for the slow rollout of fiber.
These folks won't witness it either. Not with that eye anyway.
Employers are limited in paying into 401ks for highly compensated employees, and are required to have a certain percentage of their normal employees putting money in if they want to go hog for their execs. That's why many give matches, to incentivize folks to contribute so that they can then funnel more to the C-suite.
Your coworker is right that the lack of match makes the 401k less appealing. That said, it's still the stock market, but you may have severely limited options.
You'll want to do what you're required to do, but then you should look into a ROTH IRA, which will give you a lot more control over that extra 5%.