#Some Stuff I Have Seen People Specifically Wanting to Know About

[cicaklah]

get ready for my thoughts on yaoi UBI

So I’ve kvetched about UBI in the tags for long enough someone finally asked me what I was going on about so here we go! 

I will start with some caveats: 

I am British, and so I can only speak about the British specifics.

I have for the past twelve years worked as a professional health economist, and health economics is based on social welfare theory (specifically growing out of Arrow’s work in the 1960s and Sen’s work in the 80s/90s). I literally could talk forever about this, but I won’t. If you want to know more, read the pretty good wikipedia article on welfare economics.

But fundamental to welfare economics is two things: if we make a great big change, do the benefits outweigh the costs? And does the change make a fundamental change for good? (aka cost-benefit analysis and pareto efficiency).

The other thing you need to know about me is that I don’t like activists very much, because they never have to show their working, and my entire professional life is showing my working, and critiquing other people’s working. We all have ideas mate, show me the plan! I love a plan! and this isn't coming from anything but personal experience; I have been to talks by UBI activists before, including ones by economists, but I have never had the case made to me that UBI would be either cost-beneficial OR approach pareto efficient. In fact, it usually reminds me of arguments that are based on some other imaginary world, and then I get so annoyed I want to scream. 

In the early 2010s when I was first starting working as an economist, I was asked to build a model to see whether switching a disability benefit from government administered to individual administration would be cost-effective. Essentially, if you were newly in a wheelchair and you needed a ramp building up to your house, would it be better for the government to organise a contractor, or for you to be given a cash transfer and organise it yourself? The answer was that it wasn’t, but anyone who has ever had to hire a builder could have told you that, and the government didn’t have to pay my firm £30,000 to make that decision. But that is what UBI essentially is; a cash transfer where you get cash and the government gets to enjoy less responsibility.

There are 37.5 million people of working age in England. (Nearly) every single working person gets what's called a tax free allowance, where the government doesn’t claim income tax on the first £12,570. (Once you make over £120k, your allowance starts to decrease, and you lose it entirely at I think £150k)

Let’s assume that instead of just not claiming tax on this amount, the government switched to making that £12,570 your UBI. That is £471,375,000,000 just for England - just under half a trillion pounds. In cash, or nearest as in our modern economy. And not one off - Every year. 

Okay, let's say that the country does have a spare half a trillion a year (in cash) lying around. What is the benefit to switching from tax free allowance to UBI? Well, let's assume that no one stops working, so there would be the tax receipts from the 20% income tax on the £12,570, and that’s just a shade under £100 million. Not bad.

But if you’ve seen a UBI post, you will know that people like the idea because they will be able to work less. Which probably means that UBI will need to be paid for in some other way. Perhaps by cutting existing benefits. The universal credit cost is around £100 billion. So we’re still £300 billion short, and honestly, you wouldn’t cut all of universal credit anyway, probably only the unemployment benefits, but I’m not digging into the maths on that tonight. 

But, look, I am sympathetic. I am a welfarist. I genuinely believe that the economy is not just money, that welfare is happiness, it is utility, it is all the stuff that makes life worth living, and it is the responsibility of the government to maximise the welfare/happiness/utility/quality of life of the country through efficient use of taxation and other sources of money. So people give the government money and it spends it on goods and services and then people get utility, and then they spend their own money to get more utility, and ultimately we can gain intangible things that are incredibly valuable. 

But the problem is that cash is cash, cold and hard and very real. I don’t know how unlimited spare time translates into half a trillion real pound coins. I wouldn’t know how to build a model that complex and uncertain, especially as this all assumes that you can live on 12k a year, and that whatever replaces progressive taxation is equally progressive. I haven’t even touched on how having a convoluted welfare state insures it somewhat against being entirely destroyed after a change in political opinions, aka what I call the daily mail test. You think the narrative about people on welfare is bad now? But also, how would you deal with people who didn’t manage their UBI money well? What happens if there is a personal crisis?

The more I look at it, the more the existing system is actually remarkably good value for money. Individualism is expensive. Collective decision making and spending is just cheaper. 

Ultimately I don’t see the additional benefit of UBI, requiring a pie in the sky change, when it is far, far, far more cost effective to strengthen the existing regime across the board; taxation law, social safety net, childcare, working laws, education and health - all systems that are already in place, and have a thousand times higher likelihood to be pareto optimal and cost effective than trying to find half a trillion pounds of cash round the back of the sofa, while torching 150 years of progress so middle class people can write their book without having to have a job. If I was conspiracy minded I would say that UBI feels like a psy-op, trying to shut down old fashioned progress in favour of ripping it all out and starting again.

Ultimately, that is my real annoyance. It is far, far, far cheaper for the government to provide you with your new ramp for your house, and that is done through politics, but not fun moonshot politics, the hard shit that isn’t sexy.

[twelvemonkeyswere]

How is dandadan about misogyny?/gen

I feel like it's particularly about how misogyny is the evil of the story. I haven't read the manga so I can't attest to how the story goes, but so far Dandadan has touched on heavy topics that tell me this. Also, content warning there for what I'm about to explain. Topics include stuff like sexual assault, the struggles of motherhood (particularly of single mothers), and the cataloguing of women into stereotypes, like the Angel vs the Whore. All this connects to the exploration of the show of specifically male violence against women. Old women and their knowledge - from wisdom to fairytales - is an important part of the story as well, placing a lot of relevance to what we know as "old wives tales", often dismissed by patriarchal structures.

One of the protagonists is a teenage boy, Okarun, who doesn't fit with his other classmates, and is bullied mostly by boys (though when a girl makes fun of him it also adds nuance, since she's also playing into a misogynistic stereotype because she thinks that's how she keeps her popularity in a patriarchal structure). One of the highlighted differences between Okarun and other boys is that he sees women as people. He defends his female friend from being badmouthed by the boy who bullies him, for example.

The show literally starts by having Okarun being attacked and having his penis and testicles magically removed, but he never lets that affect his sense of self. If anything, it adds to his strength since he begins training to fight the magic forces that attacked him, and he wants them back because that's a part of his body. But to me it reads like. Yes, it's often played as silly fun because an emasculated man ha ha, but also removing the stereotypical macho behaviors and beliefs makes a man stronger and more powerful.

The women of the show all face different complications based on the assumptions others make of them, and the misogyny of their environment hurts them deeply. Many of the magical monsters they encounter are in fact traumatized women who have become Creatures due to magic as they try to correct or avenge the wrong that happened to them in the world. The suffering of women leads to monstrosity, but so far it's always understood the real monster was the men who caused the harm originally. Women have an uphill battle, the show has said several times now, and when they get violent back it's seen as a horror story.

So there are many things like that that make me realize Dandadan gets that right at least. It still remains a shonen show and has a silly tone and ridiculous things happen and some might judge the character designs or some tonal approaches, but it consistently understands the objectification and oppression of women in a patriarchal society is a real and serious matter. it understands the violence of misogyny is always the ultimate evil behind it all.

[velvetvexations]

(someone should correct me if I get anything wrong about forcemasc and autoandrophilia)

The thing about autoandrophilia and autogynephilia is that they're extremely basic concepts. The idea of fetishizing becoming a man or a woman a very simple idea. Using it as a basis to "explain" trans people is dumb and wrong but that both cis people and trans people would have kinks that fit that definition is neither surprising nor should it be scandalous. Forcemasc is often tagged transandrophilia because it literally is fetishizing taking on aspects of masculinity from a theoretical starting point of non-masculinity, regardless of if "beginning as something other than a man" is how one conceptualizes their transness out of kink. Forcefem kink likewise fits the definition of autogynephilia, but isn't used because, while transmascs also get routinely accused of what is in essence autoandrophilia, that specific word is used less, and so autogynephilia has a more viscerally negative reaction even though it's obviously also fetishizing transitioning and the act of becoming and/or being a woman.

It's very arguable, though, that the dictionary definitions of autoandrophilia and autogynephilia can be taken at face value because it's whole conception and advancement are transphobic in nature. No one ever applies them to cis men and women, for instance, even though cis sissies should also fall under the category of autogynephilic. I believe there are people who self-identify as AGPs but I know nothing about them. You could go by that dictionary definition, but can you really do so neutrally or is just a poison word from the ground up? Autoandrophilia may be used by actual transphobes less, but it does get used, so some transmascs have chosen to do so on their end in spite of that. Presumably there are transmascs who are into forcemasc but don't like the term autoandrophilia and actively avoid it, too.

There are in fact transfems who do actually fetishize the concept of autogynephilia as well, of which I am one myself. The funny thing about that, though, is that while forcemasc tagged autoandrophilia is autoandrophilia, all transfem content I've seen to use AGP is closer to a form of autoandrophilia itself, getting off on how one's masculine features contrasts with societal standards of femininity. Like, to go all "ohhh I'm such an AGP freak >:3" you're not actually doing autogynephilia, you're getting off on the idea of theoretically not being a woman, which is the exact opposite of an actually "autogynephilic" kink.

AGP kink is an element of misgendering and detrans kink. For transmascs, as far as I can tell, misgendering and detrans kink usually takes the form of being an extension of misogyny kink, while for transfems it leans more towards things like trans supremacy. In both cases the idea is that both are, within the simulated kink scenario, applying cissexist bioessentialist ideas to revert trans women and trans men alike into sexual stereotypes of their AGAB, which is to say sexually aggressive dominant men and sexually weak submissive women. There are some transmasc trans supremacy doms, however. There are also a lot of submissive trans women into misgendering/detrans or kinks adjacent to those, for whom it goes into homophobia and sissy stuff, or just the general masochism of processing the pain that often comes with unwanted detransition.

I kinna got off on a tangent here, but I just like talking about kink. Ultimately it's within the rights of transmascs to use the word autoandrophilia if they want to because it is something that also gets thrown at them even if not always using that name (and often indeed using that name) while transfems are within their rights to not use it. Yes, I know this may be shocking, but the big conclusion here is "do what you like and let other people do what they like."

[bleue-flora]

speaking of lore inaccuracy I have been seeing people saying that c!sapnap dragged c!tommy into the first war with c!dream because c!sapnap stole c!tommys stuff and I can't find the clip for that but I take their word for it but c!tommy would have attacked c!dream regardless of that or not. Like if i remember correctly, c!tommy was talking about how he's sick of wars and doesn't want to be involved only to then go ahead and steal a bunch of stuff and kill people without giving back gear. c!sapnap may have dragged him into that fight with c!dream where they end up 2v1ing him but I think in the grand scheme of events it doesn't matter because he would have attacked him in another time somewhere else, nothing changes

[context]

Anon, please. I’m so triggered as it is but I also have like 700+ something pictures of dsmp map and I’d like to talk about some more of it before we hop subjects. I know, I’ve seen, I’m going do a post on it soon as I feel like someone needs to set the record straight and apparently my first [post] wasn’t enough (in fact, I may or may not have actually spent the better part of yesterday rewatching those streams). But I plead mercy, I have a Lot of different brain rots going on all at once from the time dilation we talked about the other week [post], to finally knowing what these maps are [post] [post] and the enchants of Quackity’s tools [post], to learning more about the prison [post], staged duo note [post], Dream’s hand writing and the letter to Techno [post]… etc… I am losing it… please send a medic, the brain rot is too strong.

Having said that though, I’m answering this incase you are in an ongoing debate with someone and need it, here is the [clip] you are talking about I believe. The argument that Sapnap pulled him into it only goes so far as Tommy can make his own decisions the same way Tubbo can. Also some of what made that conflict bigger was specific things Tommy did so blaming it on Sapnap is kinda ridiculous. It’s not like that’s even his first war or something anyways, Tommy is always down to kill Dream all on his own (and if you need proof of that, here is just one example [clip]).

Plus in this instance - as in the instance that starts the disc saga - Tommy is high off of his kill and says ‘we should kill more people whilst we’re at it’ and Dream just logged log on so Sapnap is like ‘should we kill Dream?’ and Tommy answers ‘Yeah let’s kill Dream!’ which hardly seems like Sapnap pulled him in to it. And if they are referring to the war prior to Dream logging on, that doesn’t matter anyways. The disc saga didn’t start when they went after Alyssa and Ponk, the disc saga started when they killed Dream unprovoked and refused to give back his stuff afterward [clip] [clip].

[notquitedeadpod]

okay I've finished the rough cut of the next episode now, and. yeah. ohhhh boyyyyyy. it's called Sound & Fury and there will be fury i am certain of it.

[fvckw4d]

The concept of queerbaiting annoys me. I was told that it refers to a work of fiction pretending to cater to a queer audience but then pulling back from it to avoid alienating homophobes, which is an incredibly specific thing. But a lot of people seem to think that it instead means "any time there's any gay subtex, metaphor, or ambiguity" or "whenever something from 1995-2012 was being a normal amount of homophobic for the era."

[dootznbootz]

I really think it's important to give credit where credit is due but for example, on tumblr you can always @ someone...but then I feel like I'm calling for attention!!! Or like I'm coming off as "Oh I mentioned you!!! You have to reblog this!!!" when that's not it!!!

Like I know that's the simplest way to give credit. And when just tagging someone, most of the time I know it's a simple "I'm thinking of you" or "I think you'd like this!" and that's definitely how I see it but I know that I'm a chaotic lil gremlin who likes collecting everything as "I absorb everything in sight". I know other people are more particular about what they toss up on their blogs.

I usually just put url names so then people KNOW who's the person with said idea first and then link the specific post so then the person doesn't need to feel like they have to like or reblog my thing as I'm just trying to give credit and the source.

[ineffablefool]

The lil corner of the Good Omens fandom that I generally see is getting more and more into publicly declaring that That Theory I Dislike Is Bad And People Who Ascribe To It Should Feel Bad, and I don't know if it's really new, or if I was just lucky enough to generally be missed with that shit the last four years.

Different people's brains work differently, which means they will notice things, form interpretations, maybe come to extremely firm conclusions, all different from each others'. Different from mine, different from yours.

I get that some people think that they have the brain which produces the Objectively Superior theories (and/or which can easily determine which other people's theories are the Objectively Inferior ones). I just really missed the memo where Your Interpretation Is Not My Interpretation (And That's Okay) was dragged out back and fucking shot.

Anyway this blog is an "I may not agree with your theory but you may trust that I won't publicly heap scorn upon the very idea of having it" zone if anyone was wondering.

[thethingything]

do you ever write out a post and then remember the reading comprehension on this site is abysmal and you can practically feel the potential shitty comments and think "actually no this isn't worth it"

[springcatalyst]

*asks you about world building*

*sickos haha yes image*

All my stories take place in roughly the same timeframe in largely the same environment: hesitantly named Synsolic as an analogue to Earth (I may change that later because I don't know if I like it but it's stuck for a while now so. We'll see)

It's fantasy because I am a sucker for fantasy, populated by humans, merfolk, fauns, satyrs, ipotanes, and nightlings- which are also called shadowlings or aveoliths in varying contexts. I know "faun'' and ''satyr" are largely used interchangeably in a lot of things, but they're different species, here, though they share similarities with each other as well as with ipotanes, the other ungulate species. Merfolk are actually made up of two subspecies, iarans and nix, but while they differ physiologically in a lot of ways, culturally they are one and the same, so they're generally grouped together. I think that's as far as I'm going to get into species things for now, because I've got *checks notes* 32 pages of species things in my own nonsense word docs and I really don't think you want all of that. Unless...

BUT

The world as it is now has been fractured. I hesitate to call it post-apocalyptic because that implies a level of supernaturality and/or violence that generally isn't present, but the gist of it is that over a century past, in the mountain range at the northern edge of the continent, the tallest peak erupted. Think Mt. Taupō or Mt Tambora, with some variation. The ash, the pyroclastic flow, the acid rains and sulfide clouds, combined with the continued effects that the material that made it into the stratosphere had on climate in the next few years, contributed to a heavy death toll. Even after the initial activity ceased, cities fell just because they couldn't feed themselves in the unnatural winter that followed, in the subsequent years' lack of a true summer. The sulfuric content released poisoned the air, especially close to the mountain, though if you were close to the mountain, you were probably dead anyway from that initial eruption, just from being buried in ash or debris. More people were lost than can be counted- in the hours after the eruption, but also in the years that followed.

Some were affected more than others. Merfolk, occupying mostly the southern seas and having the added protection of the waters' surface, retained more of their infrastructure, and with it, knowledge and history, more of their people, than terrestrial humanoids. Satyrs had typically occupied the forests in the north, and so there are very few, if any, true satyr cities remaining. As a result, merfolk are now known for their knowledge of technologies that were lost to others, and satyrs are largely travelers or scattered among other species, unlike fauns, humans, and ipotanes, who have places that are more theirs. (The species are not completely distinct, they live amongst each other in a lot of cases, but there are places that are mostly fauns, or mostly humans, for example, where other species are more a minority. Satyrs don't really have that.)

It has been a long time since the cataclysm. Nobody currently alive lived it, in fact, there are few that even remember somebody who did, and if they did, they were almost too young to know it. But it lingers in the way that things are, now. Cities don't really exist as much as towns or villages, small settlements that can support themselves with little outside influence. There's not a whole lot in the way of governmental influence, and there's definitely not any nations anymore, though they were more of city-states before, anyway. This is a double-edged sword, because the cataclysm made people come together in a way they weren't previously, but it also gave people who wanted to use or harm others an easy avenue to do it, with no formal punishment a disincentive.

The world is mostly in-betweens. Towns or herds or any other type of community are few and far between, and in the spaces linking them is just a vast wilderness that, too, has been changed by the cataclysm. Ash is rich soil. There are forests where there were once prairies and there are rivers that were redirected. The closer you get to the mountain, the more changed things have been. The landscape is scattered with overgrown ruins, again, with increasing density as you draw closer to the source. People are isolated because of this vast space they must span in order to reach others. There are many travelers, but they rarely cross paths, because how could they? There is so much space.

There is SO much more I could say but for the sake of your sanity I'll leave it here. Extremely swag of you to indulge me and if you EVER are actually interested in me elaborating on literally anything PLEASE ASK. I WILL GLADLY

[aerialworms]

Hiya! Thank you for responding to my poll about DDDNE! You are the first person to explicitly call out that you see “so don’t complain” as judgy, and I expected that to happen MUCH earlier in this poll’s circulation. May I ask what fandom(s) you tend to read in? Again, thank you for your contribution to Science!!!

Huh, that's wild! I assumed others would have put that before I did, too. I currently tend to read Supernatural fic, but I used to read Good Omens, Jeeves and Wooster, BBC Sherlock, and Original/Granada Sherlock Holmes. I rarely see it actually used, but I tend to read older fics - most of the fics I've read that used it have been fairly recent, like the last 5 or so years if I had to estimate?

For your data: I learned about DDDNE on Tumblr about 8 years ago, where the post I read explained that it usually goes hand in hand with Don't Like; Don't Read as a reminder that the reader is responsible for curating their experience, and after you've read the tags, it's your choice whether to continue or not. I've never seen it as a moral judgement on the reader or the author, just an acknowledgement that the subject matter of the fic is not for everyone and readers are responsible for curating their own reading experience.

The reason I took issue with the phrasing of "so don't complain" is that if I were ever to use it, I would mean it like "this fic contains some heavy stuff, so double-check the tags and make sure you know what you're getting into" and that's how I interpret it when I see fics tagged with it. It's not really "so don't complain," more like "so if you read the tags, see that this fic contains something you find upsetting, and still choose to read it, that's on you, I warned you, and it's not fair to be angry at me for it." No shade on either party, just a reminder that you're in charge of your media experience, and that the writer has done their best to warn you of what's inside. Completely neutral in my mind.

It's handy to me because sometimes I forget to/just skim-read the tags before clicking on a fic, and that tag being there reminds me to double-check for potential triggers. Of course, it's only useful when combined with appropriate tagging. A fic just tagged with "Dead Dove Do Not Eat" with no additional tags is like a sign just saying "Danger!" - I'm just gonna back away and find somewhere else to go.

(although I'll admit I have sometimes, out of curiosity, clicked through to a dead dove fic where I've seen it's completely untagged or tagged for something that squicks me, and then when it inevitably does squick me I'm just like welp. Shouldn't have done that! and click back out. Not judging the author, just knowing my limits!)

[inkskinned]

i got rickrolled today but it didn't work because i have adblocker installed, so youtube just told me i violated the terms of service. yesterday i was trying to edit a picture as a joke for my girlfriend, and google made me check a box to prove i'm human because i wasn't "searching normally".

it isn't just that capitalism is killing fun and whimsy, it is that any element of entertainment or joy is being fed upon by this mosquito body, one that will suck you dry at any vulnerability.

do you want to meet new friends in your city? download this app, visit our website, sign up for our email list. pay for this class on making a terrarium, on candlemaking, on cooking. it will be 90 dollars a session. you can go to group fitness, but only under our specific gym membership. solve the puzzle, sign up for our puzzle-of-the-month-club. what is a club if not just a paid opportunity - you are all paying for the same thing, which makes you a community.

but you're like me, i know it - you're careful, you try the library meetings and the stuff at the local school and all of that. the problem is that you kind of want really specific opportunities that used to exist. you are so grateful for libraries and the publicly-funded things: they are, however, an exception - and everything they have, they've fought tooth-and-nail to protect. you read a headline about how in many other states, libraries have virtually nothing left.

do you want to meet up with your friends afterwards? gift your friends the discord app. you can choose to go to a cafe (buy a coffee, at least), a bar (money, alcohol) or you can all stay in and catch a movie (streaming) or you can all stay in bed (rent. don't get me started) and scream (noise complaint. ticket at least).

you want to read a new book, but the book has to have 124 buzzwords from tiktok readers that are, like, weirdly horny. you can purchase this audiobook on audible! your podcast isn't on spotify, it's on its own server, pay for a different site. fuck, at least you're supporting artists you like. the art museum just raised their ticket price. once, they had a temporary exhibit that acknowledged that ~85% of their permanent art galleries were from cis white men, and that they had thousands of works by women (even famous women, like frida! georgia o'keefe!) just rotting in their basement. that exhibit lasted for 3 months and then they put everything away again.

walmart proudly supports this strip of land by the street! here are some flowers with wilting leaves. its employees have to pay out-of-pocket for their uniforms. my friend once got fined by the city because she organized a community pick-up of the riverfront, which was technically private property.

no, you cannot afford to take that dance class, neither can i. by the way - i'm a teacher. i'm absolutely not saying "educators shouldn't be paid fairly." i'm saying that when i taught classes, renting a studio went from 20 bucks an hour to 180 in the span of 6 months. no significant changes to the studio were made, except they now list the place as updated and friendly. the heat still doesn't work in the building. i have literally never seen the landlord who ignores my emails. recently they've been renting it out at night as an "unusual nightclub; a once-in-a-lifetime close-knit party." they spent some of those 180 dollars on LEDs and called it renovating. the high heels they invite in have been ruining the marley.

do you want to experience the old internet? do you want to play flash games or get back the temporary joy of club penguin? you can, you just need to pay for it. i have a weird, neurodivergent obsession with occasionally checking in to watch the downfall and NFT-ification of neopets. if i'm honest with you all - i never got into webkins, my family didn't have the money to buy me a pointless elephant. people forget that "being poor" can mean literally "if i buy you that toy, i can't afford rent."

you and i don't have time to make good food, and we don't have the budget for it. we are not gonna be able to host dinner parties, we're not made of money, kid. do you want some kind of 3rd space? a space that isn't home or work or school? you could try being online, but - what places actually exist for you? tiktok counts as social media because you see other people on it, not because they actually talk to you.

there was a local winter tradition of sledding down the hill at my school. kids would use pizza boxes and jackets and whatever worked, howling and laughing. back in september, they made a big announcement that this time, rules were changing, and everyone must pay 10 dollars to participate. when im not scared shitless, i kind of appreciate the environmental irony - it hasn't gone below 40. so much for snow & joyriding.

i saw a bulletin for a local dogwalking group and, nervous about making a good first impression, showed up early. the first guy there grimaced at me. "sorry," he said. "there's a 30-dollar buy-in fee." i thought he was joking. wait. for what? the group doesn't offer anything except friendship and people with whom to walk around the city.

he didn't know the answer. just shrugged at me. "you know," he said. "these days, everything costs money."

[transmasc-tabris]

More screenshots (bonus, managed to find Bull a shirt and don't know how to feel about that)

[andrewminyardslawyer]

PSA for those writing coffee shop AUs, bakery AUs, etc.

I have worked in the food service industry for 20 years and I just wanted to make an informational list of common mistakes or misconceptions I see in writing about said industry. Not trying to be a jerk, just thought I would try to make a helpful list! I will add more if I think of any and please feel free to ask any questions you may have!

- it's cookie dough, not cookie batter. Doughs are for thicker stuff, typically something you can pick up in your hand (cookies, bread). Batters are more liquid and pourable (cakes, brownies, muffins)

- one person cannot make all the products from scratch and bake everything themselves unless they are a very slow business. Most of the time someone has a specific thing they do weather it's focused on specific products or split up like one person does the batters/doughs, one person preps and bakes, one person decorates. Sometimes one person does multiple things but generally not every single thing every day by themselves

- Front of House = people interacting with customers like barista, waiter, person at the register. Back of House = people making the food (line cook, baker, etc), dish washer (the worst job in the world, I salute all dishwashers everywhere)

- if they're doing stuff like bagels, doughnuts, breakfast pastries, cinnamon rolls, bread, etc they are there EARLY. Depending on the product some people start working at 2 in the morning. I saw a published book that had someone making dozens and dozens of cinnamon rolls from scratch in like one hour. Not possible even though I wish it was

- frosting, icing, and glaze are all different things. Frosting is the thicker stuff you see on cakes and cupcakes. Icing is typically for cookies, especially the decorated cut out sugar cookies. Glaze is thin, like what you get on doughnuts

- 99% of people who work in the food service industry will immediately go home and shower. I've seen lots stories where the character gets done at work and goes out. You are covered in various substances with powdered sugar in places you didn't know it could get, a shower before Literally Anything is a must

[medicinemane]

You know, capitalism is another one of those words that sadly is like problematic in that it's functionally useless because people just toss it out and then everyone gets so hung up debating the meaning of the word capitalism that the whole point is lost

That's why I don't ever really use it. It doesn't really matter if it's capitalism or if it's cronyism or... whatever, I think it's bad when companies make record profits while prices go up up up

I think there's probably an issue and it probably needs to be solved (and I'm afraid you can't convince me less regulation is a magic bullet)

I like currency and exchanging currency because it seems like a good way of moving goods and labor around, but I also strongly support welfare and think that any group of more than 50 people is probably starting to get corrupt

Don't trust the government, but sure as hell don't trust corps...

I don't know, my original point is that sadly capitalism gets tossed around too much to mean anything anymore... but I just see too many argumentative people online so I'm tossing out my stances to avoid getting side tracked debating what I mean

What I really really mean is just fucking say what you're saying and don't bother saying capitalism cause you'll just make people argue and miss your point

[be-good-to-bugs]

yeah ok having my pronouns respectfully feels pretty fuckin good