If someone wears a T-Shirt that says “Go fuck yourself” they are making a statement, choosing to wear that shirt is a valuation or potentially they were homeless and that was the only shirt they were given to wear.
If I think A see matters, if what they are wearing is displaying ideal value, exactly the message they are trying to communicate, what are the implications? If I take the message at face value (and I am not sure it is wise to) the messages basically says you can’t rely on me for support. You can’t rely on me for support might actually be kinder than saying, I claim to love you but when the going gets tough my actions not my words will say “Go fuck yourself”. Taking messages at face value not always good, not always should, not taking messages at face value not always good, not always should.
If I have taken the message at face value I further might think the person has made the conscious to decision to say mean things to me outweighs the pain it causes me. Just because a person wears a shirt that says “Go fuck yourself” does not equate to they will know the pain and suffering I or others have been through on a given day, and less perception and comprehension of relevant details is not always ideal comprehension established. Further the person might know society is hard, not always supportive, wearing that short might reinforce the warning in that, actually delivering higher value than someone that wears a shirt that says “Don’t worry, it will all work out”.
What people are wearing, with people always reinforced in the value in seeing (red means stop green means go, orange means parking cone, prison jersey) not always ideal value added.
We as society never encourage people to wear shirts like that via action and inaction? Reminders of speech is free, you don’t get to stone people for wearing or saying offensive language all value out?
Politicians that wear this shirt U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time (usdebtclock.org), what are they saying to the future? We want to protect you?
“But it is the only shirt God gave us”…. “Tell it to the judge!”
Said for humor, reminder not right to stone anyone regardless of the shirt they are wearing.
A baby born today owes $100,000 and then $260,000 (could by a house for that) when they become a taxpayer? The price of doing business, all taxpayers to minus one house? Telling babies they defaulted on their loan payment as possible feels less than ideal (talking about actual babies, not trying to reinforce patronizing derision, though loans have the potential to feel that way).
If the past didn’t rob $260,000 from babies, how might people’s choices be different, is it likely to be factored into their defense? Take that $260,000 (as not real real money) and invest it in top 10 fortune 500 companies today and see what it would be worth in 20 years? Possibly useful for saving people in 2044.
$26,000 to Walmart, $26,000 to Amazon, $26,000 to ExxonMobil, $26,000 to Apple, $26,000 to UnitedHealth Group etc… compounded over 20 years? Investing that much in healthcare least we could do is pay doctor bills…. Doctor bills that should be paid, could be paid not factored into defense? September 11th, 2001 and October 7th, 2023 did not A (like in school grade, 100%) debt for the future – more peace and less terrorist attacks factor into value for self and others. United Nations and World News that inspires peace, saves money or doesn’t save money? Acknowledging hostages need to be released immediately and terrorists attacks can no longer be allowed to threaten the future factors into peace, saved money. Are we treating current babies like billionaires? Stacking their future with debt and legalism?
My Tech Blog 