I don’t know where people grew up that actually had cliques like that. It was just t-shirts and shorts or jeans while I was in school. There was no real trend chasing or trying to look gangster. Southern California here.
I don’t know where people grew up that actually had cliques like that. It was just t-shirts and shorts or jeans while I was in school. There was no real trend chasing or trying to look gangster. Southern California here.
DeWalt. My father in law bought us some battery powered DeWalt tools as a house warming present, and I continued buying more DeWalt battery powered tools as I needed them since I already had the interchangeable batteries and charger. They’ve all worked well for me so far. When I eventually kill my drill bits I’ll get Milwaukee replacements.
For hammers, Estwing is the only option. My workhorse hammer is >40 years old and still in great working condition and I abuse the hell out of hammers.
Communism is the communal ownership of all means of production (not just the workers owning the place they work at like socialism) and communal distribution of resources based on need (ideally). A hippie commune where everyone works a job and everyone is distributed food, goods, etc. based on their needs without money being involved is a solid, small scale model of communism, though there are a lot of issues and various theoretical solutions when it’s scaled up beyond a group of like-minded individuals who all know each other. In theory such a society is classless and has no use for currency. The reality is such a society has never actually existed and things fell apart along the way, usually by someone seizing power in the transitionary period and the state becoming a dictatorship instead.
For small scale references, worker cooperatives are a good example of socialism and communes are a good example of communism.
When it comes to defining economic systems, no. Unless the workers own the means of production, it’s not socialism. Even social democracies like the Nordic countries is just capitalism with safety nets and strong unions, not socialism. Calling such a system socialism only muddies the waters, which is exactly why Republicans do it, to conflate basic welfare systems and unions with evil socialism! We shouldn’t empower Republican talking points.
Much the same way people on the left have been adopting the Republican definition of socialism, as in any time the government does anything. Like having basic welfare or some such suddenly equals socialism.
Now people have been overusing neoliberal so much that the ill informed have started using it for people that are clearly pro government spending, pro social safety net, pro regulation, etc. Discussion becomes unhelpful when people redefine the means by with we identify ideologies.
Seconding Flonase. It opens me right up, even when I’m sick.