Part of this seems like it's attributable to changes in lifestyle and material conditions of younger people, relative to their parents. Different aesthetics might mean their parents' stuff looks incredibly gaudy to them, and doesn't go with anything else in their apartment. My parents' home is larger than any place I can reasonably expect to be able to afford, so I also don't want their big dining room table that I'd have to pay for storage on for years before I can afford a space that it will immediately fill all of. Even if it's a nice piece of furniture, that's just a pain in the neck to go through, all for something I might never get to use.

On the topic of collections, boomers just fundamentally ignore key parts of collectibility. First, old collectables only became so valuable precisely because people weren't obsessively hording and caring for everything with the intent of selling it down the line. Old Superman comics are rare and valuable due to people who bought them at the time they first came out largely treating them as disposable. They didn't assume they were anything special that merited being held on to and cared for, so they didn't. When everyone and their dog buys up commemorative plate sets, or Beanie Babies, or whatever other collectable grift boomers fell for, and they take great care of them, they don't generally see their value do anything but decrease. The supply doesn't get significantly reduced, and everyone else can see that they didn't pan out as the collectable investments they were billed as, so who would want them?

That said, even for collections of items of genuine worth, you mostly need to hope that whoever you're looking to give it to is as into whatever hobby as you are. If I were planning on having kids, I think it would be pretty unreasonable to expect them to know what to do with my fountain pen collection, unless they were into them as well. Otherwise, it's just a ton of fussy pens that seem to have a fair number of duplicates that are really only distinguished by knowledge I couldn't expect them to take the time to go gathering. Then, it's still a big pain to actually identify things, make sales listings and sell them off. Hell, I have the knowledge, and even I find it annoying to do so.

Maybe we could address this, in part, by normalizing expanding options a bit for inheritance. If my hypothetical kids aren't going to know how to make heads or tails of my pen collection, but I've got a younger friend who is just as into the hobby as I am, it would be nice if I could just leave them that specific collection, without having to worry it'll kick off some acrimonious squabbling. Failing that, have parents indicate who they trust to sell an item for a fair price if nobody wants it. You can take it and think about it, but if it's just not for you, you've got a trusted source to sell it off for you, so you (hopefully) don't have to go through an ordeal trying to find someone to sell it for you that will give you a fair shake.

Americans have to learn to live with each other, one way or another.

Honestly, I often think Americans need to learn to live apart from each other these days. I'm very skeptical of the notion that the US can ever function as a coherent political unit again, and it might be better for all to just cut bait and move to an EU-esque free movement regime. Let New England, the South, the Midwest, the West Coast and whatever Alaska and Hawaii want to be each be their own independent countries, but any citizen of one has the right to move to any if the others and work immediately. If Republicans want to enact their own little Handmaid's Tales in the deep South, they can go for it, but no moaning when women and POC decide to move elsewhere. The non-GOP hellscape regions can implement social safety net programs to allow anyone who wants to leave the conservative regions to do so, regardless of financial means, knowing they will have housing, food and healthcare when they get to a civilized country.

It really feels like some backwards regions are holding the whole country hostage at this point.

I guess it probably depends on where you're going. I went to the UK earlier this year, and my experience was mostly painless. Landed in Manchester, and they basically had self-checkout customs. I scanned my passport and looked at a camera once, and that was it. It was actually more of a hassle and more invasive coming back home and getting back into the country.

At first, I thought this must be some abandoned barracks or aircraft hangar that got retrofitted into a private residence, but then I saw it was purpose built in 2004.

When it comes to the Democrats and* the left* — from the Biden campaign on down to the activists

What's with calling out the left on this, when the closest they get to a leftist organization they take issue with is a climate advocacy group. The left has been pretty clear that Biden is not the man for the moment since the go, and for our troubles, we've been called everything from stupid and naïve, to privileged white people who don't care about insert minority group here (and ignore that not all leftists are rich, white people, there are plenty of POC active in leftist politics, though critics, often privileged white people themselves, do love to erase their existence in the same breath they claim to be looking out for them), to either useful idiots or fully cognizant agitators working on behalf of enemy states. Centrist Democrats and liberals have been the ones trying to tell anyone who will listen that the same old play will not just be good enough, but is actually our only option to win, and they're trying to leave the left to take the fall for their mistake, yet again.

Some of it is political calculation. If the president steps aside, the logical candidate is Vice-President Kamala Harris, but Harris has struggled in office and her poor poll ratings mirror those of Biden. If the Democratic Party tries to sideline Harris and open the door to other candidates through an open convention, they risk alienating her and her supporters and opening up further wounds in the Democratic coalition.

What, risk all four of her supporters? Oh, darn, there go the chances of winning ever again.

Democrats are not going to win with a staid campaign by the usual corporate boot-licking line of candidates they've relied on up until now. The sooner they accept that and get behind a candidate who is pushing for systemic changes on issues that actually resonate with your average Americans and the problems they face in their daily lives, as opposed what matters only to their donors, the better for them this time around. Heck, if they actually follow through and make some of those changes, even better.

GM, who just announced a $6 billion stock buy back once they knew tariffs would keep them safe from having to compete with Chinese EVs, that GM?

This sort of stuff is realistically why I have no sympathy for the major US automotive manufacturers. The only reason I don't just say "Screw them, let Chinese EVs drive them out of business," is because it would put so many people out of work in their plants who have no role in these decisions. Barring some fantasy where the Chinese companies establish US plants and offer equivalent or better union contracts for current employees at GM, Ford and Chrysler, these companies should simply be bound hand and foot in terms and conditions whenever something is done by the government to help them. Like, make those protectionist tariffs conditional on them hitting investment targets in relevant technologies, raising worker pay and benefits, reducing cost to the customer and a ban on stock buybacks for the duration of the tariffs being valid.

I can't understand why anyone would expect most people to want to have kids. I can hardly afford to take care of myself, things look like they're only likely to get worse, and all indicators are that if I did have kids, they would be facing an even worse future when they hit adulthood. Why would I do that to them?

I think at this point, all of us poors are just crossing our collective fingers and hoping the rent doesn't go up, we don't lose our jobs and we don't have to move for any reason. I'm hoping my landlord turns out to be immortal right now. "Affordable" units in the hood here are going for $3,000+, and you need to make less than the equivalent of minimum wage at a full-time job each to qualify for them. We stumbled our way into a three-bedroom apartment in a nice neighborhood for $2,200/month, and he hasn't raised the rent at all. The people who lived downstairs before said he charged them the same rent for close to 10 years before they moved out, so hopefully that streak will continue. Just have to worry that he'll die and whoever inherits the house comes in and jacks up the rent once they can, in which case we'd definitely need to move pretty far away to be able to afford something.

A major issue is that a lot of jobs people do out of passion for the work are underpaid, if not outright looked down on, in contemporary society. Teachers, caretakers, artists and many other classes of professionals are exploited to work for severely suppressed wages due to their passion for what they do.

I once had someone at school declare, "Oh shit, you're hacking stuff!". I forget exactly what I was doing at the moment, but I either had a Latex doc open in vim, or I had ncmpcpp open. Not nearly as exciting as whatever he was imagining.

I don't know about Turkey, but US politicians mostly care about Israel because AIPAC pumps a ton of money into US politics, both in the form of funneling it to pro-Israel candidates, and ads and campaign funding against those who don't bow down to swear fealty to Israel.

To a lesser extent, you also have a large chunk of fundamentalist Christians in the us who will support Israel no matter what because they believe Israel needs to exist as a nation with its full, Biblical territory, in order for Armageddon and the return of Jesus to occur. Just yet another way conservative Christians are trying to wreck the US for their insane beliefs.

And if they don't, he can count on other Democrats to try and browbeat them and shame them into voting for him no matter what he does, screeching, "But Trump!" as loud as they can.

He sure is trying his best to make his actions indefensible to as wide a swath of the Democratic electorate as he can, now, and just banking on "Hey, I tossed you a few crumbs, and have you seen the other guy?"