Sure you can, it’s just the median of the range rather than the median person. For what it’s worth, I did look at age distribution statistics and there is some disparity but it’s minimal, which is why I wrote 40% instead of 44%.
Anyways, this is getting much too pedantic, obviously I’m not writing a scientific analysis, it’s just an internet comment, it doesn’t need to be perfect.
The police were founded in 1829. We managed without them just fine before they were founded and we will manage just fine after. I’d propose the creation of a voluntary group of people with no powers beyond that of any other person, but who take some time out of their day to keep watch and deal with any issues that crop up. The overwhelming majority of crime is caused by poverty as you rightly said so there’s likely very little that they would have to deal with.
The BBC hasn’t been impartial for at least 20 years. Not only that, but they’re the most transphobic publicly funded institution in the UK.
Err, yeah, I wouldn’t do that, I’d just buy some other kind of snack!
I’m no more resilient than average, heck I’m definitely less resilient than average, I think you’re just underestimating just how strong humans are and how capable we are to just get on with our lives.
I haven’t read that book, sorry!
I did a quick bit of searching online and found out some interesting stuff about how people tend to report positive outcomes from trauma more often than negative outcomes: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8827649/
Millennials: we’re all adults now, we want to be taken seriously!
Time: passes
Millennials: never mind we’ve made a mistake let’s go back
The US census used 1997 - 2013 as the range. Which gives us an age range of 10-26, making the median age 18 - and I was thinking of 21 as adult, rather than 18 - which is why I said “they’re teenagers or younger” - but yes, you’re right, “only” 40%-ish of gen Z are under 18 :p
Run the same survey again in 11 years and compare 21+ gen Z to 2023’s boomers and I bet the results aren’t even close.
All of the things you suggest (checks and balances, strong education, democratic reform) have consistently been weakened rather than strengthened - this is because they would negatively impact those in power, and those in power make the decisions about implementing those things.
In addition, they would help, but not nearly enough. Checks and balances are a temporary improvement but eventually become captured and consolidated by the power they’re checking/balancing. Education helps people to understand how these systems are abusive, but can be countered by propaganda and misinformation - no one is immune to psychological manipulation. And democratic reform again acts as a temporary improvement, but eventually, power is consolidated and the reforms are integrated.
Humans unfortunately are still quite instinctual creatures, we often don’t have an “off” switch that says “okay, we have enough material wealth / security now, we don’t need to hoard anymore!” because we’re kind of always inclined towards building up a stockpile for winter.
We need to accept the reality of our situation and dismantle power structures - this means the abolition of money, the police, prisons, private property ownership, etc. - this may sound far fetched, but it is the only way that we can have a world without abuses of power and exploitation. I completely believe that it’s possible and worth working towards achieving that goal.
The problem with exploitative supply chains is that they’re chains, so even if you make one link less exploitative, the sources and next steps in the chain likely remain exploitative.
Each improvement makes things better. If we let perfect be the enemy of good then we just allow exploitation to continue because we couldn’t fix it all at once.
Companies have already been exerting influence on these supply chains for decades to “improve” them, and they have only gotten worse. No, I don’t think that’s better.
Manufacturers aren’t going to just sit back and say, “oh well I guess we’ll just not compete in the industry anymore, let’s just let our competitors take it.” No way, the people running these firms aren’t going to just throw away business like that. They’ll lose out on some profits for a while and throw all their toys out the pram about that, but they will not just leave the market (or price themselves out of it). That’s just their gaslighting propaganda.
Stupid article, most of Gen Z aren’t even 21 yet, of course they’re gonna fall for scams, they’re teenagers or younger lol. I got scammed loads of times on RuneScape as a kid, and that taught me better than anything else how to avoid scams.
Holy shit, I hope you found some way of forwarding that to his new partner…
There is an absolute wealth of articles online about it, but here’s a couple points to get you started
https://www.thepinknews.com/2020/06/22/bbc-news-institutional-transphobia-kamal-ahmed-crispin-blunt-trans-media-watch/
https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7nv97/lgbtq-employees-are-quitting-the-bbc-because-they-say-its-transphobic