Wiktionary suggests both “fixing to” and “fitting to” are used synonymously. Fwiw, in Tennessee, I only ever hear “fixing to”. As someone who learned English outside of the southern US, it makes little sense to me also. But what makes even less sense to me is people saying “trying to” to mean “want to”.
Also consider a healthcare career. As a teenager, I wanted to do computer science/engineering, and sometimes I do wish I had stayed on that track. But now, as a nurse, I could get a job in any state in the US by tomorrow. I dare you to try to find a hospital that doesn’t have open nursing positions. Even when the economy goes down, people still get sick. Even if society collapses, the knowledge/skills will be useful.
And if you don’t want to change diapers or deal with blood, there are still options; I’m in psychiatry and rarely have to deal with either.
If they don’t have to work to live, they’re no longer working class (Musk still works at Tesla, but clearly doesn’t need to). But I’m not sure what your point is. Are you saying that those who derive their wealth from the labor of workers but who can’t afford a yacht should be treated differently than billionaires? I’m not arguing that we shouldn’t have progressive tax rates, I’m only saying that an arbitrarily defined ‘middle class’ exists solely so that you and I are distracted by exactly these discussions, and provides no benefit to determining what is justifiable economic policy.
Those at the midpoint still have to work to live, so they are working class. 🤷
Imo the entire concept of the middle class should be abandoned as capitalist propaganda. There’s the rich and there’s the working class. Anything else is a distraction to keep us from focusing on the rich stealing from the workers. Bezos owns a $500,000,000 yacht while thousands of his employees rely on government assistance programs which are funded by taxes he doesn’t even pay.
We’ll convert the bloodmouths, one way or another! The next plan is mosquitoes that make you allergic to cheese.
Bezos is halfway there; his yacht cost 500 million:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koru_(yacht)
Give it a few more years and I bet one of them will buy a a billion dollar yacht. But in an ideal world, such absurdities wouldn’t exist.
That would require acknowledging that he is the problem. He doesn’t have that level of introspection. It’s easier for him to just convince himself that the professionals are the problem.
Nurse here: I have a hard time imagining vaccines won’t be covered by insurance unless federal law starts to prohibit it for some bonkers reason. Vaccines are the simplest and most effective prevention for a number of illnesses which can require expensive care. And they’re cheap. Vaccines are good for the bottom line. Like, they’re practically gold. If they didn’t make financial sense, insurance companies wouldn’t be covering them. It would be unfathomable for insurance companies to elect not to cover them unless they can also elect not to cover treatment for the resultant illness.
That said, I think the much more likely thing is RdumbFucK Jr. trying to make them unavailable, because clearly someone who has zero training in medicine or infectious disease or any science of any kind knows better than the collective consensus of the entire world’s medical community… So, get your vaccinations while you can.
*sunny passions of a dozen fires
The dude 100% believes that there will be a mass murdering purge of all doctors and healthcare workers this year when the “RFK Autism report” comes out.
…does he not realize that he is also capable of contracting illness? Who does he think is going to take care of him when he breaks his hip or has a stroke?
So, like, … maybe 50 or so smaller regions? And a few other mostly even smaller territories that don’t get those rights, just for funsies?
I joke, of course. But in seriousness: Are you suggesting the US just defederate and become more like, say, the EU? What are you anticipating that would solve? Moreover, what is it that makes it too big to be a democracy? Can large governments exist only in authoritarian forms? Why would that be?
Don’t they keep it for life?
The worst part is: the wealthiest few of them could each, individually, if they wanted to, end world hunger permanently with their current wealth. Estimates I’ve read range $40b per year or something like $250-300b just once to set up sustainable long-term solutions globally.
Musk, Zuckerberg, or Bezos could end hunger globally and permanently. Any one of them, individually, could do it. If the richest 10 billionaires all pitched in a portion, they’d all recoup everything they spent within a couple years at worst. If the richest 100 did, many of them wouldn’t even notice the expenditure.
But it would only take 1 of them.