• 0 Posts
  • 12 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 27th, 2023

help-circle
  • I live in the US, and with the state of things I have decided to make my life more analog and disconnected this year, and for the foreseeable future. Instead of online games, I do puzzles and listen to audiobooks. Instead of doom scrolling for hours, I’ve decided I’m going to start backpacking. Instead of watching so much TV, I’ve been reading more.

    All of these things are helping bring me peace. I’ve been pack training with my dog, which means doing longer day hikes with a heavy pack for each of us, and it’s just been so nice. I’m losing weight without trying (which is a good thing as I’m overweight), I’m seeing parts of my area I’ve never seen, and spending fantastic quality time with my dog. This weekend we’re doing a shakedown car camp to see how he does in my smaller backpacking tent and I am SO excited. In 3 weeks we go on our first backpacking trip with a friend, and I’m already dreaming of future trips. All of this is huge for us because I’m allergic to the sun (literally) and he (my dog) is very sensitive to heat, and allergic to wasps (we have to carry epipens for him) so deciding to spend time outdoors has taken a lot of consideration, determination and planning, but we’re doing it. I’m so excited for the adventures we’ll have, I can’t even put my emotions into words.




  • A lot of Europe is like this and I think part of the difference is social expectation with dogs. Because it’s more normal for dogs to go places, and less normal to have private yards at your home for your dog to spend time in, people in Europe tend to spend more time training their dogs to be good members of society because they basically have to. If you have to walk your dog multiple times a day for potty instead of letting it into the back yard, you’re probably more likely to make sure your dog is leash trained properly.

    I also think the USA (and Canada to some extent as you’ve kind of adopted many of our values, for good or ill) are more individualistic than many European countries. In America we train our pets because WE want them trained, not because of societal expectations about dog ownership. It’s truly telling when you walk a dog that is properly leash trained and get compliments about how well trained your dog is. That a dog can walk on leash without pulling is the exception, not the norm. (This happened yesterday to me, just walking around a park path.) It’s depressing. American individualism insists, “I don’t need to train my dog, he’s perfect being the cute little terrorist that he is, and if you don’t like it, that’s your problem.” As a result, dogs aren’t allowed most places in the US because entitled dog owners are the norm, not the minority. I love dogs, and I love taking my dog places, but if I owned a business of any kind I wouldn’t allow dogs because it’s not worth the headache here.


  • Let me preface this by first saying I agree that dogs should generally not be allowed in food serving establishments because their hair goes everywhere and nobody likes eating dog hair.

    With that said though, I have never once seen my dog lick his own butt. What on earth are other people’s dogs doing?! The closest my dog has gotten to licking his butt is licking around his genitalia, which I grant you is unclean as well, but he’s fluffy and keeps the hair between his legs clean and un-matted. But butt licking?!

    Now here’s where I get down voted to hell, but I have to play devil’s advocate lol. I would argue that kids are a MUCH larger vector of bacteria and viruses that are of concern to the average adult human than any dog. Dogs are gross, sure, but I’ll take a lick from a strange dog over a strange toddler’s sticky hands on me!

    We should keep dogs out of food places, but mostly cause hair and allergies - if we’re going to ban beings due to their gross factor though that list should be much longer (toddlers, homeless, anyone that didn’t wash their hands after using the restroom…)







  • My husband and I split things by % of income. First, we made a list of all household bills that we both benefit from - this includes everything from the mortgage to Netflix. Everything. We put it on a shared spreadsheet in Google Drive so we can both access it and update it. The sheet includes the bill description, the amount of it, the due date, and the frequency (weekly, monthly, annually), with another column to deduce the monthly cost of all bills based on frequency.

    Next up we made a section for income, and totaled out what we each take home every month. This is AFTER taxes and insurance, what actually lands in the bank accounts. Then we take the total of all the bills and figure out what % it is of our total combined income. For instance if the combined income is 5000/mo and the total for all bills is 3500, then it’s 70%. Lastly, we then have a spot that determines what 70% of each of our monthly incomes are. So let’s say you bring home 3500 and she brings 1500 - in this scenario you would pay 70% of 3500, or 2450 monthly, and she would pay 1050. If you get paid twice in a month, divide that by 2 and you know what you each should contribute per pay period.

    If you setup the sheet with proper formulas, you can just update the bills as needed, and change the income as needed, and it will update contributions automatically. This is the simplest version, but you can also include savings and stuff if you want as well. We opened a joint checking account separate from our main ones when we moved in together, and we transfer the money to it for bills each time we’re paid, and all bills come out of that account. Our personal accounts are kept separate and private, because anything left after bills and savings is our own money to spend or save however we like.

    Personally I think this is the most equitable way of doing things. We ensure that all bills are paid and that we both have a bit of spending money. We’ve been together for 20 years, and have kept this system for most of it!


  • Tinks@lemmy.worldtoMicroblog Memes@lemmy.worldPretty much
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    The problem is that in many areas there are no alternative institutions for someone to receive care. Choosing to go to another non-religious hospital is often not an option in many places. I live in a major metro and the majority of hospitals here are religiously affiliated. It’s not a matter of allowing a few random institutions to uphold their beliefs, it’s an institutional problem when a person cannot receive valid medical care because of the objections of a religion. If you live in a small town with a single hospital, and the next closest one is an 8 hour drive away, then that hospital should be required to provide all FDA approved treatments the doctors are physically capable of administering.

    I’m all for allowing people to practice their religion however it best suits them to do so, until it negatively interferes with the lives of others. When your religion starts preventing people from accessing widely approved and safe healthcare, then your beliefs should not be protected. I don’t care if you’re Catholic, Muslim, or Pastafarian - you have no right to prevent someone from accessing healthcare because of your beliefs.