You know we’re not talking about dogs here, right homie?
Yes, but the point still stands. Everyone loves the grand gesture of walking in and plopping a 20lb bag of chow on the counter or heroically presenting a homeless man on the corner with a brand new The North Face coat with tags on it.
I’m speaking from an American perspective for this next part, so if OP isn’t from America they can disregard it, but the whole gift-giving ritual (which this is) makes people feel embarrassed for giving cash outright, like “oh, you couldn’t think of anything to get them?” It’s a difficult truth to swallow but the truth is that most community closets, food banks, etc. are more than stocked with the goods themselves. Homeless people in most of the country have at least some access to these basic goods. What they don’t have is money to save for either A) their specific needs that only they know about or B) some sort of safe housing arrangement.
Same thing I saw when I volunteered at a shelter. Americans love the warm feeling they get when they give someone less successful than them a physical item, but the second you tell them the cash would be more useful they get indignant. It shatters their illusion that they, and they alone, were making some huge expenditure.
I am not crazy! I know they dug those tunnels! I knew it was in the basement. One after ground level. As if I could ever make such a mistake. Never. Never! I just – I just couldn’t prove it. They - they covered the entrance, they got that idiot at the synagogue to lie for them. You think this is something? You think this is bad? This? This putzery?
Really no comments as an American but my general impression is that it’s a culturally significant natural resource that’s been poisoned by industrialization.
Y-you’re telling me that America wasn’t willing to just give away billions of dollars in aid in the middle of the worst economic disaster in the county’s history???
Actual live-in nurses are pretty rare and very expensive, but I think you’re overestimating how common they are.
Most of what you see is just caretakers who come during the week on a set schedule, which is usually a lot more affordable than nursing homes because you’re paying for someone’s labor versus labor + living accomodations.
To answer your second question, it would cost whatever rate the nurse agreed to work for. It would have to be pretty competitive. In most cases, having to live at the patient’s house isn’t seen as a benefit of the job.
Some would say 1935, with the invasion of Ethiopia. There’s also a large body of historians who view WW1 and WW2 as being a single event. To sort of piggy-back off my above reply, the idea that WW2 “began” in 1939 is as Anglocentric as Americans thinking it started in 1941.
they didn’t actively put boots on the ground until shit got really close.
False comparison. There was no alternative to “boots on the ground” for the European Allies when the war happened in their backyard, but there was certainly an alternative to the U.S. offering a quarter-trillion dollars (adjusted) in aid to Europe.