I feel iffy on this. I loved the original Karate Kid growing up, but absolutely hated the 2010 remake. Partly because I feel like it is following the trend of just lumping every Asian character into a generic “Kung Fu Guy” stereotype with no room for nuance.
Like, in the original, Mr. Miyagi’s backstory as a Japanese war veteran was pretty significant to his character, and karate being a specifically Japanese fighting style made sense for him to teach.
Not to say you have to be Japanese to learn karate, but that wasn’t even the premise in the 2010 movie, where Mr. Miyagi was swapped out for the Chinese Mr. Han, and the discipline being learned is kung fu, not karate. But that doesn’t matter, does it? Because as far as the white people in the audience are concerned, there’s basically no difference. Asian is Asian, right?
(And being a movie made in cooperation with China Film Group, which is a propaganda arm of the Chinese government, they definitely couldn’t have Mr. Han also be a war veteran who regretted his years of service, because who could ever regret fighting for glorious communism?)
I watched Lower Decks and am also tempted to jump on the Star Trek binge, if only to rewatch Lower Decks again and better catch all of the references.
Granted, I caught a lot of them just by being someone who has used the internet for my entire adolescent through adult life, but I know there’s a lot more good stuff out there to enjoy.
I believe they’re referring to an undefined threshold of buying power. E.g. if I earn $3000 but my take home is $200 after taxes, rent, food, utilities, and student loan repayments, abusive price hikes on basic needs could reduce my take home below the point of sustainability, even factoring in an extra $1000 on top of that. Basically, if rent, food, and utilities go up by 50% but I’m only earning 33% more.
Might be an extreme example, but I think it’s certainly a consideration that needs to be made when putting together the legislation. There needs to be some form of price control, otherwise those UBI checks could basically just become a free gift from the government to exploitative corporations and landlords.
I do want to believe all of that, but I am also not going to underestimate the tendency for de facto oligopolies like ISPs to continue colluding on prices, or landlords disproportionately raising rents to “keep out the (probably non-white) poors” who have been gifted greater economic mobility.
I’m just not keen on any policy which assumes that the market can be trusted to course correct itself in a way that is healthy and fair for consumers, because that is so often not the case. I would honestly prefer a system with no UBI, where people simply do not need to buy basic necessities at all. Shelter, food, and utilities should be fundamental rights that people shouldn’t need to pay for in the first place, and income would just allow people to improve the quality of those things should they desire.
Jackie Chan, Ralph Macchio Set For New ‘Karate Kid’ Movie (deadline.com)
Amiright? (lemmy.zip)
Which tricolor flag do you think is the ugliest, considering only the color combination? Here are some candidates that I have found. (files.catbox.moe)
"Do you live in the Midwest?" by self-report (lemmy.world)
Denver experimented with giving people $1,000 a month. It reduced homelessness and increased full-time employment, a study found. (www.businessinsider.com)
cross-posted from: lemmit.online/post/1021018...