The moronic move was trading the Merchant of Death for a WNBA player.

Tell me, what was gained by the trade? How exactly was it worth the political capital? How is Griner worth it but Whaelen is not?

Eh, I really don’t think many people are saying “I wasn’t going to vote for Biden, but he freed Brittney Griner.” And there are surely others who think Biden was wrong for trading an arms dealer for a WNBA “star.”

What return? WNBA fans are not exactly a huge group.

Clearly. I said likely, not “all”. Likely assumes situations in which that is not true which in this case is the exact thing you said. Thank you for reiterating.

You still have it wrong. You can’t just show up and easily get disability benefits. And that statement still reinforces the lie that the disabled are lazy, when the disabled want to work. And that is only people that meet the definition of disabled. There are surely more people with physical limitations that don’t otherwise qualify as “disabled”.

No where do they talk about this.

They specifically say walking only gets 1:0.3 credit. How can you assume that is unpoliced when it is a specific policy? The logical assumption is that is IS policed since they took the time to give lesser credit to walking.

Life isn’t fair. It’s not a cop out. Exceptions can and need to be made.

And they have no exceptions. That is the point.

So let’s just prevent all people in society from healthy activities because it discriminates. Let’s drag all of society down to the same playing field for fairness. Solid reasoning. You know what’s easier reasoning to reconcile. Exceptions to the rule.

What a straw man. No one is preventing people from healthy activities.

That’s fine. I just would not have spent political capital on Griner, either.

I wouldn’t go near Russia. But she is a tad bit biased.

Wasn’t worth it.

If only he was a WNBA player vaping THC.

Except they did do just that for Brittney Griner.

If you have a condition that prevents you from moving/ elevated heart rate, chances are you not working and already on disability.

Ah, no. Plenty of us work. Desk jobs exist. I sit at one now. I have been told by my doctor I should not jog or run due to the impact to my knees.

I understand the article says this but how do you police it. Put your fitness tracker to “Outdoor run” and call it day. Unless there are stricter measurements around heart rate and minimum speeds I don’t fully buy this.

So you don’t know how they police it, but 1 sentence later you see how easy it is to police.

So start. If a company is going to incentivize you to not be a slob maybe just go do it. Life isn’t fair. Stop making excuses and be a better version of yourself.

Ah, the old “life isn’t fair” copout. Why should we not do our best to be fair?

Idk, maybe they want their employees to not die of heart failure at 40 and see them grow to be old and successful.

Ah, yes, because there is no daylight between the binary options of heart failure at 40 and growing old.

If you’re not doing it getting a giant bonus would be a good motivator to go out

A better motivator would be giving credit for improvements rather than requiring the same of all regardless of age, fitness level, and disability. The only thing this would motivate me to do is find another job.

One mile a day is really really easy to do. Jogging or walking.

Walking only counts for 0.3 of jogging, so it is 3.33 miles of walking

My doctor has specifically advised against jogging due to the impact on my knees.

62 miles a month is slightly over a mile a day.

Math isn’t your strong suit, huh? That is over 2 miles a day, Or 6.67 miles if you walk.

Why not if this is both easy to do and a benefit for your own health?

You miss the point. It may be easy for you, but it is not easy for everyone.

First, disabled people exist.

Second, the article makes it clear walking only counts for 30% credit.

Third, if you are not doing it, starting can be very difficult.

Fourth, the top bonus requires 62 miles per month.

Last, why should there be a bonus based on something unrelated to your work?

That doesn’t solve the interoperability problem. You can’t guarantee who has what messaging app. You shouldn’t need a 3rd party app for basic functionality, anyway.

Well, that’s why I thought it fits in this thread.

One kid will contribute far more greenhouse gasses than a car will. One fewer child saves 58.6 tonnes CO2-equivalent per year, whereas going car free is only 2.4 tonnes. One less kid is better than 24 people ditching their car.

And note I said step 1. Surely there are other actions, but not having kids is by far the largest impact.

The big problem is everyone wants people to take the actions that they are ok with. Vegans think the best way to stop climate change is ending animal agriculture. Transit and bike advocates tell us it’s ending cars. Those same people will happily have multiple kids and fly around the globe without a second thought.

Every child will consume resources and be responsible for producing greenhouse gases.

My parents didn’t care about climate change. People can learn on their own.

Exactly. They are the assault rifle of dog breeds. People want to preach about bad owners and personal responsibility, but the fact is both are capable of way more damage, and next to no one needs them.

You want to tell me how a chihuahua is more aggressive? When was the last time one ripped out a woman’s throat? Sure, they can be more aggressive, just as someone with a 9mm revolver can be more aggressive than someone with an AR-15. But when someone kills and/or wounds dozens, it’s not done with a 9mm.

If we were supposed to use base 10, we’d have 10 figures and 10 toes!

/s

Air fryers are toaster ovens with better marketing.

If you actually want to do some about climate change, step 1 is to stop having kids.