The fact that the landlord is also getting an extra 1000 a month means they’ll be less incentivised to put up the price. Also market forces, it’d just take a couple of landlords to have some morals, or prioritise having their properties filled to keep prices down.

With the restaurant example market forces again. If the shitty big chain restaurant put up their prices and the nice local restaurant didn’t then suddenly they’ll see more people going to them. It would also make it really easy for shitty chain B to undercut shitty chain A.

Then you also have the backup of government regulations and using tax systems to make it not viable to price gouge that way.

https://youtu.be/aHA4-5N5AzA?si=Oh5YhDnwrfoOyMqy

Pictures you can hear.

It’s likely you’re not from the right country.

Here’s any that’s very likely as geographic as it is from a specific time.

Daddy or chips?

Can they sue him for slander?

0181 811 81 81

It was more for an unknown individual than a known one, but extending it the way it has been is a very natural progression

So an example where you don’t know the individual would be

Somebody left their umbrella in the office. Could you please let them know where they can get it?

The more modern extended usage that people seem so up in arms about would be

Kate left their umbrella in the office. Could you please let them know where they can get it?

Cat.

Always say “they”. This violates the grammar of English so deeply that it feels terribly wrong. It also results frequently in confusing expressions in which the referent of “they” is unclear.

I totally disagree with this. Singular they has been in use since the 14th century or so. It’s so deeply ingrained in the language that is perfectly simple to understand. In fact I’d say that people who claim to not understand it are doing so intentionally.

Perhaps a new word will develop naturally as you say. But personally I don’t see a need for it.

What would you say are better? I find singular they much more elegant than a lot of the new words that were made up. The fact that to apply it to a known individual, rather than an unknown individual seems like a natural extension of the usage that has existed for centuries.

You mean 600 years too late.

It’s not though. Singular they goes back to middle English (14th century) it was just grammar Nazis in the 18th century that tried to stamp it out.

You absolutely can, especially if you have low support needs.

You’ve said you’re at uni so please reach out to your student services and seek help. Especially as you’ve been saying you feel suicidal. They have safeguarding responsibilities and should help you find professional help and support groups.

A big part of feeling fulfilled in think is owning your weirdnesses. Seek out clubs and societies that relate to your special interests and you’ll likely find people you click with.

10%-20% of the population is neurodivergent. Probably more with how chronically under diagnosed both ASD and ADHD have been in women. Some of the people you know may well be in the spectrum and either don’t know it themselves or are masking.

I’d reach out to your student services, see if there’s any groups.

I’d also look for uni societies that relate to your special interests.

At least it’s labelled. Better than China sneaking sugar syrup into the supply chain without being open about it.

https://www.theguardian.com/food/2023/mar/26/uk-honey-fails-authenticity-test

Season 3 is good. Season 4 is where it starts to hit home run after home run.

Not to mention trying to hold against a western backed resistance movement.

From an outsider perspective. Two houses/chambers are better than one. But the second should be a review chamber that sends amendments back to the first. If those amendments are rejected by the first then so be it.

Something like PAYE would be better than having your government work out the tax. It places the expanse on the companies rather than the government or the individual.

With a less convoluted tax system and businesses working it out you probably wouldn’t need to ban those tax companies as market forces would make them no longer viable.

VAT should be on luxury goods, and ones that the government wants to discourage the use of for public health (500% vat on tobacco products, 300% VAT on vaping etc).

That’s new London bridge, the original was crazy. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:London_Bridge_(1616)_by_Claes_Van_Visscher.jpg