i am more than willing to engage on any positive claim you want to make (i probably agree with a lot of them). what i’m not willing to do is tolerate personal attacks and dogpiling.
I used to. now I don't want anyone to contradict me. I know I'm right, so if you argue with me you're either stating a falsehood or falling prey to bad reasoning.
i'm suspicious of your last three claims. the first and third one uncritically cite poore-nemecek 2018, which indicates they either don't understand the issues with that methodology, or they don't care (since it makes their "research" sound more impactful). the oxford study i have read in full, and it only addresses retail costs of food, making no mention of people who receive subsidized food, free food from poverty programs, or people who raise their own food, or hunt or trap or fish for it. basically, it excludes anyone who is actually poor.
i have to admit i was baiting you because i knew psychopathy isn't a diagnosable condition in (ok, now just as far as i know) any version of the DSM. but then i read the wikipedia entry on psychopathy.
it turns out, even though it's not diagnosable as such, there are evaluation criteria for it so it sort of sits in this weird middleground.
anyway, i think we should just treat people as people and not like a diagnosis. i don't want people to treat me like "depressed commie" or "anxious commie" (not conditions i have diagnosed, just using examples). i want to be treated as a whole person. writing off people who hit certain evaluation criteria as "just a psychopath" is pretty shitty.
I can't seem to find the full paper