When asking an open-ended question on the Internet, OP should put their own response as a comment, not in the post body, so people can judge it separately from the question and it’s not elevated above other responses.

That’s it. That’s my hot take.

Ass is better then tits unless the tits are great then I can handle a Hank Hill ass.

It’s “fewer than” not “fewer then”

The only grammar thing that annoys the hell out of me is “on accident”. No idea why, it just really sticks out and bugs me when I come across it. I rarely mention it when I see it though, because I know that noone actually cares.

We pivoted from social justice causes like child labour to systemic racism (but only in the first world, not where our actual daily racism is practiced) and transphobia etc because the former requires personal sacrifices while the latter mostly “requires” snarky takes on social media.

Legos with stickers suck. They should just print it in the parts or not have a design. It’s too much stress on the person building them :/

My hot take is that I don’t care what other people’s hot takes are.

People should be able to get suicide assistance. Including healthy people.

Mother Nature is really, really angry at us and payback is only barely beginning to start.

I am not religious or superstitious or whatever, it’s just a way of expressing that very soon we’re gonna have it very bad. The heatwaves, the storms, the utilities unable to cope, the displaced populations, the overwhelmed over-egotistic political systems - we’re in for a ride, and that ride starts yesterday.

My hot take of the month:

Nobody should own land but the government. You should lease it directly from the government. In order to lease land, you should bid for it in an auction based on the monthly amount you will pay the government for it, plus a fixed cost for any buildings already on the property that is set by a government assessor.

The monthly amount should then be regularly updated (probably yearly) based on the value of the property (using effectively the same method for valuation we have for doing property tax assessments already)

If you build a building on land you are leasing, the building is effectively owned by you for the duration you continue to lease it. When you decide not to live there anymore, you don’t sell the land or the buildings to anyone though, the government just takes control of them. The government can then assess and auction that property off to a new leaser and then transfers the fixed building assessed amount to the previous owner. The government makes no money off the building components transaction, and therefore has no reason to under or overvalue the amount.

The total amount the government leases ALL land should replace all current Property taxes, Income Taxes, and Sales taxes (remove those three taxes entirely) currently being collected, and then on top of that fund a universal basic income (including a partial amount for kids). This factors into the yearly updates to the pricing.

Business taxes should be re-imagined around this new paradigm, but would require some more thought in order to handle businesses that use zero land (foreign entities) or have a limited footprint in the country.

Renting (from an existing landlord who is leasing the property from the government) still exists, but landlords can no longer make money by just waiting for property values to increase over time. They have to pay the same amount per month as every other land owner based on the same amount of land in the same area. They become essentially just a long-term hotel business where you pay for the convenience of not having to pay upfront for the building or deal with the maintenance.

In terms of a transition over, current owners should be given a monthly number from the government to keep their current property rather than having to go through an auction process. The value of their building can be reimbursed if they move under the new system. Current owners essentially lose the entirety of the value of their land, which for a lot of people would actually be quite significant, especially those who have had the land for a long time, have too much land, or have too much land in a desirable location, or some combination of the above. Condo or other high-density owners, despite “owning” a portion of the land would actually not be impacted very much, since the monthly amounts are scaled on land, not the buildings.

This whole system has some serious benefits for everyone involved (except current owners of signficant land)

First, the removal of private land owners removes the massive drain that real estate is having on our economy. It’s mostly non-productive capital sitting there earning money without doing a damn thing, and removing the incentives around investing in it will make it massively property ownership affordable.

Second, the removal of income and sales taxes is a huge economic boost for the population. You work for $20 an hour, you get to keep the vast majority of it (still probably some minor stuff for union dues, employment insurance, etc.) If you choose to spend that renting more housing, great, you’re paying into the tax base to make life easier for everyone. If you are happy with a smaller property, then great you are leaving more space for others and get to keep more of your money.

Third, the pricing of land and it’s return via a basic income (including kids) will drive people to be more likely to use the correct amount of land. Fuck the Boomers with their 3500 square foot 5-bedroom house on a 10,000 square foot lot in town that they raised 2 kids but that currently only has 2 occupants. Move your ass out to something more reasonable, and make a space available for a family that’s raising their kids now.

Tl;dr: Private ownership of land shouldn’t exist, burn it to the ground and make things better for everyone by taxing property properly.

Disclosure: I own a home, this would hurt me. I still think it’s a good idea because my kids will not be able to afford a home at the current prices, let alone at the prices in 10 years when they start looking, and that’s more of a problem than the pain implementing this would cause me.

I don’t think pineapple belongs on hamburgers either. It tastes okay, but there’s so much extra liquid that it’s like holding a bun full of soup.

For some reason, people using the contraction “everyday” as a noun drives me insane. “Everyday” is an adjective (e.g., an everyday activity), “every day” is the noun (e.g., I do this activity every day).

It doesn’t matter. It doesn’t.

The Snyder Superman movies were good, actually.

I’ve got a spicy one.

Despite all the patches and updates, Cyberpunk 2077 is still a meh game. I hate the UI, the RPG combat system with damage numbers, the edgy aesthetic and slang words, the lack of vehicle customisation, and the overall lack of non-mission side activities to do in the world.

The ratio of style to substance is heavily weighted in favour of style.

Family and blood relation means absolutely nothing.

It’s just that people decided that due to blood relation and marriages a certain set of people should not only know each other, but like each other and put up with each other’s bullshit for far longer than for other groups like friends.

Meanwhile these relations are no different from being coworkers.

Similarly, lacking this blood relation doesn’t matter aside from family anamnesis (and perhaps organ/bone marrow transplants), in case of adoptions.
I don’t understand why people go through so much struggle for their kids to be “their own” while there’s many waiting and hoping to get adopted. People don’t think anything special about adopting a cat or dog, after all, there is no other way, and yet they’ll fully love their pet. But suddenly when it’s small humans, which is even the same specie, it matters a lot.

I don’t understand if people really feel something towards having really similar DNA, but I don’t see any logic in it.