Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Technology

5 New Studies That Challenge Conventional Wisdom About Kids and Tech

A slew of recent research suggests parents should relax a bit about screen time.

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 12.27.2022 7:00 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
teenage boy looking at a cell phone | Maria Diachenko/Westend61 GmbH/Newscom
(Maria Diachenko/Westend61 GmbH/Newscom)

This week, hordes of kids across the country are spending some of their Christmas break hours staring at screens. And hordes of parents are probably fretting that they shouldn't be letting them do this. That "screen time"—computer screen, TV screen, cellphone screen, etc.—is indiscriminately and insidiously dangerous for young minds.

These parents should relax.

Some research—and common sense—suggests ample screen time could be bad if it displaces other things, just as spending every waking hour on any one activity could be bad. But moderate screen time and occasional bursts of excessive screen time (say, during winter break) are probably harmless. So long as kids still generally find time for things like physical activity, schoolwork, and in-person socializing with family and peers, screen time per se simply shouldn't be a concern for most families.

That's not to say TV, TikTok, or Call of Duty will never be problematic. Some kids use things like these to escape feelings or situations they should be confronting. Some are extra susceptible to rude comments or risky suggestions.

But problematic tech use tends to reflect underlying issues, as Stetson University psychologist Christopher Ferguson told Reason for this piece on algorithms. "Pathological technology use" isn't caused by technology—but because that's the most visible symptom, parents and politicians think "let's take the video games away, or Facebook or Instagram away, and everything will be resolved."

Besides, "screen time" can mean many, many different things. Parents would do better to fret less about the precise amount of time kids spend playing video games, watching TV, surfing social media, or what have you, and exert more interest in the nature of the content kids consume, create, and interact with.

Studies connecting childhood screen time to negative results don't often take the type of screen time into account. And press about these studies tends to confound causation and correlation, insisting that screen time is responsible for emotional, behavioral, or developmental issues that could be the factor of something else (absent parents, depression, etc.) that drives both more time in front of screens and the issue in question.

But there's also a lot of research challenging the doomsayers—it just doesn't tend to get as much media attention. To do our small part to help correct that, here are five recent studies that challenge conventional wisdom about kids and screens.


"Effects of screen exposure on young children's cognitive development: A review."

Published in Frontiers in Psychology, August 2022

Main takeaway: TV can be good for kids' cognitive development.

In this study, a team of researchers from the University of Portsmouth and France's Paris Nanterre University looked at the impact of screen exposure on early childhood cognitive development. To do so, they analyzed 478 studies published throughout the past two decades. While some studies linked early exposure to television with negative effects in children under age 3, watching TV was also linked to positive effects, depending on the type of media being viewed and the circumstances under which this viewing takes place.

"We're used to hearing that screen exposure is bad for a child and can do serious damage to their development if it's not limited to say less than an hour a day. While it can be harmful, our study suggests the focus should be on the quality or context of what a child is watching, not the quantity," said Eszter Somogyi of the University of Portsmouth in a statement. "Weak narrative, fast pace editing, and complex stimuli can make it difficult for a child to extract or generalise information. But when screen content is appropriate for a child's age, it's likely to have a positive effect, particularly when it's designed to encourage interaction."

Watching TV with a caregiver around can also make the experience more beneficial. "Watching television with your child and elaborating and commenting on what is viewed can help enhance their understanding of the content, reinforcing their learning during educational programs," said Somogyi. "Coviewing can also contribute to the development of their conversation skills and provides children with a role model for appropriate television viewing behavior."

Take a look at the full analysis for a deep dive into potential positive effects.


"Are mobile phone ownership and age of acquisition associated with child adjustment? A 5-year prospective study among low-income Latinx children"

Published in Child Development, September 2022

Main takeaway: The age at which adolescents get phones doesn't affect their grades, sleep habits, or moods.

In this study, researchers from Stanford Medicine followed a group of 250 children for five years, during a period in which most eventually got their first cellphone. "Instead of comparing phone-using kids with those who don't have phones at a single point in time, the scientists tracked the participants' well-being as they transitioned to phone ownership," notes Erin Digitale on the Stanford Medicine website.

Subjects ranged from 7 to 11 years old at the start of the study and 11 to 15 years old at the end. The average age at which they got their first cellphone was 11.6 years old.

But about a quarter had phones before they turned 11, and a quarter did not have phones yet at 12.6 years old. And neither earlier nor later phone acquisition was linked to negative outcomes.

"We found that whether or not the children in the study had a mobile phone, and when they had their first mobile phone, did not seem to have meaningful links to their well-being and adjustment outcomes," said lead author Xiaoran Sun. "There doesn't seem to be a golden rule about waiting until eighth grade or a certain age."

The researchers point out that individual children may still be adversely affected by phone ownership. "These are average trends on a population level," said Sun. "There can still be individual differences. It doesn't mean you can't take your kid's phone away if you think it's taking too much sleep time."

But there is no universal right or wrong age to give kids a cellphone. "These results should be seen as empowering parents to do what they think is right for their family," senior author Thomas Robinson said.


"Connection, Creativity and Drama: Teen Life on Social Media in 2022"

Published by the Pew Research Center, November 2022

The main takeaway: Teens see social media as having a positive effect on their lives.

Teenagers surveyed by the Pew Research Center paint a "nuanced picture of adolescent life on social media," Pew reports. "It is one in which majorities credit these platforms with deepening connections and providing a support network when they need it, while smaller – though notable – shares acknowledge the drama and pressures that can come along with using social media."

Pew conducted its survey of 1,316 American 13–17-year-olds in April and May 2022. The full report on the results—released last month—can be found here.

Eighty percent of the teens surveyed said social media makes them feel "more connected to what's going on in their friends' lives," while 71 percent said it offers them "a place where they can show their creative side," 67 percent said it provides them with "people who can support them through tough times," and 58 percent said it makes them feel "more accepted."

Teens do feel some anxiety because of social media. Nearly a third said it makes them feel like their friends leave them out of things, and 38 percent said it makes them feel "overwhelmed because of all the drama."

But most teens—59 percent—see social media as neither having a positive nor negative effect on their lives. Just 9 percent said it's mostly negative, while 32 percent said it's mostly positive.

Many teens also say that life on social media is better than their parents assume it is. Thirty-nine percent agreed that "teens' experiences on social media are better than what parents think," while 33 percent said their parents' views on this are about right and 27 percent said it's worse than parents think.


"Disconnection More Problematic for Adolescent Self-Esteem than Heavy Social Media Use: Evidence from Access Inequalities and Restrictive Media Parenting in Rural America"

Published in Social Science Research Review, August 2022

The main takeaway: The internet isn't driving low self-esteem in teens.

"Teens who are disconnected from today's technologies are more isolated from their peers, which can lead to problems," said Michigan State University's Keith Hampton, a professor in the school's Department of Media and Information and lead author of a study on how being disconnected from technology affects teen self-esteem.

Social media is often blamed for teenage anxiety, body image problems, and self-confidence issues. But self-esteem problems are common to teens no matter what, notes Hampton, who suggests looking beyond social media and screen time for a culprit.

"Disconnection is a much greater threat than screen time," he told MSU Today. In fact, screen time can actually be beneficial. "Social media and video games are deeply integrated into youth culture, and they do more than entertain. They help kids to socialize, they contribute to identity formation and provide a channel for social support," Hampton said.

For his study, Hampton and colleagues looked at data on 3,258 adolescents living in predominately rural areas of Michigan. Subjects spanned 15 school districts and 21 schools.

The researchers measured time spent consuming digital media (including streaming services, video games, social media, and other web outlets), watching TV, and engaging in various in-person activities (socializing with friends, participating in school clubs, hanging out with family, etc.). They also asked teens about how tightly their parents controlled their screen time, and about the technological access to the internet.

Being disconnected from the digital world—either because of spotty internet service or parental constraints—was a much better predictor of low self-esteem than time spent in front of screens.

"Heavy restrictive mediation practices have among the largest relationships to adolescent self-esteem, exceeded only by identifying as female," states the study. (Being a girl was the largest predictor of self-esteem issues, alas.) Heavy use of social media, the web, video games, or online videos "has a much smaller relationship to adolescent self-esteem," the study states. And "adolescents, especially boys, who have less than broadband, home Internet access tend to report self-esteem that is substantively lower than that what is experienced through heavy screen time on any new media."

"Isolation doesn't come from being online, it comes from being disconnected from those sources of entertainment and socialization that permeate teens' lives," Hampton told MSU Today. "For most teens, that's social media, video games and sharing the videos they watch online. It is often how teens get their information, communicate and share," said Hampton.

One potential issue here is a problem that frequently plagues tech panic studies, too: Parents of some groups (those who strictly control their teenagers' screen time, live in more remote areas, etc.) probably differ in significant ways from parents who don't fall into these categories. It could be these family differences that drive differences in self-esteem and socializing patterns, not the amount of time spent with digital media.

But even taking this into account, Hampton's study challenges some stereotypes about teen screen time. (For instance, the idea that heavy digital media consumption necessarily interferes with real-world bonding.) Teens who spent more time in front of screens also spent more in-person time socializing with family and friends.

"Perpetuating the myth that teens who spend more time on their devices spend less time with friends and family and that 'excessive' time online is harming most teens' mental health, does more harm than good," said Hampton. "When parents exert too much control over the time their teens spend on screens, they cut kids off from peers and the social support that protects mental health."


"Association of Video Gaming With Cognitive Performance Among Children"

Published in JAMA Network Open, October 2022

The main takeaway: Video games are good for kids, actually.

For this study, University of Vermont researchers looked at data on 2,217 children who took part in the national Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development study. Their aim: to explore links between time spent playing video games and certain aspects of cognitive performance.

Specifically, the researchers compared kids who said they played no video games to kids who reported playing at least 21 hours of video games per week. Kids were asked to perform various tasks related to response inhibition and working memory while being subjected to functional magnetic resonance imaging.

The gamers performed better on the cognitive tests and also showed altered signaling in parts of the brain linked to attention, visual processing, and memory processing. The researchers also found no significant difference between gamers and nongamers in terms of mental health.

Gamers "are less susceptible to attentional distraction and outperform [nongamers] on both selection-based and response-based processes, suggesting that enhanced attentional performance in [gamers] may be underpinned by a greater capacity to suppress or disregard irrelevant stimuli," write the researchers.

Of course, the study can't tell us whether playing video games causes these cognitive differences or whether these differences cause some people to either become avid gamers or to reject video games entirely. But it does suggest that fears about gaming ruining kids' memories, attention spans, etc., may be overblown.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Stop Spazzing Out About 'Spaz'

Elizabeth Nolan Brown is a senior editor at Reason.

TechnologyTelevisionInternetVideo GamesSocial MediaChildrenTeenagersParentingMoral PanicResearchPsychology/Psychiatry
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (161)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. DawnPierce   2 years ago (edited)

    Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit..
    🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)

    HERE====)> http://WWW.WORKSFUL.COM

    1. Truthteller1   2 years ago

      ENB is a woke globalist shill.

      1. GloriaMarsh   2 years ago (edited)

        I am making $162/hour telecommuting. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning $21 thousand a month by working on the web, that was truly shocking for me, she prescribed me to attempt it simply
        COPY AND OPEN THIS SITE________ http://Www.Salaryapp1.com

  2. BigT   2 years ago

    More than half of social science is BS.

    One need not be a weatherman to see which way the wind blows. Overuse of any of these is damaging. Different kids will be damaged by different electronic activities. Parents have a responsibility to pay attention. ENB will learn the hard way.

    1. Social Justice is neither   2 years ago

      No she won't. She'll blame her kid for not understanding boundaries and exhibiting whatever leftist bugaboo is going around at the time

    2. JesseAz   2 years ago

      An interesting break down of how the mind virus of post modernism escaped like a Wuhan virus from universities.

      But my critics and I both missed something that might not have been obvious 30 years ago. By the late 1990s the rapid expansion of the universities came to a halt, especially in the humanities. Faculty openings slowed or stopped in many fields. Graduate enrollment cratered. In my own department in 10 years we went from accepting over a hundred students for graduate study to under 20 for a simple reason. We could not place our students. The hordes who took courses in critical pedagogy, insurgent sociology, gender studies, radical anthropology, Marxist cinema theory, and postmodernism could no longer hope for university careers.
      .
      What became of them? No single answer is possible. They joined the work force. Some became baristas, tech supporters, Amazon staffers and real estate agents. Others with intellectual ambitions found positions with the remaining newspapers and online periodicals, but most often they landed jobs as writers or researchers with liberal government agencies, foundations, or NGOs. In all these capacities they brought along the sensibilities and jargon they learned on campus.

      https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2022/12/23/progressive-professors-the-root-of-all-evil/

      1. Roberta   2 years ago

        When I read "tech supporters" above, the first impression in my mind was of people saying, "Yeah, go tech!"

        1. JesseAz   2 years ago

          Of course by supporters they mean the hive mind demanding censorship from tech companies. Ways to amplify their voice but not yours.

        2. sosope   2 years ago (edited)

          Home earnings allow all people to paint on-line and acquire weekly bills to financial institutions. Earn over $500 each day and get payouts each week instantly to account for financial institutions. (bwj-03) My remaining month of earnings was $30,390 and all I do is paint for as much as four hours an afternoon on my computer. Easy paintings and constant earnings are exquisite with this job.

          More information→→→→→ https://WWW.DAILYPRO7.COM

      2. Inquisitive Squirrel   2 years ago

        So funny you posted that. Just got done reading that piece before popping over to Reason today. Then saw this article and wondered about how this subject fits in to the spillover of academic idiocy.

        1. JesseAz   2 years ago (edited)

          It is a good article. The funny part being the writer wrote a book in the 80s about how this insane shit is taught in college but it won’t escape from colleges. The same arguments reason has used just 5 years ago about the gop causing a moral panic against post modernism a few years ago and how it was only on campus so no worries.

          1. Inquisitive Squirrel   2 years ago

            Oh yeah, Jacoby's mea culpa on that was great.

    3. mtrueman   2 years ago

      "Different kids will be damaged by different electronic activities. Parents have a responsibility to pay attention."

      What is the responsibility of those who offer these damaging activities to children, encourage them and profit from them?

      1. Inquisitive Squirrel   2 years ago

        Um, what kind of responsibility are you talking about and who falls into that?

        1. mtrueman   2 years ago

          I was asking the other guy. He's the one in charge of assigning responsibilities. Ask him.

          1. Inquisitive Squirrel   2 years ago

            He simply stated that parents need to be mindful of what their kids are doing. You have a problem with that?

            1. mtrueman   2 years ago (edited)

              “You have a problem with that?”

              You really have to ask? How are we to lure children into tranny toilets and persuade them to undergo Mexican sex change operations if their mindful parents are constantly helicoptering in and spoiling the fun?

              1. Inquisitive Squirrel   2 years ago

                What is wrong with you?

                1. mtrueman   2 years ago

                  It's the TDS. I'm trying to recover but it's a hard climb returning to Trump loving normalcy. Please bear with me.

                  1. Dogvalor   2 years ago

                    Something is definitely malfunctioning in your brain.
                    Seek help.

                    1. mtrueman   2 years ago

                      "Something is definitely malfunctioning in your brain."

                      It's called wrongthink. I dared to ask BigT a question.

                    2. Inquisitive Squirrel   2 years ago

                      You asked him a massively dumb question that has no relevance to what he said.

                      I think you were trying to set up a straw man gotcha, but it was so poorly done you are coming off like a moron. Maybe instead of trying so hard to "own" people, you rather engage in intelligent discussion.

                    3. mtrueman   2 years ago

                      'You asked him a massively dumb question that has no relevance to what he said. '

                      I disagree. I think it was a splendidly intelligent question of the utmost relevance to what he said, and moreover, what he thought but dared not say.

                  2. Inquisitive Squirrel   2 years ago

                    No seriously, what is wrong with you?

                    1. mtrueman   2 years ago

                      No seriously.
                      "What is the responsibility of those who offer these damaging activities to children, encourage them and profit from them?"

                      Several people have responded to me including you several times. But nobody has answered my question instead engaged in tiresome personal insults.
                      The 'damaging activities' is BigT's apt description the online engagement in messaging, videos etc, in case my question isn't clear enough.

        2. JulieMurray   2 years ago (edited)

          Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit.. ???? AND GOOD LUCK.:)
          https://WWW.WORKSCLICK.COM

  3. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

    Gamers "are less susceptible to attentional distraction and outperform [nongamers] on both selection-based and response-based processes, suggesting that enhanced attentional performance in [gamers] may be underpinned by a greater capacity to suppress or disregard irrelevant stimuli," write the researchers.

    But only when playing a game. Otherwise, all they think about is playing a game.

    1. JesseAz   2 years ago

      I'm sorry. What were you saying? Playing Crisis Core Reunion.

    2. JesseAz   2 years ago

      Rereading your snippet. I dont think the editors here are gamers. See how they focused so much attention on mean tweets, or the unimportant stimuli.

    3. Roberta   2 years ago

      It's like when we coach them in football. We want them to concentrate on the game and do things to their friends that they should never do outside the game, then be friends again immediately after knocking them around.

      1. Nardz   2 years ago

        That's just the way of Man

  4. Jefferson's Ghost   2 years ago

    So, where does screen time spent on Reason come in? Especially the time spent reading the comments? Inquiring minds want to know...

    1. BigT   2 years ago

      Comments good, articles bad.

      1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

        Lizzie seems to think so.

        https://twitter.com/ENBrown/status/1601256561086988289

        Reason commenters make up a very small percentage of our readership, and are largely people who hate everyone on staff and all of our work, on any subject. They’re in now way representative of “libertarian audiences” overall

        ENB, this will live on in the interwebs for an eternity.

        1. R Mac   2 years ago

          Hey, at least she wasn’t calling for murdering her political enemies.

          https://mobile.twitter.com/mattwelch/status/1102654202545913857?s=12

          1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

            https://mobile.twitter.com/mattwelch/status/1102654202545913857?s=12

            Now would be a good time to throw a big cocktail party in New York or Washington, and invite every single conservative writer you know. #RedWedding2

            Nice one, Welchie Boy, now it'll live on here too.
            #WhatAnAsshole

        2. Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf   2 years ago

          That's a fun find. Commenters disagree, so commenters are wrong. Couldn't describe statists any better.

  5. Naime Bond   2 years ago

    Moderation in all things is conventional wisdom which is precisely (and predictably) what yet another Reason article is attacking.

    1. Longtobefree   2 years ago

      The wisdom of the Senior - - - -

      "To enjoy life, take big bites. Moderation is for Monks."

    2. Libertariantranslator   2 years ago

      Unlike National Socialist Review and Mother Jonestown, right?

    3. mtrueman   2 years ago (edited)

      “Moderation in all things is conventional wisdom ”

      In your neck of the woods, maybe. But in the world of computer gadgetry, moderation is for pussies. Addicted attention holding is what we're after.

  6. Longtobefree   2 years ago

    Any actual journalists digging in to follow the money will probably end up at Soros or the DNC.

    1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

      Or Gates and the WEF.

      1. Nardz   2 years ago

        They're the same picture

  7. Roberta   2 years ago (edited)

    Parents would do better to fret less about the precise amount of time kids spend playing video games, watching TV, surfing social media, or what have you, and exert more interest in the nature of the content kids consume, create, and interact with.

    Huh. My feeling’s long been just the opposite. You know, the medium is the massage. I thought there’s been too much attention to content generally, including in relation to form.

    Meanwhile, the [re-]editor is stripping the tags again.

  8. Nardz   2 years ago

    https://twitter.com/NameRedacted247/status/1607539875712217089?t=g5REYEJUhS2_VQNVLsx9PQ&s=19

    1. Google currently employs at least 165 people, in high-ranking positions, from the Intelligence Community.

    Google’s Trust & Safety team is managed by 3 ex-CIA agents, who control “misinfo & hate speech.”

    Here’s the breakdown:
    CIA-27
    FBI-52
    NSA-30
    DHS-50
    ODNI-6

    2. Since the 2016 Presidential election, Google/Facebook/Twitter have hired at least 300+ people formerly employed by CIA, FBI, etc

    Ex-CIA agents are Heads of Trust & Safety at Google & Facebook. Is it OK that ex-CIA agents control what “misinfo” is?

    34. Why, since 2016, did Twitter, Facebook & Google go on a hiring blitz of former CIA, FBI, NSA, etc. and assign them to high level managerial positions, many of which oversee “misinformation” and censorship policy?

    [Thread, links]

    1. JesseAz   2 years ago

      Local story.

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        It's old news, it's not happening, and it's good for us.

        1. JesseAz   2 years ago

          They deserve an amnesty they a continuation of the behaviors they got the amnesty for.

        2. Eeyore   2 years ago

          It is standard operating procedure.

    2. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

      Well, when Google and Facebook were startups they were funded by the CIA through the In-Q-Tel program, so this must all just be a return on their investment.

    3. R Mac   2 years ago

      It’s the return to normalcy we all hoped for! Seriously, this could have been a quote from Reason in 2020, replacing Hillary with Biden.

      https://m.facebook.com/cigionline/videos/10154692401918622/?refsrc=deprecated&ref=sharing&_rdr

    4. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

      It's a big nothingburger donchaknow?

      1. Nardz   2 years ago (edited)

        I believe the order of operation is:
        1. It’s not happening
        2. You’re a conspiracy theorist
        3. It’s Russian propaganda
        4. Nothingburger
        5. Old news
        6. It’s a good thing
        7. Repeat #s 1, 2, and 3

  9. Nardz   2 years ago

    https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status/1607330928359243776?t=EvVJyjcjgHVR7j0d6tC6PQ&s=19

    Please just stop. Virtually zero chance these will end up being used for anything but nefarious purposes.

    [Link]

  10. Nardz   2 years ago

    https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1607588835625668609?t=dCMcB9Pga5GSdF7JZP5eWg&s=19

    Congresswoman AOC has shared a far-left flyer on Instagram for comrades to come to a direct action to “protect” a children’s drag queen event in Queens. A number of these drag events have been protested by BIPOC New Yorkers concerned about what they say is sexual propaganda.

    [Link]

  11. Nardz   2 years ago

    https://twitter.com/davereaboi/status/1607736917059149826?t=zG7eQ-KdFLZS40R7JfF16A&s=19

    Can’t wait for Biden to wax poetically about the wonderful beauty of eunuch children.

    [Link]

  12. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

    Well, I guess ENB is lagging on the Roundup.

    You will own nothing and like it.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/political/lefts-big-pitch-embrace-worse-life-name-equality

    There can be only one excuse for such signal failure to serve the prosperity of your citizenry: the chimera of equality. This, in fact, is the clarion call of the Left: that human beings sacrifice well-being and prosperity on behalf of the cult of equal distribution of resources. Klaus Schwab, head of the World Economic Forum, says as much in his book, "The Great Narrative": we should dispense with economic measures like gross domestic product (GDP) in favor of "what matters most: climate action, sustainability, inclusivity, global cooperation, health and well-being."

    1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      What about reparations?

    2. JesseAz   2 years ago

      Some would take the adjective great to mean unbelievable but widely spread narrative counter to reality. ENB and democrats take it to mean good.

    3. Weigel's Cock Ring   2 years ago

      Most of the Reason staff is obviously on vacation today, just like their D.C. federal government employee friends and neighbors.

      It's pretty easy to tell because none of the usual high-volume leftie sockpuppet accounts are posting at all.

      1. R Mac   2 years ago

        “It’s pretty easy to tell because none of the usual high-volume leftie sockpuppet accounts are posting at all.”

        Hmm…

        1. JesseAz   2 years ago

          I am also intrigued by that observation.

      2. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

        I noticed that over the weekend. Sarc was very active, and Sqrlsy was as well; however, SPB2 was mostly MIA until yesterday. Mike has been around a bit. Jeffy has also been seemingly MIA as have some of the other socks like Davedave and SRG. I've seen Moderation4ever a few times.

      3. Uilleam   2 years ago

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krD4hdGvGHM

  13. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

    Now this is interesting. Portable nukes.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/commodities/christmas-grid-chaos-rolling-blackouts-could-bring-light-transportable-nuclear-power

    What's idiotic is the decarbonization campaign to decommission nuclear and fossil fuel generators for renewables. This weekend's grid chaos is a wake-up call. America has a severe grid problem sparked by the 'green' movement. Thank the climate alarmist, woke corporations, and progressive politicians for ushering in so-called green reforms that have transformed once-stable grids into a third-world country prone to rolling blackouts anytime temperatures fall below freezing.

  14. Libertariantranslator   2 years ago

    Waitaminnit... JAMA sez Leisure Suit Larry and Duke Nukem aren't assassins of youth? Next they'll be admitting LSD is safer than beer, tobacco, wine and weed--after 50 years of police state fascism ruining and ending innocent lives. Freedom is something spoiler votes wring out of The Kleptocracy in dribs and drabs.

    1. R Mac   2 years ago

      You’re on LSD right now, right Hank?

      1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

        Geritol, but it's having a similar effect apparently.

      2. Dillinger   2 years ago

        is the only way to slog through the trolls here.

    2. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

      LSD safer? I guess if you're in a car, but I dare you to cross it on foot, against a signal, Hank.

      Oh, you meant the other LSD.

  15. Nardz   2 years ago

    https://twitter.com/RWMaloneMD/status/1607710183022628864?t=bIQhKhOK5qQ729paRKxWpw&s=19

    "In a meta-analysis of 63 studies of ivermectin versus COVID-19 in humans, 100% of these have shown positive results... 29 of those studies were found to be statistically significant regarding use of ivermectin alone.

    "Over the 63 studies in meta-analysis, pooled effects showed 69% improvement in early treatment, and prophylactic use showed 86% improvement"

    [Link]

    1. JesseAz   2 years ago

      Misinformation. Trust CDC models based on the programmers biases instead.

    2. JasonAZ   2 years ago

      Follow the money.

      Ivermectin = no profits
      "Vaccine" = massive profits

      It's been truly amazing to watch Big Pharma go from boogeymen to saviors, overnight. Seriously, HollyWeird made movies where BP was the bad guys, then overnight we get "Trust the Science!!!"

    3. JimboJr   2 years ago

      one thing costs pennies, is widely available, relatively safe/known, and favored by conservatives

      the other thing costs 1000s of times more, was heavily invested in by congress critters, and had massive money making potential

      its never been about more than profit and control

  16. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

    Hobbs is a (rhymes with "witch").

    https://nypost.com/2022/12/27/katie-hobbs-urges-arizona-court-to-sanction-kari-lake-over-election-fraud-claims/

    The request for Arizona Superior Court Judge Peter Thompson to order Lake to pay more than $500,000 in legal fees to Hobbs’ attorneys and Maricopa County came less than 48 hours after he ruled against Lake’s efforts to throw out certified election results in Arizona’s most populous county.

    1. JesseAz   2 years ago

      The attorney? DNC election lawyer Marc Elias and his firm.

      1. R Mac   2 years ago

        That dude really gets around.

    2. JesseAz   2 years ago (edited)

      It still boggles my mind how the defense here admits they fucked up, they changed printer settings the day of, blamed in person voters as fucking themselves over by voting day of, destroyed originals of duplicated box 3 ballots, had no chain of custody on hundreds of thousands of ballots…. but no big deal because nobody said they did it intentionally. Despite each issue knowing ahead of time as to effect gop voters. And they even admitted the same problems happened the last 3 elections.

      1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

        Who appointed the judge?

        1. JesseAz   2 years ago (edited)

          The last gop governor. But the gop in Arizona is McCain industry people. Uniparty reps.

          Why i vote no on every judge every time.

  17. Nardz   2 years ago

    https://twitter.com/Sargon_of_Akkad/status/1607721785277181956?t=1x3RxLWp2qQk8bMMjiQAgA&s=19

    It's not that they can't see the difference between these pics. They know but want you to force you accept that they are morally identical. It isn't about drag, it isn't even about imposing sexuality on children; these are means to the end of destroying your moral standards.

    [Link]

    1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

      "They know but want you to force you accept that they are morally identical."

      Jeff pulled something similar here with censorship, arguing that child rape images are free speech, so isn't some free speech bad?
      He was desperately hoping to get someone to agree that in some cases Twitter/Fed censorship was necessary.

      1. Nardz   2 years ago

        Jeff is a sick, evil clump of cancer

      2. JesseAz   2 years ago (edited)

        Jeff doesn’t understand child porn produces a victim. Each distribution is a crime because it has a victim. It is not speech. Advocating for child porn is speech. Victimizing a child is not.

        Thats why the USSC differentiates child porn drawings vs child porn pictures. I have no doubt he has accessed and exchanged child porn. If not more.

        But jeff has defended pedophiles and grooming for years now. He should be locked up as I guarantee you he is active in that community.

        1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

          Well, he and SPB2 are here, so I make my own conclusions that the two may have exchanged it.

        2. JimboJr   2 years ago

          and this leads to the same question that keeps coming up:

          why do so many people on the political left seem to keep aligning themselves with pedophiles...

          1. Inquisitive Squirrel   2 years ago (edited)

            This is an honest question now. The left screams and moans when they get called “groomers.” But at this point, the honest question of “why do all of you have such an infatuation with kids and sexuality” becomes relevant.

            At some point the logic becomes: if you don’t want to be called a groomer, stop pushing the sexualization of children and sexual interaction with them.

            1. JimboJr   2 years ago

              Its getting bizarre.

              They are rallying the troops and having armed guards to ensure that...some guy with fake tits that likes to dress up like a woman can 'read stories' to the kids? Or walk down the cat walk for the kids? Or have the kids walk the runway while they throw money at them?

              You would think that a person this invested in the above events would at some point question: "Is there a reason I am so heavily invested in what amounts to exposing children to a grown man's fetish?"

              1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

                Remember when the rallying cry for gays and lesbians was that they just wanted to be treated like everyone else? I guess I missed all the flagrantly sexual hetero St. Patrick Day parades.

                1. Inquisitive Squirrel   2 years ago (edited)

                  And this begs another question. I have two good friends who are gay who are so angered by the TQI+ portion of the alphabet that they don’t want any association with it. They like adults and want nothing to do with kids or kids’ sexuality. And they also have no desire to play pretend games about whether someone is a man or woman. But, they are now also seeing a lot of unintentional pushback against gay people because gay people are all getting lumped in with the gender fluid/queer/transsexual movements.

                  They want nothing to do with the movement. But they also feel at the same time that they have to be somewhat supportive to protect themselves from over-wrought pushback. I really feel bad for them.

                  As such, I would like to know how many in the gay community really have no love for this new trans movement, but fear saying anything because simply being gay (especially being a gay white man) is not intersectional enough to win a woke battle against trans people.

                  1. Gaear Grimsrud   2 years ago

                    Gays against grooming got banned from social media quite a while back IIRC. Maybe back on Twitter under Musk. Most gays do not want to be associated with this shit especially the grooming.

          2. JesseAz   2 years ago

            The majority of advanced cultures and empires tend towards the mixing of sexes and pedophilia. There have been studies showing that as empires collapse they are proceeded by statues of men becoming more effeminate and the sexualization of children.

            1. Inquisitive Squirrel   2 years ago

              That's an interesting point.

  18. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

    https://www.foxnews.com/media/twitter-files-part-10-trump-biden-white-houses-leaned-tech-giant-moderate-content-during-covid

    The "Twitter Files" noted that when President Biden took over, "one of the first meeting quests from the Biden White House was about COVID misinformation" and that Biden's staff "focused on vaccines and hight profile anti-vaxxer accounts, including Alex Berenson."

    1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

      Was Berenson the one who's Twitter ban for Covid "misinformation" was celebrated by Robby?

      1. Nardz   2 years ago

        Yes

      2. Nardz   2 years ago

        "To be sure, censorship can be bad, but that dude totally deserved it!"

      3. JesseAz   2 years ago (edited)

        Not quite. He called him a spewer of misinformation.

        There are good reasons to be troubled by this decision—even though Berenson is indeed a serial spewer of misinformation. . The pandemic has minted a new class of terribly misguided pundits, and Berenson is among the very worst of them.

        https://reason.com/2021/08/30/alex-berenson-twitter-ban-vaccine-covid/

        Basically he shouldn’t be banned but trust Fauci.

        And it gets worse.

        He has used his Twitter platform to peddle the absurd notion that vaccines might be causing severe illnesses and even deaths.
        .
        Though COVID-19 has allowed Berenson to fully embrace his role as a purveyor of delusions, it should be noted that he was pushing unscientific nonsense before the pandemic.

        1. JesseAz   2 years ago

          Lol. And he used The Atlantic as his source.

          And he has claimed that most people under the age of 70 probably don't need to become vaccinated—even though the death toll for the under-70 crowd is well over 100,000. As The Atlantic's Derek Thompson noted in a conclusive takedown of Berenson—whom he quite reasonably dubs "the pandemic's wrongest man"—these views are all nonsense.

          Everything about Covid and Berenson Robbie said in the article is wrong.

          1. Gaear Grimsrud   2 years ago

            Always puzzles me when commenters come here and say Robbie is somehow more libertarian than the other Reason editors. I have to assume that they haven't actually read the shit he publishes.

            1. DesigNate   2 years ago

              Being the most libertarian writer on staff is a short bar to cross considering some of the other people that write here.

        2. R Mac   2 years ago

          And he was rewarded with the Fauci interview, so it all worked out in the end.

        3. Nardz   2 years ago

          Reason really lets the government dictate their reality, without question or doubt

  19. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

    I guess pay raises are more important.

    https://wsyr.iheart.com/featured/bob-lonsberry-syr/content/2022-12-27-lonsberry-hochul-failed-to-prepare-for-buffalo-blizzard/

    And yet the governor seems to have largely ignored the warnings and made only token and ineffective preparations. Sure, she held her self-aggrandizing press conferences, in the embroidered-jacket costume, ultimately affecting an embroidered cap to show that she was serious. But the timeline shows the state government was far more interested in politicians’ raises than it was in people’s safety.

  20. Nemo Aequalis   2 years ago

    Libertarians seem to be obsessed with lulling us to sleep. Ever notice how many articles keep telling us to Relax, No Problem, So What?

    I'd really like to see an article, "A slew of studies suggest libertarians need to relax about getting serial ass-kickings".

    Serial ass-kickings provided free of charge.

    1. JesseAz   2 years ago

      That way they can switch to old news a year later and tell you it is a return to normalcy.

    2. R Mac   2 years ago

      “Libertarians”

      Please use “liberaltarians” when referring to Reason. They don’t speak for the rest of us.

      1. JesseAz   2 years ago

        It really is the preferred title of those cosplaying as writers here.

      2. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

        I prefer calling them "libertines" as it's all about the food trucks, open borders, sex work, and weed from them. "Libertarian" should apply to those who believe in the rule of law, freedom of speech, defending the Constitution (including all amendments), and oppose authoritarianism/totalitarianism in all forms at all times.

      3. JasonAZ   2 years ago

        Or, far left progressives with a novel Libertarian position.

        1. Nardz   2 years ago

          Libertine progressives/leftists

          1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

            Cosplay libertarians, who want to seem edgy on the D.C. cocktail party circuit.

            1. R Mac   2 years ago

              Fonzi’s jacket is friggin awesome.

  21. JesseAz   2 years ago

    We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the prevalence of psychiatric diagnoses among transgender patients in clinical care using an all-payer electronic health record database. Of 10,270 transgender patients identified, 58% (n=5940) had at least one psychiatric diagnosis compared with 13.6% (n=7,311,780) in the control patient population (p<0.0005). Transgender patients had a statistically significant increase in prevalence for all psychiatric diagnoses queried, with major depressive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder being the most common diagnoses (31% and 12%, respectively). Utilizing an all-payer database, although not without limitations, enables assessment of mental health and substance use diagnoses in this otherwise small population.

    https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/benbartee/2022/12/26/study-transgenders-have-4-5-times-higher-rate-of-psychiatric-illness-than-normies-n1656435

    1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      Well, if that doesn't prove transphobia nothing will.

      #WorshipMyNeuroses

    2. Eeyore   2 years ago

      The big lie is that hormone therapy and surgery are effective treatments. There is the short term hope that is sold to the patient and that is all they get. It is all a lie. When the reality sets in the depression and anxiety doubles.

      Desire is the root of suffering.

      1. JimboJr   2 years ago

        The even bigger lie is they have moved from "effective", which is a big lie, to "life saving" which moves into evil territory.

        They are getting these people on an assembly line for expensive surgery and HRT they know wont work, to make a massive profit.

  22. Nardz   2 years ago

    https://twitter.com/GRDecter/status/1607560871424978946?t=n8js-AHiofbJJKO5JB9QAA&s=19

    The New York Times is STILL trying to paint Sam Bankman-Fried in a positive light

    [Link]

    1. JesseAz   2 years ago

      He just made a few mistakes. Wasn't his fault. He was trying to work with democrats to fix the crypto market.

    2. JasonAZ   2 years ago

      Hard to hate a guy that helped their cause so much. And of course, "their" cause = funding Democrats.

  23. JesseAz   2 years ago

    Proof of biology that men can be woman as boy dressed as a girl gets her first period.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/RitaPanahi/status/1607475328062205954

    1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      Try that in Ukraine.

    2. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

      I think I agree with TRHL:

      This person has no uterus. There is no lining to shed. If they are bleeding then something is very wrong.

      1. JesseAz   2 years ago

        The Science denier!!!

    3. JimboJr   2 years ago

      Also notable (and not actually needing to be said to anyone with fucking common sense...):

      The requirements for the intense cramping and pain come from 2 things: 1) the actual organ that is shedding its lining, which is caused by 2) the menstrual cycle (weeks of estrogen building the lining up, followed by a stark decrease causing the lining to shed and the uterine contractions to expel it...yes this is the very simplified version)

      Being that this unfortunate deluded soul does not have the organ to cramp, and also is likely taking continuous hormone treatments rather than taking 3 weeks on, one off, because why the fuck would you do that...and even if they did it wouldn't matter because they dont have a fucking uterus...its all in their head, which we all knew.

      The most important point in this.. Not even 5 years ago this would have been seen for what it is: mental illness. Could be classified in a variety of ways, whether gender dysphoria, delusion, psychotic episode, what have you. But we have normalized this.

      We have taken what is extreme, unhealthy, abnormal behavior that is statistically likely to cause harm to a person, and we as a society give them back-pats and kudos for their bravery, encouraging this. Hell, you might even get a sit down with POTUS if you play your cards right!

      This is telling a schizophrenic, yup those voices are real, and they ARE coming for you. It's taking a cutter and sharpening their blade, giving them suggestions on where else to cut next. Its giving a depressed suicidal person the gun, loading it, and telling them "you are right, it probably is for the best" then walking away. Its evil

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        What if a kind volunteer punched it in the gut every 30 minutes?

      2. Gaear Grimsrud   2 years ago

        These sick fucks are a parody of women. Real women don't act like that. I like women a lot. Most of the most important people in my life have been women. How any woman can defend these assholes is just baffling to me.

  24. Nardz   2 years ago

    Because you might end up shooting other black students?

    https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1607512862435442689?t=lZnREUmXUHB5XMR0i1HNLg&s=19

    The shooting of three students at U-Va., who were all Black, has hit hard a tight-knit community on campus.

    “The weight of being a Black student feels so heavy right now,” said a 21-year-old on the executive board of a Black student-athlete group.

    [Link]

    1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      Blame it on slavery.

    2. JimboJr   2 years ago

      One of the biggest, if not the single most predictive factor in a person committing or being on the receiving end of assault/homicide is being a black male.

      But that leads to a very long and difficult conversation about personal and cultural responsibility that the left wants nothing to do with.

      So, as always, the answer will be : "Something something racism, something slavery, something colonialism, something something white supremacy" so they can satisfy both their need to virtue signal and white savior

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        A few years ago I gathered statistics and looked for correlation (by state) of various factors compared to murder rate. The strongest, and really only, correlation was with black percentage in state population.

        But I have been told that math is white culture.

    3. Its_Not_Inevitable   2 years ago

      The Man made him do it.

  25. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

    WSJ headline: Pandemic Learning Loss Could Cost Students $70,000 in Lifetime Earnings

    We'd better figure out how to bump up student loan forgiveness by another $50k.

    1. JesseAz   2 years ago

      Please don't give them ideas even as a joke. California is ready bumping up the reparations payout from 300k to 700k. Every month it gets bigger.

      1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

        In that case, I should follow Steve Martin and identify as he did in The Jerk. I'd make a hell of a lot more money that way.

        1. Dillinger   2 years ago

          and this lamp ...

          1. Gaear Grimsrud   2 years ago

            It's not the money. It's the stuff.

      2. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

        They want to boost sales of Mercedes’ and Cadillac.

      3. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

        California is bumping up the mass emigration. So many people will leave if they decide to transfer half a mil to every black person from non-black persons. Unreal how dumb this is.

      4. Duke of URL   2 years ago

        Yep, just like their bullshi..er, bullet train!

  26. Nardz   2 years ago

    https://twitter.com/amuse/status/1607741945740234753?t=h-VT6IC6QNr21FY9zUeylA&s=19

    HATE HOAXES ????1/

    @jordanbpeterson has noticed a massive increase in online comments supportive of Nazi ideology. The incidents remind me of the massive increase in racist hate following the death of George Floyd.

    [Thread, links]

  27. Homple   2 years ago

    It's obvious that Ms. Nolan Brown spends her time reading studies instead of observing kids enraptured by their electronic devices.

  28. Dillinger   2 years ago

    I'm not saying anyone ever said put Pong away and go outside but I definitely remember being yelled at in the Atari 2600 / Colecovision era

  29. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

    Reminder from 2020:

    WSJ editorial board: All the Adam Schiff Transcripts
    Newly released documents show he knew all along that there was no proof of Russia-Trump collusion.

    "Newly released Congressional testimony shows that Adam Schiff spread falsehoods shamelessly about Russia and Donald Trump for three years even as his own committee gathered contrary evidence...
    Most of the transcripts were ready for release long ago, but Mr. Schiff oddly refused to release them after he became chairman in 2019. He only released them last week when the White House threatened to do it first.
    Now we know why. From the earliest days of the collusion narrative, Mr. Schiff insisted that he had evidence proving the plot. In March 2017 on MSNBC, Mr. Schiff teased that he couldn’t “go into particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now.”
    In December 2017 he told CNN that collusion was a fact: “The Russians offered help, the campaign accepted help. The Russians gave help and the President made full use of that help.” In April 2018, Mr. Schiff released his response to Mr. Nunes’s report, stating that its finding of no collusion “was unsupported by the facts and the investigative record.”

    After this article went out Mr. Schiff's was banned from Twitter, he was lambasted as a liar by the rest of the media and a NY prosecutor swore to jail him for something... oh wait.

    1. R Mac   2 years ago

      But we should totally take his word that the 1/6 committee has proof of his crimes.

    2. JimboJr   2 years ago

      Just like the J6 committee, they got what they wanted, they got their show trial.

  30. I, Woodchipper   2 years ago

    No links today? wtf

    1. JesseAz   2 years ago

      Here you go.

      https://mobile.twitter.com/mattyglesias

      1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

        Chuckle.

  31. Number 2   2 years ago

    ENB misses the point. The iron law of life is that whatever pre-teens or teenagers enjoy doing is by definition bad And, therefore, a serious social issue. What is being said about video games and social media today was said about television 60 years ago, rock ‘n’ roll, music 50 years ago, arcade games, 40 years ago, etc. It’s all a way of keeping parents, terrified and research and grant funding flowing.

    1. Gaear Grimsrud   2 years ago

      Dunno. When I close my eyes at night I still see Betty Rubble. But not in that tiger skin skirt. In my dreams she wears a tiny G string. And nothing else. She haunts my dreams and, at times, my waking hours. How much more productive could I have been if not for TV? Could I have been the next Einstein? Discovered a cure for cancer? Started a crypto exchange and donated generously to worthy politicians? We will never know.

      1. Number 2   2 years ago (edited)

        You are one of the fortunate ones. Despite your Betty Rubble obsession, you did not commit teenage suicide, end up committing murder, die of a drug overdose, father children out of wedlock, or have your first sexual experience at age 9, or fall victim to any one of the other maladies blamed on television watching.

    2. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      True enough. But what many cultures around the world learned over millennia is that what teens naturally do is often retarded and hard to live with, and so best to send them away for a few years of vision questing, mastodon hunting, missionary work, or other excursions.

  32. Duke of URL   2 years ago

    The sage advice I received on this subject was;
    "Beware of what your son downloads, and what your daughter uploads".

    1. mtrueman   2 years ago

      Business idea:
      Start your own child internet monitoring service. Or write software that does it automatically, saving parents the bother of poring through hours of tedium every day.

  33. mad.casual   2 years ago (edited)

    ARE MOBILE PHONE OWNERSHIP AND AGE OF ACQUISITION ASSOCIATED WITH CHILD ADJUSTMENT? A 5-YEAR PROSPECTIVE STUDY AMONG LOW-INCOME LATINX CHILDREN

    Main Takeaway: Studies with ‘LatinX’ in the title are shitty and racist. People quoting them as if they mean any thing are shitty white female liberal racists.

    1. mtrueman   2 years ago

      "Studies with ‘LatinX’ in the title are shitty and racist"

      Studies with the word CHILD and CHILDREN in the title are ageist.

  34. GloriaMarsh   2 years ago (edited)

    I am making $162/hour telecommuting. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning $21 thousand a month by working on the web, that was truly shocking for me, she prescribed me to attempt it simply
    COPY AND OPEN THIS SITE________ http://Www.Salaryapp1.com

  35. MeghanLane   2 years ago (edited)

    I get paid over 190$ per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Heres what I’ve been doing..

    HERE====)> http://WWW.RICHSALARIES.COM

  36. AllisonPark   2 years ago (edited)

    Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit.. ???? AND GOOD LUCK.:)

    HERE====)> http://www.worksclick.com

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

28 Years Later Is Terrifying and Life-Affirming

Peter Suderman | 6.20.2025 10:31 AM

Two Weeks

Robby Soave | 6.20.2025 9:32 AM

Militarized Response to California Riots Seeks To Expand Federal Power

Steven Greenhut | 6.20.2025 7:30 AM

War With Iran Should Be Determined by Congressional Debate, Not Presidential Whim

J.D. Tuccille | 6.20.2025 7:00 AM

Review: What the Hell Is a 'Libertarian Authoritarian'?

Brian Doherty | From the July 2025 issue

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!