Ever Wondered What Harry Piles Looks Like When He Isn

Why are the Weasleys poor, as described in the second Harry Potter book, in spite of Arthur, Bill, and Charlie earning?

The following reasons - 1. The Weasleys are poor because of having 7 children. Until Bill and Charlie started working, the Weasley family had one earning member to take care of the household expenses, education and upbringing of 9 family members. I'm sure Hogwarts does not charge a huge fee but the extras - books, wands, broomsticks, robes etc can be quite a dent with 7 children. 2. Also, just working at the Ministry of Magic does not mean money. Mr. Weasley was not very high up in the Ministry. He worked in the Misuse of Muggle Artefacts Department - which to most pure blood fanatics is something of a joke. His department had two people - him and Perkins. He would, at best, be considered middle management at the Ministry and with a family of 9, that can't be great for finances. 3. Being a Muggle, I'm not sure how merged the wizard finances are with children who have moved out and started working. So we cannot assume that Bill and Charlie contributed to the Weasley household once they started working. 4. Charlie was studying dragons. I'm assuming this was like a research job. Even with hazard pay, I don't think he was in the highest earning strata of the wizarding world. 5. Bill, arguably, had the most glamorous job in the Weasley family. He would be fairly well paid, I think, if the money Muggles pay to bankers is any indication. However, again, we don't know if Bill contributed to the Weasley household once he started workingEDIT - courtesy Clarissa Lohr - Arthur worked in the Misuse of Muggle Artifacts Office which is a part of the Magical Law Enforcement Department - his office was just a small part of the larger department and hence had only 2 people.

Did you ever wonder that maybe your favourite shows were produced not so much for your entertainment, but to condition you to think and feel certain ways about certain issues?

Never. There are societal myths that are embodied in entertainment as well as the American culture of violence. Football and hockey pit body armored and helmeted combatants against each other with resulting frequent serious injuries. People rise from their seats when fights break out. Some would argue it is a healthy outlet for our instincts but actually it reinforces our violent nature rather than " letting off steam".One odd myths is embodied in the heroic act of a team sent to rescue a few captives. Several are shot and some killed as a result and we think of the effort as a good choice and an honorable act. Another is the presentation of impeccably decorated residences of modest income people in TV shows. What you see is hardly consistent with what is affordable or with real life. It fosters unrealistic expectations.Entertainment or diversions distract us from the issues that truly matter. They encourage quick emotional reactions rather than taking the time for serious and rational consideration of issues. This is a bit off topic but, issues are created that purposely draw attention away from other ones. We see that daily from Trump and the GOP as the Special Counsel methodically and relentlessly "peals the onion".Oh, and various presentations where firearms are the final solution to problems. It perpetuates our gun ownership mentality. It not something new. The old Westerns did the same thing. Dirty Harry movies were an excellent example of the righteous lone vigilanty wielding a gun of absolute justice. "The Punisher" is another of the same ilk. I'm a flawed human so I'll readily admit to getting a jingle out of them myself.

Do you think Severus Snape was unworthy of love and kindness and deserved to live a miserable life and eventually die a gruesome death?

I’m not sure if this question is an opinion in disguise, or a call to arms for those who think Snape deserved that cruelty, or someone being curious.Anyway, no he didn’t deserve to be tortured to death. Everyone should be allowed the chance to find love in their life. I don’t think anyone DESERVES love (with the exception of minors, who should be entitled to the love and care of those who look after them) But I feel they should have the right to be allowed to seek out love for themselves.It’s incels who think they DESERVE sex. They deserve to ask someone if they would like to have sex with them, and if the person says yes, then cool. If no, then try another person. But they do not DESERVE sex itself. Unless the person is too young to consent.So nobody DESERVES ROMANTIC AND SEXUAL love itself. They deserve to have the freedom to seek those things, whilst respecting the freedom and consent related matters of the people they’re seeking those things with.Nor did he deserve to go through the neglect and emotional abuse he went through at home. Nor did he deserve the physical abuse and emotional abuse he went through at school.