I totally understand that (and Im sorry for your loss). But that objectively helps the guy who would not care at all (as opposed to at least trying to put a little bit of pressure) and actually encourage them to go for an even more radical “final solution”. Voting is always picking the least evil. The US system simply does not allow you a serious choice - it would be better to direct your anger against that system, instead of against the least evil of the real options.
deleted by creator
I’m pretty sure they’ll do increasingly farcical votes for some time after.
That’s a short but touching poem.
Electric cars do charge when braking. Obviously the energy recuperated is less then waht was needed to drive that fast in the first place. Using driving wind would just increase the energy needed to drive that speed and would be net negative.
NDA, not BJP, got 293 seats
Not really, many many more people are B12 insufficient than there are vegans/vegetarians. And much of what B12 you get is because supplements are given…to the animals. See e.g. https://baltimorepostexaminer.com/carnivores-need-vitamin-b12-supplements/2013/10/30
And here I am with 35 days, which we’re expected to take.
Preventable, but they still happened, even with the crazy security at plants. But what you’re saying is like “we’ve only had small earthquakes so far, so there are likely to be no big ones”. When it’s really absolutely the other way around.
The danger of nuclear isn’t so much on the daily stats of what actually went wrong, but in the tiny risk of having huge problems. The worst case scenario for a Chernobyl style disaster is actually losing huge parts of Europe. Even in well run plants, if enough things go wrong at the same time, it could still mean losing the nearest city. These “black swan” events are hard for humans to think clearly about, as we are not used to working with incredibly small chances (like deciding to plan for a 1000 year storm or not).
It makes little sense to vote third party in your current system. Electoral reform is needed to break the cycle. For example with proportional representation instead of winner takes all.
“Made unusable”: that’s not how it works. Even with occasional vandalism, there’s so much more people positively contributing, that overall the map just keeps on getting better and better.
It won’t, but at least you’re not part of the problem anymore. You might inspire other people to. And every person who goes plantbased makes it more politically viable to enact policies to encourage plant based over the most destructive other foods. Try to avoid discouraging people who try to do the right thing, help them make a bigger impact instead.
Didn’t they have 3% economic growth last year?
You do have direct control over fisheries as much as you do over straws. But indeed, don’t invalidate. Say “if you like X, you might also want to do Y which has an even greater impact”
Read till the end. About 50% on foot and 30% with public transport.
If you want to spend billions on encouraging cars over any other form of transport, sure. But with that kind of money, you can make some real change to public transport and cyclability
Third parties make little sense as long as you have a first passed the post system. Change to proportional representation and you’ll get more choice automatically.
I get the reasoning, but not a single country has ever been kicked out of the UN for having crazy/terrorist/genocidal leaders. So why should having a palatable government be a criterium to join? And anyway, I thought Hamas only controls Gaza. The West Bank is larger, and has a slightly larger population, and it is controlled by Fatah (AFAIK). So the seat would likely end up under Fatah control, no?
Do you really think there is no alternative? Isn’t it more a matter of making place for an alternative, and then it will turn up?