TheDoozer

You're focusing too much on the "rights" and not enough on the "Mah." Not "Our rights."

It was never about universal rights. They were pretty clear about them caring specifically and only about their rights.

90s Dominos was trash. Even Dominos recognized old Dominos was trash.

Thank you for this. It seems more in keeping with the original idea of the US, a federation of states.

Can you give some examples of how that works? Like, who pays for roads, who handles environmental regulations (or are there any), who establishes education standards (or are there any), etc. I'm not trying to argue, it just seems like on the internet people referring to "state authoritarianism" and "central government tyranny" ranges from "adults can't be transgender" to "I have to pay taxes and the government won't let me own slaves."

So, like... a cheesecake recipe?

I have had a number of conversations with relatively reasonable conservatives, where I've brought up the dangers of so many jobs moving toward automation with no additional job creation. And steering the conversation carefully, I got them to at least consider the idea of UBI funded by taxing any and all automation. I also got them (with the "everybody should have to work, people shouldn't get life handed to them for free" mentality) to agree that the rise in automation should mean people working less hours each, so everyone still has jobs (basically, UBI and changing "full time" to 25 or 30 hours, where people get overtime past that... creating more jobs while peoples needs are still covered).

It's amazing, sometimes, how starting with some similar premises (people should have to work, which I mostly agree with) and shared threat (automation taking jobs) can lead to some more open minds for things that they would otherwise be adamantly against.

When you multiply the productivity of every practitioner of a trade, they can lower their prices.

I'm sorry, but that's some hilarious Ayn Rand thinking. Prices didn't go down in grocery stores that added self-checkout, they just made more profit. Companies these days are perfectly comfortable keeping the price the same (or raising them) and just cutting their overhead.

Don't get me wrong, if there are things they could get more profit by selling more, then they likely would. But I think those items are few and far between. Everything else they just make more money with less workers.

Welp... looks like I gotta buy a Switch2.

Technically an amendment to the constitution, the third section of the 14th amendment, that nobody who has engaged or helped an insurrection can hold office in the government or military (except with a 2/3 majority of congress).

Yeah, there was already established law to prevent him from running for president. It got ignored. He ran anyway. He won anyway. He became president anyway.

Any of these legal mechanisms only work if they are upheld.

I had understood it to be even worse:

The sacrifices at the temple were expected to be pretty much perfect, and had to be found acceptable by the temple priests. So the merchants would get "pre-blessed" sacrifices that they would sell at exorbitant prices to the pilgrims, who would have the sacrifices they brought deemed "inadequate" by the priests.

So if you brought an animal sacrifice, you'd still have to buy another (costly) animal. If you brought money, you'd be forced to exchange it at a significant loss.

The whole thing was an obvious scam, and Jesus was killed over it (and the rest of his message). I don't believe he was God Incarnate, but I'm still a big fan of Jesus the man.

I'm pretty confident that all would have gone about the same way in this era.

I think you're missing the point. Personally, when I watch those movies, I think about whether the guard who just got turned into a parapalegic was just an ex-military guy who picked up a security job. For that matter, I wonder about how many people joined the German military in 1932, with no idea what their country would become. They still had to be fought through to affect the leader. Yes, any given grunt, any given infantry, is hurt considerably more than the big fish, but the way of the world is that a lot of little fish must suffer before the big fish feels it.

Not every big fish can be luigi-ed. Some have a security detail.