so they could pay less taxes and due to a grievance about parliamentary representation

They did primarily because they wanted to expand their settler colonies further into native lands while the British government had tried restricting settler expansion.

The “free state” was never about preventing oppression of the citizens or launching an insurrection against the state. I don’t know where this bizzare view comes from, since the constitution literally defines treason against the state to be punishable by death.

I think that colleges will respond to this crisis by focusing entirely on exams, and reducing the weighting of practical assignments, which would be a huge loss.

China/communism can’t fucking win, with these crakkkers.

Life becomes so much better when you stop caring about what these people think

I’ve never heard of those before o_o

I don’t think of calcium batteries. I’m not a battery engineer T_T

I’ve seen debates on the gravity batteries before, and while they certainly work, I doubt they will really displace significant amounts of lithium battery usage. For one, sodium batteries are already a thing and much more likely to replace lithium. The biggest drawback with sodium batteries (lower energy density) is not a problem for grid applications.

Even more importantly, with how fast the industry is growing, by the time new solutions are scaled up for mass adoption, large amounts of new lithium battery storage will have been installed already. Although installing 25 MW of new battery capacity with one project is nice, we need 1300 ish GW of new batter power capacity by 2030 to support enough renewable generation. It will take a lot of projects, very large projects to fill significant amounts of that capacity with gravity storage.

Of course, that’s not to undermine the fact that this is definitely a step in the right direction.

What is even the point of doing planned obsolescence with satelites of all things? It’s not like a smartphone that you want customers to keep buying.

I’m not being a purist. I don’t mind when when reactionary sources (like John Mearshimer or western media outlets for example) are linked, because they can have useful information or analysis. But some sources are so reactionary that the toxic association becomes a liability.

As for sharing this source, I haven’t found someone (from an ML or leftist) that links the US govt with this issue, but if you do, please share it.

Unfortunately, I keep only finding highly reactionary sources for these claims. I’ll have to look some other time

deleted by creator

Guys, can we make sure to properly vet our sources before posting them? Is this guy nuttier than a PB&J sandwich the only one talking about these abuses?

Not only is this article unshareable, reading praises of republicans on their immigration policy is just cringy, especially as a non-white.

Lol even funnier

I don’t know why you are being so obtuse. Aparantly, you can only be called an ally of america if you are being paraded around Washington or something.

Americans providing weapons and training doesn’t count, because the structure for providing this isn’t to your standards.

We’re currently more of a “global power” then they are.

There’s a reason why the peace talks for Ukraine are between the US and Russia and the EU isn’t invited. Nobody takes Europe seriously anymore. The only thing resembling global power that Europeans have is their remaining colonies.

My God the failed novelism is really strong in this one. Article takes so long to get to the rucking point and meanders about stupid nonsense.

particularly in the age of Donald Trump?

Tf does this mean and what does it have to do with aircraft carriers.

In the absence of wars to fight, US carrier groups spend much of their time doing this, learning how to operate together with allied navies.

Didn’t you guys recently use a carrier group to help Israel commit a genocide? Or was that a different class of warships?

This one was smaller, but was the first in the Pacific involving a French carrier for more than 40 years.

French warships (and ships from 18 other countries) encircling China in the Pacific is what these people consider as a defensive alliance.

the one of Trump with its now familiar pugilistic glower.

smh. What I mean by failed novelism.

Downsize these carriers, to carry only helicopters or planes which can land and take off vertically as many countries have done, and you end up with vessels which are even more vulnerable.

Completely besides the point. In war, more important than having weapons that can’t be destroyed (they certainly can be) os having weapons that you can afford to have destroyed.

If it only takes a few lucky shots to disable almost 10% of your power projection at a time, and your opponent can take hundreds, thousands of shots, you are absolutely cooked.

Three new Ford-class nuclear carriers, the next generation after the Carl Vinson, are currently under construction, although two will not be in service until the next decade. The plan is to complete ten of this new class of carrier

Great plan. I’m sure you will complete these ships in time for your war against China.

I wouldn’t mind losing my job to something this cute

At this rate, the Chinese are just dunking on us.

If we are talking about an industrialized country, then absolutely, farmers need to be taxed just like everybody else. Farmer subsidies leads to overproduction of food, much of which is then intentionally destroyed (by the farmers, or supermarkets) to keep prices high. If you think that the elimination of farmer subsidies will lead to higher food prices and thus hunger, do note that it is possible to redirect subsidies into food allowances for the poor. For instance, the US spends about $14 billion per year in agriculture subsidies (barring covid, during which subsidies jumped to above $40 billion). On the other hand, for the entire world, the cost of eliminating (or drastically reducing) hunger can be as low as $7 billion per year depending on the approach.

And this isn’t even the radical solution. The actually radical solution for eliminating the food problem entirely would be to nationalize the agriculture industry and switch the whole country to a vegetarian diet. If we do this in the entire industrialized world, and fund aggressive hunger elimination programs, then the question of food instability, even taking climate change into account is solved.

To put it in computer science terms, you are mistakenly believing that your “greedy algorithm” of harm reducing (seeking the best option at this time step) will lead to the global optimum (the best possible outcome at the end).

“Harm reduction” is what got us to this place is why I have a problem with it. This is the inevitable result of lesser eviling your way through politics.

If you guys weren’t so gung ho on supporting the dems no matter what, and forced them to do some good for once, Trump wouldn’t have been elected the first time much less the second one.

The only reason the Democrats are willing to spill so much blood is because they know people like you will defend them.

Both parties are bad but one is clearly less bad by a mile.

This is irrelevant and falls into great man theory. The US government has 23 million employees and is a massive sprawling system with its own dynamics. It reacts to world events based on these dynamics. The US government is not controlled by this or that party, or the elections. It is not designed for such democratic input since it was designed as a dictatorship of property owners. In its early days, this was quite literally explicit, but even to this day, the iron grip of the bourgeoise is maintained on government strategy.

I’m allowed to have an opinion on the trolley problem while also acknowledging it’s one of the most famous problems in philosophy precisely because so few people agree.

The trolley problem is garbage nonsense, and applies to basically no real world situations. The trolley problem is only famous because it’s easy to think about, not because it is philosophically sophisticated. In the real world, there are an monumental number of possible paths that can be taken, each with outcomes that cannot be exactly predicted in advance. The trolley problem only works in real life if you are basically God.