Why would we have a PM? We already have the Speaker of the House and the Senate Majority Leader. And the PM wouldn’t be able to exercise any executive powers unless you burned the constitution, because separation of powers.

There’s not really a good reason to adopt a parliamentary system like the UK’s for example if we were to completely reform the government imo. Or to have a PM separate from the president at all.

Do NOT use battery electric busses when you could use trolleybusses. Or even better, just use trams

That being said, anything is better than diesel busses

People bias their own experiences and wrongly assume that most people have similiar thoughts and feelings.

(Neuro)typical people and narcissists thinking everyone experiences life like them 🤝 people with an undiagnosed disability thinking typical people experience the same exact hardships they do and being self-deprecating over it

It worked for Turkey… until recently…

Actually the development of .50 cal and 13.2mm are completely unrelated, .50 cal wasn’t used for disabling tanks and development of a gun to use it (the Browning machine gun) wasn’t finished until WW1 ended.

All I need to know is that a bunch of the important people that wrote the New Testament were homophobic and sexist as FUCK and the New Testament took a lot from that

is it that difficult to look up the answer from a reliable source?

With the current state of search engines and their content (almost completely unrelated garbage and shitty blogs make in like 3 minutes with 1/4 of the content poorly copy-pasted out of context from stackoverflow and most of the rest being pop-ups and ads), YES

SEO ““engineers”” deserve the guillotine

Man Biden is really trying to lose the upcoming election isn’t he. A year ago I would not have predicted that he would fuck up such an easy reelection this badly, but here we are. Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory I guess.

Apparently Biden has always been this shitty when it comes to Palestine. Some things children just never grow out of it seems.

can i be moderately strong and gay but probably slightly closer to weak than strong because i wanna get fucked senseless by a strong protective man be a twink

not that i want that or anything

Idk man conservatives in recent history have a pretty consistent track record of assassinations and assassination attemps on liberal and leftist politicians in the US based on their politics. Tommy Burks was outright killed by his Republican opponent less than a month before the election (Burks was one of the most conservative Democrats at the time, but he was certainly killed by a lot more conservative Republican), Clementa Pinckney (targetted in a white supremacist shooting at a primarily black church that he was the pastor of), Gabby Giffords (shot in the head by an anti-government right-wing conspiracy theory consumer).

When Republican politicians are killed now, it’s pretty much only by personal enemies/drama that is unrelated to liberal or leftist politics, or by schizophrenic/criminally insane people who also weren’t doing it over politics. Like Linda Collins (her friend killed her after being confronted for stealing money), Mike McLelland (he was killed by a former lawyer who’s theft case he prosecuted). Hell, even Ronald Reagan was shot over an actress, not over the guy’s personal political views. Ironically, Republican John Roll was killed by the right-wing terrorist targetting Gabby Giffords, he was caught in the cross-fire. I don’t think there’s even an in-office conservative Republican politician that was assassinated by a Democratic rival this century, or even a single instance of a conservative Republican being assassinated by a liberal over politics recently.

I want you to think of how frequently you hear of terrorist attacks which were committed in the name of white supremacy, christian nationalism, dicrimination against LGBT, or some other far-right bullshit, and then think of how frequently you hear of terrorist attacks committed in the name of progressive beliefs like, oh idk universal healthcare and better public transport. it’s gotta be at least like a 20 to 1 ratio, and that’s me being conservative with the amount of conservative attacks.

So I take it you’re against the government subsidizing science research in general? “The government shouldn’t fund new technology” is a stupid and destructive position. We’d be living in the 1800s if it were up to solely the capitalistic market. I mean, the first broadly effective antibiotics that are responsible for saving probably hundreds of millions of lives at least only exist because of people working in government-funded labs, under government-funded universities, for the government. Why should the environment be treated like it doesn’t matter to our civilization?

“There is no future without electrification. But just electrification will not get us there,”

Daniel Posen is an associate professor in U of T’s department of civil and mineral engineering, and the Canada Research Chair in system-scale environmental impacts of energy and transport technologies. He agrees electrification is vital. But relying solely on electric vehicles to reduce carbon emissions from transportation may not be enough, especially if we want to do it in time to stop a catastrophic two-degree rise in global temperatures.

The article you link contradicts you, it clearly suggests that adoption of EVs reduce carbon emissions, but we still need to do more (e.g. ACTUALLY HAVE PUBLIC TRANSIT INFRASTRUCTURE) to prevent a climate catastrophe.

wiki.gg is where most of the wikis have transferred to, terraria for example

The code looks like any other Python code out there.

That’s more of the fault of Obama than Biden, although it is fair to partially blame his inaction since he was still in the admin. Appealing to Republ*cans and “they go low, we go high” has usually been how Democrats roll, but Biden has changed that attitude a decent amount in his presidency while still successfully driving some bipartisan successes.

A lot of the time it’s about being lucky enough be able to have or form connections with rich stupid people. Those kinds are a lot more willing to throw insane amounts of money at someone/some company they vaguely know to do things they know nothing of but hear a lot about.

Or just working at a company that’s well-known in the area and deals with clients very intimately while the product is being created.

Sometimes charging more for the same service makes them want it more, to them it means it’s premium programming (as opposed to the off-brand wish dot com programming). But sometimes they demand disgracefully cheap yet world-class service and throw a tantrum when they can’t pay you $5 an hour for a full rebranded recreation of the Amazon web service.

More like a symptom of a broken broad economic system. In all forms of capitalism, it is a given that much wealth accumulates in the few. It’s a system where resources are distributed based on capital, and capital is a resource, and it’s a system where those with more capital have more voting power both economy-wise and politics-wise. There is no such thing as a capitalist economy that has even wealth distribution long-term, it was quite plainly a system created for the sole purpose of keeping those with power in power – this isn’t an exaggeration, the guys who basically created/popularized modern capitalism and are the basis for all the writings and philosophy of the “founders of capitalism” were post-french revolution aristocrats who wished to push a system where they could keep their power instead of having it taken while also not having their heads chopped off.

Even with the best taxation capitalism can offer, there is no solution to the capitalist problem. It’s a system that requires there to be suffering underclasses and carefree upperclasses. It requires an immoral social hierarchy to exist. The systems that reduce the damage of this innately bad hierarchy while still maintaining it (welfare corporatism, for example) are incredibly unstable over the long-term and inevitably result in a populace that want to tear it down. The people who receive the most benefits from welfare & social safety in a capitalist society are often the ones that are the quickest to tear it down (them, and the elite) and guide us back to right-wing feudalism.

Billionaires might maybe go away if we “properly” tax, but there is only so much you can do to patch up a fundamentally broken system. The countries with the most wealth equality and highest wealth taxes also happen to be countries with a ton of megacorporations and/or billionaires… Switzerland, Scandinavian countries, Finland, Germany, Australia all have the highest wealth equality while all being on the top 15 for billionaires per capita excluding extremely small nations. Plus those countries have a tendency for alt-right movements to pop up, a few even more by proportion than the US…

TL;DR capitalism bad socialism good eat the rich

never thought of “poop os” but I think Pop!_OS is a stupid name, it’s the only reason I avoided it and chose Nobara instead lol

old

money 100

doubt

In Hungarian it comes from literally combining “ott” (there) + “honn”/“ház” (house/home). “itthon” is the same way except with “itt” (here).