Not really. It was ok but not great pizza.

I lived above a pizza shop at one point. Was not an issue.

In my state (Idaho) it’s because a good number of the legislators are landlords.

They don’t give a fuck that half their apartments are Airbnbs, they prefer it that way.

https://theconversation.com/nras-path-to-recovery-from-financial-woes-leaves-the-gun-group-vulnerable-to-new-problems-201144

Looks like the bankruptcy was killed. But yeah, the NRA has been bleeding members and is spending it’s money on legal flights. They are in a pretty bad state

2A absolutism is a recent invention in modern politics started by the NRA. Restrictions on guns and gun ownership have been in the law books since pretty close to the founding.

There are already restrictions on who can own guns and what guns can be purchased by the public.

When I say 2A insanity, I’m talking about Republicans blocking all common sense gun legislation. I don’t think that will stay forever. I don’t believe a repeal of 2A needs to happen to make things significantly better. You could, for example, make it illegal to sell/own guns under 30. You could ban magazines. You could limit the caliber of bullets sold. You could make gun manufacturers civilly liable for the advertisements they put out.

Before even addressing if 2A is a good amendment (it isn’t) we can do all this

I sort of wonder how much longer 2A idiocy will last in the US. The NRA has gone bankrupt and since they aren’t able to funnel Russian money to politicians like they used to be able to, their influence is basically zero at this point.

With them out of the picture, there’s really not a powerful gun lobby getting right wing media to talk about Democrats as gun grabbers.

If you peruse conservative spaces like I do, you’ll notice that talking point has evaporated.

Israel and its supporters did a GREAT job of linking anti-israel sentiment to antisemitism. That alone made reporting of its messed up actions and history taboo. Certainly does not help that neonazis are also frequently anti-israel.

But… Shit… I mean Israel was founded on white jewish supremacy. Real hard to have a state founded on racial supremacy not turn into a fucking nightmare.

It’s ok, just think of all the 4 year old hamas terrorists they killed!

Ad hominem: check.

Don’t expect any rational choices here.

Perhaps don’t cry about rationality if all you have in your brain is logical fallacies.

Here’s a quote from the site you cherry picked

Some people may choose to go vegan, for some it may be because they do not believe in farmed animal practices and animal exploitation, for others it may be due to environmental concerns. Whatever the reason The Vegan Society is here to support everyone on their vegan journey.

Gee, looks like the vegan society also recognizes some people become vegan because of climate change… Or maybe you are going to redefine more terms so you can win your argument.

Or maybe you are pulling a definition not commonly accepted by the community or English speakers. No, that can’t be right, you are obviously smarter than I am. After all, you are a rational person that’d never engage in strawman attacks.

Got it, so you are emotionally defining veganism in such a way that you aren’t actually vegan if you don’t get there for emotional reasons.

If that’s your definition of veganism then of course nobody can get there with reason. You’ve created a tautology with your emotion filled definition.

For the record, veganism is defined by MW as

: a strict vegetarian who consumes no food (such as meat, eggs, or dairy products) that comes from animals

also : one who abstains from using animal products (such as leather)

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vegan

That was the definition I was operating under. Sorry I didn’t Intuit your arbitrary definition you pulled from “eat meat.com” or whatever you got it.

Meat production is a prime contributor to climate change. Large amounts of resources go into raising meat. Further, cattle and pig production (not so much chicken) is the prime pathway to food contamination. Whenever you see lettuce recalls because of e. coli, that’s because animal shit got mixed in with the lettuce or the water for the lettuce.

Choosing not to eat meat because of these facts seems like a pretty rational choice, no emotion involved.

Why so many? Its resolution is 16000 x 16000 which is a lot but also not that much. Is it doing more than just video output?

It does not work like that.

The problem with such statements is the energy costs are nowhere near fixed. The amount of energy needed to play a song on my iPod shuffle through a wired headset is wildly different from the power needed to play that same song on my TV through my home theater equipment.

The same is true on the backend. The amount of power Google spends serving up a wildly popular band is way less than what they burn serving up an unknown Indy band’s video. That’s because the popular band’s music will have been pre-optimized by Google to save on bandwidth and computing resources. When something is popular, it’s in their best interests to reduce the computational costs (ie power consumption) associated with serving that content.

And look, their charities are even helping the children! Their own, but think of the children!

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/10/us/elon-musk-charity.html#:~:text=Musk’s philanthropy has been haphazard,the largest in the country.

No, no, no, the CEO runs the charity free of charge. That allows the charity to pay for their flights to the Caribbean and it rents the CEO’s yacht there (at a discount of course) so the CEO can charitably give a talk about how being poor sucks to potential donors. Of course the charity needs to pay for fuel and food, that’s only fair for the value given by the wonderful presentation given by the CEO.

This of course is all done tax free. After all, we wouldn’t want to bankrupt these valuable charities.

Not a hypothetical… Here’s the Clinton foundation building a luxury hotel in Haiti… You know… For the aid workers or whatever.

https://www.cnn.com/2011/11/28/world/americas/haiti-hotel-clinton/index.html

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/11/haiti-and-the-failed-promise-of-us-aid

It’s about stopping centralized programs which would actually address public needs. “We don’t need universal healthcare, here’s a charity that helps people with the bubonic plague!”

And in the worst cases, it’s a grift for the wealthy. Where the charities exist to do scammy things like pay the founder to fly to luxury resorts to give a talk about why poverty is bad. Or to fund your family members solar manufacturing company. Or to put fuel into your church’s private jet so you don’t run the risk of catching demons from the public.

6. They lobby against government aid programs and increased taxes because “look, see, we are help the poors, no need for the government to get involved!”

The cost has already been paid. Even small farming communities have rail line access that’s mostly been abandoned because the line owners switched business models.

As for flexibility, again, that’s mostly an issue with how rail line management has evolved. From shorter more frequent trains to ultra long infrequent trains. Mostly to cut the cost of staffing.

The solution is simple, nationalize the rail service. Put it under the USPS and have them figure out scheduling to optimize the speed of goods shipping.

The current state of the rail system is entirely due to the monopolistic nature of ownership. The incentive is to increase prices as much as possible while shipping to the fewest stops possible. Profit motives are in direct conflict with generalized shipping.

The reason trunking works today is the public nature of roads. Well, why shouldn’t rail lines be equally public? We practically gave the property away to the current rail owners with the notion it was for the public good… They’ve failed that.