pusher_robot
PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS
No bio...
User ID: 278
They don't want a monoculture so much as they don't want to be forced to look at posts by Ted Cruz
Was Singal Cruz-posting? I don't get the connection.
The time wasn't right because there were too many useless coins.
There's already a perfectly good dollar coin, the Presidental Dollar. I say keep that along with the quarter, eliminate the $1 bill and move Washington permanently to the dollar coin, and cycle through all the presidents on the quarter. Replace the half-dollar coin with a $5 coin, and put Lincoln on it. That would leave us with three useful coins. (Note the current iteration of the quarter, in 1932, was worth over $5 in inflation-adjusted dollars, so this is not a ridiculous value for a coin). Keep the $5 bill but add a $500 bill, and put JP Morgan on it.
America is really down bad if that's where people's standard is
It is indeed, no lol. This is what it now takes just to see that the law is enforced. For decades, we've waited for another option, and tried many, and nothing has worked. Things will continue to get more extreme until either the law is actually enforced or America rips itself apart.
That just completely cedes the media ground to opposition agitprop.
The gravity of the incident was not about the twitter comments but the media coverage, which was both defamatory and inflamatory.
I disagree, it's simply looking at the tradeoffs of enforcement within certain contexts. If the harm of enforcement within a certain context would be greater than the benefits, that doesn't invalidate enforcement everywhere.
Yes - there is supermajority support essentially everywhere for curtailing abuse of the humanitarian and family-based routes to immigrate to first-world countries, based on the accurate belief that the people who get in that way are, on average, bad neighbours. We should do so.
And yet, it doesn't happen. Curious!
They could win me over by actually delivering the public works improvements they campaign on and use to justify tax increases. When they can't or won't, the choice between simply not getting the improvements and getting taxed a bunch of money and still not getting improvements seems obvious. If Democrats in California had actually delivered a well-performing high-speed railroad by now, on time and on budget, I would probably be pretty stoked about voting for that on a national level. But they failed, and in a way that made it seem like they didn't even care whether they succeeded or not.
- Prev
- Next
Yes, that's a huge difference, mostly because the stock is only worth anything if the CEO does a good job of running the company. This can cause problems as well, such as CEO taking measures to juice short term sugars process at the expense of long term corporate health, but is a standard way to align incentives.
Tesla is also a special case because the CEO is also the principal founder and largest shareholder by a considerable margin, so it is to be expected that his interests and the company's will align.
More options
Context Copy link