MentatOnMelange

If Elon Musks wants to help the US military, all he has to do is start paying taxes and compete for government contracts based on merit rather than gladhanding politicians.

Is this really a bad thing? It isn't a cost, this is an extra billion dollars in revenue for hospitals.

This means the hospitals can hire more doctors/nurses, expand their hours, buy new medical devices, etc etc. Unlike when insurers use AI to deny coverage, which wastes the time of patients and hospital staff dealing with endless, needless busywork appealing.

I recently figured out buying a pack of gum at the closest grocery store and using cash-back at the register is actually a cheaper way to get cash than the ATM outside the store charging $3 for a withdrawal.

I dare anyone to tell me with a straight face that this is a well-run, efficient system we have going. Profit-seeking in capitalism is meant to incentivize new ideas and greater efficiency. Currently though its mostly incentivizing throwing a wrench in any solution that leads to less profit. The tail is wagging the dog.

Thats my point, the law has not caught up to new forms of gambling. The fact its legal to bet on whether another human being will live or die is not due to society condoning it. It's because when laws against such barbaric practices were implemented, nobody imagined they'd need to worry about people gambling on bad things happening to other human beings.

This is in part how creating laws is supposed to work. You legislate things when either something bad is happening or is likely to begin happening soon. When something new is comparable to existing unethical practices, the fact we have to update the laws is not an excuse for it being legal. Its just that the alternative is making laws based on whims or conjecture of what might happen.

Just because gambling in general is legal doesn't mean every possible gambling event is legal. If someone got caught hosting a dog fight, they don't get off the hook because gambling is legal. I can't think of a single reason why such laws against unethical or violent gambling shouldn't extend to human suffering as well.

You realize that without the door it would be even more obvious whether the stall is occupied?

I agree completely, the game would get boring if things didn't constantly change. It was more-so the way they'd go about it, not the general sales strategy. Perhaps I should have said overpowered, typically they'd intentionally overcorrect so a unit would go from too weak to way too strong.

It didn't help they had 2 very different philosophies in the creative/design department. For example if an army was getting a revamp, competitive players would pray Gav Thorpe wasn't in charge of it. Whereas other people loved how he made the game more fun and goofy.

I used to play warhammer when I was younger and am honestly astounded gamesworkshop is still in business let alone one of Britain's biggest companies. At least in the 00s and 2010s, they were the epitome of a greedy corporation squeezing blood from a stone.

Sales were down? Increase the prices of everything. Something not selling well? Change the game rules to make that it more powerful (or conversely, hype it up constantly so people only realize it sucks after they buy it). And of course constant changes so it was likely any models you bought would eventually become uncompetitive due to new, flashier, more overpowered things released.

Basically every bad business practice we see now was Games Workshop's wheelhouse. And while this may come across as bashing on them, I'm psyched to hear the company is thriving because their games are immensely fun and its impressive they've avoided stagnating or run out of ideas. It gives me hope for the software industry because if an in-person, expensive niche hobby could survive through social media and the pandemic, tech can bounce back from the current enshitification and short-term profit seeking.

If you have the money and enjoy lots of lore/worldbuilding and complex strategy games, Warhammer is a fantastic hobby I'd recommend checking out

When Biden tried to forgive everyone's student debt, the supreme court ruled it exceeded his constitutional power.

So how on earth could the government legally garnish peoples wages for private debt?

Imagine how much better things would be if we did have that discussion. Lets not make the same mistake twice

We had the capability to capture Iraq and Afghanistan too. Occupying a territory is the actual hard point. For one, Greenland is in the middle of nowhere compared to everywhere else the US has to keep eyes on, whereas its in the back yard of Canada and the UK.

More importantly though, its an incredibly cold and unhospitable place thats inhabited by 50k people whose little kids have more arctic survival skills than US special forces and who really, really don't want us there. Unlike Afghanistan, you can't patrol the skies nonstop with drones either due to the cold.

Basically, this isn't a choice between owning Greenland or keeping all our allies. Its a choice between keeping all our allies vs getting bogged down into the ultimate guerilla war and suddenly having nothing but hostile neighbors to the north.

I don't think you can capture a >800k square mile island in the same way you can kidnap a dictator.

Wouldn't they just burn down again?.. if this were any other properties besides high-priced real estate, people would be up in arms at the thought of government prioritizing rebuilding homes in wildfire zones.