rassimmoc

I think this is good idea. I am not against combating climate change, but it can't come at the expanse of our economy. If you disagree stop using whatever device you are reading this on.

not sure I understand what you are trying to say witht regard to my comment

Not from US and not a lawyer, but for me it makes sense for 'speech' to include writing, signs, etc... But not money. I think it should only include what every person has same of as every other person. We all can communicate, write, display signs,.... But not everyone can donate millions/billions

what a nonsense.

Is 2nd amendment forcing anyone to make guns? Is US hiding population of enslaved workers that are forced to dig up metal, work it, make guns and sell them?

US has a lot of underground water, that is starting to run a bit low atm, but it's not like they are on desert world. The reason there is no political will to ensure access to water in US, is because its good way to make money, and any legal guarantees as to quality/safety of the water would unreasonably lower investors' return

Oh, I think GOP is nicely evolving US constitution with a little help from supreme court

guardrails, yea pedotrump pissed all over existing guardrails in this wc. and you want to sell him a piece of fifa :D

don't be naive. Never in the history of humanity did corrupt billionaire pedophiles do anything help the sport/fans/women/..... They want a piece to get the foot in the door. 10 years from now, we wont even recognise football anymore.

I don't care what american billionaires make with nhl/nfl/..., hands fucking off of football.

I am surprised that USAF selecting MRTT even got so far as to be made public. I would expect it would die in some draft document on someones office PC

You can't compare calculations in article with minimum wage.

Think of it this way, its like difference between median and average income. Larger inequality, larger the gap between median and average.

We want to make our own weapons because depending on someone else can be more costly. But some parties in UK do have worrying ties to Russia (reform uk and conservatives). I mean who would have thought that Republicans in US would be 3rd best allies of Putin, right after China and North Korea

1.those are not the only options, far from it. If EU buys from 3rd party, that party gets to dictate what we can do with those weapons. How long have EU countries been asking US to allow them to transfer F-16, longer ranged artillery, missiles, MBT,... to Ukraine? Also, lets remember that UK has prevented shipping vaccine manufactured there to 3rd countries, even when some other country paid for it already. EU did not do that.

2. Thank you for confirming our fears. We decide not to buy something for you and now you go full crybaby and deny Ukrain help. Yes, you guys sound like totally dependable.

3. It's not isolationist and we do want (or should want to) cooperate with you, but Eu has just learnt what happens if you outsource your own defense and US elects idiot for the 2nd time. And lets not forget that you have political party on the rise, (Reform UK), that seems to be a bit too friendly with Trump, Farage supposedly received money from RT (russ sponsored Tv) in 2022. One of your previous PMs (Boris Johnson) had appointed Russian oligarch as Lord and is said to have ditched his own security to party with Russian intelligence officers while he was in office. So, if eu and russia come to blows, whos side will UK be on? Depends on what party is in government.

>At the moment we're trying to give security backing for Ukraine and you're asking us to give up our fishing rights for the honour of helping secure Europe.

You are not trying to secure Europe, you are trying to sell something to Europe. We would rather build capacity to make whatever you want to sell us ourselfs.

I agree we should work closely together, more so after US started dancing naked around burning brides. But everyone is looking into how to secure themselfs, without depending on 3rd party, and from EU's perspective UK is on the outside (even if not as crazy as US has become).

I did not understand his post as 'all profit is waste', this is what he said: >>The amount of resources used to feed profit alone are a huge waste.

I believe that this can sometimes be true. For example, lets say that CEO want to raise profits by 20% by end of fiscal year and uses 50% more resources for that compared to current resource/profit use. This might be good idea for CEO, if his bonus is tied to profit, but for company it might be better to develop business that is going to bring more profit / resource spent a few years down the line.

I think both government and private sector have waste. It's just that reason for waste is different, and it doesn't make sense to compere them directly. Also, combating waste should be done differently in private vs public sector.