What difference does it make when they have a monopoly anyhow?

No, "the banks" are not going to write even bigger loans. These are federally administered loans, not from private banks.

You are ignoring interest. Congress gets to set the interest of federal student loans and it's historically been much higher than the cost of money for the federal government.

If you don't mind a slightly mushy, I mean *tender* product, "eat meati"'s carne asada is pretty good; I have't tried their "checken". "eat meati" is compressed mycellium (mushroom "roots").

(As an aside, stylizing your multi-word brand really makes sentences difficult to parse)

This among apps using a revenue tracking service. Those making $0 are unlikely to be in that cohort.

Not to mention the desertification, aquifer depletion and massive amounts of soil erosion in many parts of the world. Those may not take hundreds of thousands of years to recover, but meters of sod in the Great Plains won't reform without twenty years of intensive corn planting. California's Central Valley also isn't simply going to spring back several meters in elevation either...

Nobody is guaranteed profit.

The GP is referring to the events in Dealey Plaza.

Coal was just an example. Natural gas an petroleum are both replete with issues too.

Your unsubstantiated statements appear to be based on dated and/or flawed information. On the other hand, here are some studies showing that life-cycle emissions of PV are on the order of 50g/kWh, orders of magnitude less than coal:

• https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy13osti/56487.pdf
• https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338384189_Review_on_Life_Cycle_Assessment_of_Solar_Photovoltaic_Panels

GP appears to be alluding to externalities.

But your unsupported claims that solar are wind are more destructive are dubious. Certainly fossil fuels have enjoyed far more explicit subsidies and externalized costs. Do you have a reputable source pointing how production, use and disposal of PV and wind infrastructure exceeds, say the impact of mountaintop removal or strip mining for coal, the release of mercury from its combustion, creation of toxic coal ash ponds that spill into rivers, etc.? Not to mention all the side effects of emitting gigatons of carbon dioxide?

Plenty here are not happy that a reasonable project to reduce emissions and electricity rates was stymied for over twenty years by a few divas whining about some faint toothpicks on the horizon.

But there are rational reasons. While it's great that it helped you quit, it's also getting a lot of other people hooked. Vape pens may have been invented as a cessation device, but for many they are the scooter that seems safe and attractive... The only thing they have going for them is that it looks like few people move on to cigarettes from vaping.

Tom Nicholas just released the first in a three part series yesterday, "Why Everything is Addictive Now." It explores this and other favorite topics like enshittification and is worth a watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuTQbOo3Y30/

Doh, posted in wrong window. This was meant for the UK ban on disposal vapes.

Tom Nicholas just released the first in a three part series yesterday that explores this and other favorite topics like enshittification. It's worth a watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuTQbOo3Y30/