Got a link for that "10 times higher for organic produce"? You made some good points like the celery juice bit, which I think most informed people were aware of, but you're sounding more like an industry shill than an informative contributor and posting AC doesn't help. Blowing off organic farming and even calling for "punishing" it is a bit extreme. It certainly is possible to focus on quality over quantity - ask anyone who grows there own tomatoes. Soil can become deficient in minerals and that transfers to the plants, making them less nutritious. Some people like to know what they're putting in their body. Certain pesticides may be safe at certain levels, but that information's not on the "label".

"insanely wasteful of natural resources and bad on the environment" - ??? Link? Looking more and more like a shill.

I live in the 6th district of Georgia. I have no way of verifying the claims you made against Abrams and you're making some damning claims with no evidence. But one this is clear; Kemp should have handed off oversight of the elections to a neutral party. This is simple and obvious ethics, which it seems Kemp lacks. Now that the race is so very close, Kemps decision to maintain control over the elections is clearly a horrendous conflict of interest. If this were election overseas, we'd call it a sham election.

Do your costs include all operational and decommissioning? A quick google search shows me this:

The levelized cost of nuclear power is relatively high compared to other energy sources: the minimum cost per megawatt hour to build a new nuclear plant is $97, compared to $49 for utility-scale solar, $48 for combined cycle gas, and $32 for wind.

Nuclear waste is a major issue precisely because Plutonium-239 has a half-life of 24,000 years. Please don't minimize actual issues. You're undermining your own argument.

Forgetting the past puts us all in peril. From the days of DR-DOS up through the OOXML sham, Microsoft consistently practiced anti-competitive behaviour, working towards vendor-lock in and maintaining that lock in. Only when they didn't have market dominance did they actually try to compete fairly. You're seeing a better behaved Microsoft today likely because they're way behind in the mobile market, they've lost web browser dominance, and they're trying to carve out a place in the "cloud"; they're having to compete. To assume their monopolistic ethos has been cast out is naive. If MS had gotten their way, you'd run Internet Explorer on all your devices because websites wouldn't work with any other browser. Windows Phones would work so much better than OS X and Android when interfacing with work-mandated apps (running Microsoft Apps), that they'd be the only "sensible" choice. Do you really think there's no serious Outlook competitors because Outlook is so good, no developers can design better? Remember Nokia? Why did MS create XPS instead of using the capable and industry standard PDF?

You're quick to belittle those who lived and worked through years of MS's anti-competitive actions. It's prudent to be suspicious of anyone or anything that has repeatedly misbehaved in the past.

BTW, your "tiny percentage" comment as well as your assumption that the same would be using a "non-mainstream" distro makes you sound like a MS fanboi. Maybe only a tiny percentage ever took notice and cared, but that's the nature of the industry (how many know what OOXML is?). I've used Ubuntu since it came out and to this day, having used Debian, RH, and others before.

"Similarly when you get that call out of the ordinary that you need to go somewhere now, when you need to charge first"

As an EV driver for 3 years, I've never found myself with less than 50% (100+) miles or range while in town. I have, with my previous gas car, been late because I forgot to fill up and had to stop. That said, a 100kW fast charge can add 16 kWh, or about 50 miles in 10 minutes. As to where we're going, 400 kW chargers are in the works - that's 200 miles in 10 minutes.

Again: https://texags.com/forums/16/t...

Yep. This is a copy-paste job: https://archive.4plebs.org/pol...

You think Trump understands or cares about the plight of the working man? He's never worked an honest day in his life. He looks down on the very people who support him, the "Dumb Southerners" (I'm from MS). He used them just like he has always used people. Everyone with an ounce of intelligence and honesty knew he was unfit for the office and the only reason to vote him in was to throw a giant middle finger to the federal government.

"huge pressure on the labor market and welfare system by lax immigration policies" - This is looking more and more staged. This is FUD talk, with no base in reality.

"cultural relativism and globalism" - Yep, more talking points. Your entire comment sounds like Heritage style propaganda.

"they don't know what's best for them by young people who have never experienced Britain before the EU" - And you do? So you're not even American and you're commenting on our elections? If that's the case, screw off.

virtue signaling - One of my pet peeves. I think it's just a code word to write off any effort to improve our plight with regards to global warming. Here's the fact of the matter. Global warming is the biggest threat humanity faces. Again, Global warming is the biggest threat humanity faces. You will accept this fact either now or later when you or your children are dealing with the consequences. Though not all methods will prove feasible, any attempt to prevent or reduce the impact of global warming should be supported, not chastised. In working against these efforts, you are a traitor to the human race.

These are people Trump brought in (the best people). How can they also be the "Deep State".

I'm a relatively private person, never drawn to social networking. If someone had described how Facebook would work and how wildly popular it would be, I would have little interest - I'd rather work on something technically interesting like distributed computing.

That said, Facebook, following MySpace, certainly appealed to some part of peoples' human nature. Facebook's popularity will fade, but human nature remains the same and some other service(s) will pick up these users. Though not technically interesting to people like myself, there is an enormous business opportunity for Facebook alternative and/or successors.

MySpace is the ultimate in nostalgic social media.

CO2 emissions per capita are far from meaningless. Resource requirements, including energy requirements, are based on population, so emissions per capita is a measure of how efficiently that energy is delivered.

If you get modded down, it's because you didn't explain why our emissions are down. Exactly what methods of ours should others follow? Our recent reduction is due primarily to a switch from coal to natural gas. Many countries don't have access to natural gas and it (methane) comes with its own issues and still contributes to global warming.

Reports like the ones your linked to are most often used as an excuse to do nothing. Ironic that you link to "Reason".com, when there is a major logical fallacy in the arguments based it. Namely, that joining the Paris Agreement is senseless since we were already reducing greenhouse gases beforehand.

And why do you think they're down? Maybe something to do with previous policies (which are currently being gutted)?