Just because conservatives tend to trust authority more than actual demonstrable facts doesn't mean that reporting those demonstrable facts is a "leftest interpretation of the world."

Thoughts and volcanos and prayers and DC8s.

So does the boy scouts program indoctrinate kids that they should harass, belittle, and ostracize homosexuals, or does BSA only do that in the real world?

And we do. That doesn't mean we can't also do activities that do require screens. It isn't a zero-sum game.

I honestly think that balance is key. No, your kid shouldn't be in front of a screen all day every day, and TV and games are never a substitute for parental attention. Kids need socialization, kinesthetic learning, etc. However, the AAP says my 15mo daughter shouldn't get any screen time except for video calls until she's 18mo. I think that's a bit too far. We DO spend a few minutes a day with some learning apps, usually 10min or less. Because of it, she's starting to associate letters with the sounds they make, and she's starting to differentiate different numbers and letters. For her age, that is absolutely awesome. We use endless academy, khan academy kids, and as stupid as it sounds, purina makes a "cat fishing" game for cats which is super simple but seems to be helping our daughter build hand-eye coordination. There are probably a ton more simple things that would be helpful. So, I believe some amount of purposeful screen time used well can definitely benefit even very young children. But it should never be the "only" thing.

You're forgetting one thing in your example - if foreign steel goes up to $120, that means there is now a massive run for domestic steel. That means domestic steel prices skyrocket due to demand - this is basic supply/demand curve stuff from economics class. So, the price will rise to that of the foreign steel, or even higher. So, if you make finished steel goods, no matter what, you pay a much higher price, and domestic companies get screwed.

Because the current administration is run by freaking morons. The tariffs are against raw steel imports, not finished steel goods. So that means that US based companies that take raw steel and turn it into finished products now have to pay a much higher amount for raw materials. If you cut off foreign raw steel, now the price of domestic raw steel skyrockets due to demand. That's basic economics. Either way, those domestic companies face massive increases in costs and a loss of most of their margin. Oh, and because the tariffs only focus on raw steel, they now have to compete against international companies importing finished steel products who don't have to face those same tariffs. It's basically a policy assembled by people who have no freaking clue how economics work. But what else do you expect from a guy who literally destroys everything he touches, supported by people who don't understand that macroeconomics and microeconomics aren't the same thing.

This is 100% true. My grandfather was a gunsmith. He showed me how you can use a rubber band, a nail, and an old car antenna to make a small calibre zip gun. Like you said, guns have been made from the 1300s. And almost every failure prone part has been engineered away and combined into a modern bullet (wadding, spark, gunpowder, projectile). At this point, most of what a gun does is hold a bullet in place so the primer can get hit by some kind of pin, and point the projectile and gasses somewhere.

Thoughts and prayers.

I wouldn't worry, given the current political climate in the US, our leadership has done everything it can to scare intelligent people away from our borders.

If you are going to pay someone 150k/year, do you want to bring them on board in a state where they are currently useless, and then have to spend 2-5 years training them to make them productive? What if you are looking for a candidate who is capable of being productive now if you are actively competing against another company?

US being a member state doesn't mean it actually controls the development. I can be a member of the NRA, that doesn't mean I control what it does.

Or, there are niches that you simply don't want to consider because it doesn't fit your narrative.

The company is established in the US in one sector, however continuing development in that sector exists outside the country. Several hundred billion in infrastructure are already established stateside. For example, a company like CenturyLink, Comcast, AT&T, or Level3 already has a massive footprint, and is well established. But, new development is most likely building off of standards orgs that are largely based in Europe. Do you really expect them to just close up shop in the US simply because most of the people who understand and develop those standards are found in Europe?

Telecommunications research and development. Most of the standards bodies involved are international - ITU, 3GPP, etc. So, if you need someone who is an expert on their specs they are rarely going to exist in the USA.