Amazing how putting this on the front of your list just discredited your entire post instantly. Public labor unions are a particularly nasty parasite. The union in question, the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Union got overly greedy and demonstrated an epic level of hubris.

The results were not so good. Not only did they get burned permanently (the strikers weren't only fired, but banned permanently from employment with the Federal government), but they also set back all labor unions by swinging public opinion massively against labor unions in general.

Well, there's not much evidence that they got out dead either. It's not like anyone's counted the bodies to make sure we got everyone.

If it's not bending metal, it's not pretty thorough. And a big problem with the study that you mention is that it is written by people with a huge conflict of interest to present solar and wind power as being sufficiently reliable that they can drive most of an electric grid without a lot of expensive infrastructure like energy storage and transmission.

I thought we would need storage permanently in a situation where we're relying heavily (80%) on variable sources of power.

The "smart grid" just throws the cost of energy storage and brown outs (when supply can't meet demand) onto the end user.

So we make it more efficient to buy a lawnmower at 3am by making it a moral wrong? I'm not seeing the connection here.

Executive orders are merely relatively formal written orders from the person in charge of the executive branch, the US President. If you do away with executive orders then no one is in charge and the only meager control you have is via Congress's power of the purse.

Where's the evidence? If the Greys land in front of the White House in a flying saucer and ask to be taken to our leader, then I would allow that there's something to this UFO stuff. Who knows? You might too.

It doesn't seem that way to me. I think a lot of people here on Slashdot have figured out the life-work balance that's good for them in their current situation. Maybe we could do an "Ask Slashdot" thing here.

You know I'm not speaking of UFOs in the literal definition, but of the social phenomenon. And who knows, there may actually be aliens, humans from the future, beings from alternate dimensions, or whatever. That doesn't mean much since we don't have actual evidence of these guys, but rather a huge load of hysterical tales and remarkably poor and often doctored photographic evidence.

So what about that "gets" you? Supernatural by definition needs not be observable. What gets me are the natural conclusions supposedly justified by this supernatural being, like that God considers homosexual behavior to be a sin (not to mention the concept of sin in the first place) or that humanity can continue to multiply exponentially because God will end the game before too many people become a serious problem.

I doubt it. For example, there's UFOs and New Age crystal healing.

Any reason why shopping for a lawnmower at 3am somehow is a moral quandary? What is so magical about that time that we should keep people from shopping for lawnmowers?

Real life is way ahead of you. The reason most workers don't have "work-life balance" is because they don't want it as much as they want other things.

Something has to keep those shops open to provide us with valuable services. "Out of the goodness of their hearts" doesn't work.

And I make it a point of not having my code of morality decree when a shop should be open.

My original comment referred to war between the Soviet Union and the US. I didn't say Russia.

But it was not a formalized declared "shooting war" in which Americans explicitly targeted Soviets and Soviets explicitly targeted Americans. What we saw were undeclared skirmishes. There was no fanning of Soviet public opinion that Americans were killing thousands of Soviets and that Soviet citizens had to enlist to revenge those killings. If Americans were explicitly and publically killing Russians today (or the reverse), it would be the beginning of World War III. Any policy that puts us unnecessarily close to such an incident is reckless.