I'm not saying this is the "right" or "best" solution, but...
I taught my son to punch hard and aim for the nose: "if you miss, you'll get his mouth or cheek or eye and it'll still hurt". I also explained that if the bully hit, slapped, tripped, or otherwise battered him, that my son was to lay him out. "What if I get in trouble?", he asked. "You let me handle that part", I replied. We had to play-act it a few times because my boy kept wanting to say something first, like "if you touch me again I'll hit you in the nose!" No. You've already warned him before and he kept it up. Don't talk: act.
Cut to a week later when the teacher was waiting for me when I went to get my son from school. "He hit another kid today." "Was it so-and-so?" "Yes." "Good. I told him to." The teacher looked around, leaned in and confessed: "someone needed to belt that little asshole."
The bullying ended that day. My boy stopped coming home with torn clothes, scratches, and bruises. My son got an enormous confidence boost and hasn't had a problem with other little thugs since then.
Violence is not the solution to all problems, but damned if it can't fix some.
"Live free or die"
It's amazing to me that people still act as if it is OK to treat the slaves so gently, like they were children. They, the Indians, and the poor white farmers were the only ones who actually knew how to live off of the land.
And once again, the Southern economy ended up collapsing anyway as a result of the war. At the time the South left the union, the thought of a sudden freeing of the slaves was unthinkable even to the vast majority of Northerners.
We're on the verge of totalitarianism in NZ, and have been for a few years. Call back when we get the current bunch of neoliberal rent-seeking thugs out on their behinds. Hopefully we won't just replace them with a kinder, gentler bunch of neoliberals who love the Deep State as much as the present crew.
You don't just ban it, you migrate away from it while providing solutions to the massive hole left in the labour sector.
No, you ban it. The people that then lose their ill-gotten plantations can go pick cotton. They can consider themselves lucky that they aren't punished more directly.
The north had just spent a whole lot of money on other conflicts, and needed the resources.
The north even had slavery at an earlier point in history. Plenty of blame for slavery all around.
But the Civil War still boils down to slavery.
Again, I agree - but it doesn't make it any more moral to keep piling debt up for our children. The debt is a bigger travesty than overtaxing.
screw over the south economically
By "taking away their property"? Please...
Provide an economical way for the cotton fields to be harvested
There was no moral duty to prop up a fundamentally corrupt way of exploiting people.
While there is officially no slavery
Unless you are talking about the sex trade, there is nothing even close to approaching what was happening in the US South in the 1850s.
Slavery may not have been the direct reason cited for Southern succession, but it was most definitely the cause. Remove slavery and you have no motivation for any of the other stuff. Slavery was a major political football at the time, forcing even the admission of new states to be forced around the issue. Succession only became a real possibility once it became clear that free states would dominate the slave states politically. The South certainly had other grievances, but even collectively they don't add up to succession.
People are exactly the same as they were 150 years ago. I imagine the exact same thing would happen: Texas would declare itself independent. There would be a thorny issue of a bunch of federal property still in Texas. For a short time, there would be an uneasy peace as the Texans tolerated US forces within their borders. Eventually, someone would do something aggressive and you would have war.
I have to agree. I tend to fall on the "reduce spending" side of things - but top priority should be balancing the damn books.
Nonaya eggheads is gonna last through the zombies, man.
I think the article is firmly tongue in cheek. There is no practical use here, but it is a fun way to teach some fundamentals of geometry and statistics.
Each time I watch a two-hour movie on the 6W device, it uses around 43 kJ. On the 120W device a two-hour movie uses 864 kJ - a delta of 821 kJ per movie. Given the 2000MJ number you provide, that's over 2400 2-hour movies until break-even... might be my lifetime total.
A list is only as strong as its weakest link. -- Don Knuth