What college still has forced PE classes? I know my mom had one back in the 70s, but I haven't known anyone who had to take one in the past decade or two.
But they actually know and understand the curriculum. Besides which, professors at real universities aren't hired to teach, they're hired because of the research they've done. So yes, they have experience in research.
Sailing is practically free transportation. The adjustment of the sails can be automated so a single human operator can run the whole ship.
Failing to exploit this is simply stupid.
States someone who obviously has never set foot on a sailboat.
Sailing is akin to standing in a cold shower and ripping up hundred dollar bills.
I was born and raised next to the ocean. I grew up jigging for cod with my grandfather. My father taught sailing to the sea cadets. I've been on sailboats, worked on freighter ships. Numerous members of my family have owned boats of their own. I personally never had enough interest to actually buy one of my own, but I expect that will change over the coming decades.
But thanks for implying I don't know anything about what I'm talking about, asshole.
The basic premise, that it is an anomaly for us to come together into a common social space, is so ridiculous that I have to wonder what her agenda is for making such a blatantly false claim.
People came together from their community to the marketplace to socialize. People came together at church every single Sunday.
Beyond the reaches of the individual community, people of almost every faith used to come together for pilgrimage, allowing them to socialize with other members of their faith from far away places and become more worldly and less ignorant. This was considered a moral duty.
The point isn't to go where people who are your friends are, or to go to places where people who are into the same hobbies. The point is to grow as a human being by leaving your comfort zone.
The real anomaly is in the walls that keep us from knowing each other. It keeps us weak, powerless and under control.
Outside of the US, many cars run on a wide range of fuels (diesel, ethanol, kerosene, etc.). It's really only in the US that everyone buys cars that refuse to run except on auto-grade gasoline. Works well for the oil companies, eh?
I've seen some electric vehicles at traditional dealers, and the salespeople seem to want to sell them, and are happy to explain them. But they have a challenge that a broad product line with gas, hybrid and EV cars is complex to explain. And so far the EV cars from the traditional car companies don't seem to be as well done as the Tesla.
I suspect that part of the issue is that Tesla doesn't want to pay the huge markup, which would either inflate the car's price or wipe out Tesla's profits. Their model of taking orders and building custom cars for each buyer is much more efficient, because not only do you give each buyer exactly what they want, but you don't have a bunch of pre-built cars tying up capital. The only down-side is that you can't walk out with a car the day you walk in, though I'd think anyone spending that much money isn't doing so on impulse.
The law in NJ was written in other ways to keep Tesla out. For example, the "dealership" is required to have lots of square footage and an inventory of cars on-hand to sell. But Tesla's model is to custom build each car exactly to the buyer's specifications and delivery it to them, so they don't need or want to have an inventory of pre-built cars to sell since they won't be exactly what anyone wants (except by chance). At most they would want to have a car or two on the floor for people to look at and a car or two to test drive, but they wouldn't want to sell them.
Also stuff capable of reducing handfuls of a wide range of oxides to metals in a nice compact backyard form could leave a nice little crater if that energy is released in the wrong way. Hot hydrogen gas is probably one of the least dangerous on the list.
It appears that the education cuts under Reagan have worked with this one.
I would truly love to see some Libertarians create a precise quantitative model of how they think societies and economies work for the rest of us to examine and critique
By asking them to think in detail about their suggestions you are telling them to stop being Libertarians!
OK, so that's both cruel and not entirely accurate since the only thing the extremes of that bunch have in common is they like the word liberty - but it does apply to some of the more noisy ones.
Good point. Once music companies realized that new forms of distribution were important they started writing contracts more broadly even though they didn't know what would come along. There's an amusing story of one band who's contract licensed the music for distribution anywhere on Earth, so the band bounced their album off of the moon (laser at moon, re-digitized via telescope) to get out of the contract. Which worked, because the moon wasn't on Earth. So contracts started putting in crazy phrases like "distributed through any means, known or unknown, anywhere in the known or unknown Universe". Must have been a weird time to be a lawyer. That was all well before iTunes - the same sorts of issues came up every time there's a new format - when cassettes came out, and CDs, some old contracts had to be renegotiated. The trick with digital distribution was that there's no physical product, so the legal definition of a sale via iTunes has to be defined, and covering terms for "purchased", "rented" and "streamed", which all have different terms and pricing, none of which was in a contract from the 80s. So when I was in music ten years ago, digital distribution for pretty much every single album in the back catalog required clearance, requiring someone to track down the current rights holder and negotiate a new contract. This kept huge teams of people busy doing detective work, trying to figure out who had the rights to (for example) a jazz album from 60 years ago where the artist, agent, etc., are no longer living, or a band that split up and the legal status between the members was murky, etc. So it's only easy for the music labels to do digital distribution deals now because they spent over a decade chasing this sort of thing down and getting new contracts signed.