You do not appear to understand what a republic or a democracy is, so I'll ignore the last sentence.
"Independent" does not mean unaccountable to the people. The President is independent of Congress, and vice versa, but both are accountable to the people. Well, the current president doesn't seem to think so, but legally he is.
The civil service is not a part of the executive but is a co-equal branch.
You are correct. In principle, presidents have no authority whatsoever to dictate how an agency runs. The executive branch should have zero authority over the civil service, which is intended to constitute a fourth co-equal branch of government.
In the US, in principle, the status of the civil service as co-equal to, and independent of, the executive should be added to the Constitution and enshrined in law for good measure. Not that that would help much with the current SCOTUS, but a Constitutional change might possibly persuade the current government that absolute authoritatian control is not as popular as Trump thinks.
That is the idea that, in Britain, entities like the NHS and the BBC have operated under. Charters specify the responsibilties and duties, and guarantee the funding needed to provide these, but the organisation is (supposed) to carry these out wholly independently of the government of the day.
It actually worked quite well for some time, but has been under increasing pressure and subject to increasing government sabotage over the past 20-25 years.
It's also the idea behind science/engineering research funding bodies the world over. These should direct funding for grant proposals not on political whim or popularity but on the basis of what is actually needed. Again, though, it does get sabotaged a fair bit.
Exactly how you'd mitigate this is unclear, many governments have - after all - the leading talent in manipulation, corruption, and kickbacks. But presumably, strategies can be devised to weaken political influence.
Yes but have you considered that without this system poor people won't be able to get mcdonalds delivered to their door?
So it's a plan with no drawbacks?
I do recognize that this is an issue for the disabled, but it's unsustainable for them as well, and I reject temporary solutions that aren't backed up by permanent ones. If the plan is only to kick the can and wish for a miracle, it's a bad plan.
ICEs still have a 23 to 1 energy density than Li
That's not even wrong, it's just not how anything works. You're comparing a motor to an energy storage mechanism and also ignoring efficiency at the same time.
most of the new car buyers cannot calculate TCO and they care only about purchase price.
Monthly payments matter. Also when people are poor and can't afford big payments and the vehicles are very expensive then they wind up spending a lot in interest. TCO matters but so does monthly cost.
I think the USA & EU should start developing hybrids
They have existed for decades. What did you actually mean to say?
No military of consequence is going to shift to purely electric vehicles any time soon because of refueling times alone, but in number of roles an EV has an advantage because it's quiet and reliable. If you can deliver a tanker truck, then you can deliver a generator.
For which we pay with much lower take home pay, hilarious queues for doctor in most places
Most of my coworkers have to go out of county for even fairly basic medical care because there isn't anything available here and wait times can be into the months. I had referrals for over a year that I never even got a call back on. It's not clear why you think that the USA has functional medical care, but in many cases and places it very much does not.
It depends on how you define it. If you think of it from a purely mineral basis then sure, the arctic is not looking at many changes. If you're thinking about the animal life that is there, it's in trouble. We are not the only animals on this mudball.
I want gig workers to receive a living wage whether I am doing business with them or not, but this is the wrong way to try to accomplish that.
The right way is to change the employment laws such that they have to be paid decently, and to raise the minimum wage if necessary, etc.
Trying to solve the problem with tips is completely wrong. They're supposed to be an expression of appreciation above and beyond what you need to survive, not the basis of survival. Trying to trick the customer into paying that indirectly is some bootlicking bullshit which also disguises the true cost of survival.
And I shouldn't use it because?
That's not the argument. The argument is (actually, arguments are):
1) It wasn't worth $20M, they could have done the same thing in house for less
2) It shouldn't have been built in, it should have been an add-on, they could have shipped it with the browser.
1 is the most pertinent given the story we're discussing, but 2 is also important. By putting it into the browser instead of making it an extension when there's absolutely no need for it to be built in, they forced it on users. They also have a Microsoftesque habit of turning on things you've turned off when you do an update, which is sometimes achieved by simply not doing anything rational with users' config settings when the code has changed and their meaning now differs, so that you have to refresh your profile to make the browser work correctly.
Firefox should have less stuff built into it, not more.
The thing about getting Trump into office in the first place let alone a second term, it required every single system of American society, economics and politics to break down on a fundamental level.
The economic system has allowed the worst people to become wealthy and powerful since the earliest times. You're mostly right about the other stuff though, it at least had civility for some.
Once you've found out about fish sauce, not much is scary.
God made the integers; all else is the work of Man. -- Kronecker
