The google news app on my phone is bad as well. The tech section is basically just advertisements for products, disguised as articles. Science isn't much better. This is what happens when one entity is both supposed to provide unbiased information as well as please advertisers, as well as provide access to shopping search results.... no, no possibility of a conflict of interest there...

I lean left on most issues, but a conservative once told me "you might think you like the idea of centrally controlled education system, until an election happens and you end up with a far right religious congress controlled by zealots who ban teaching evolution in all 50 states with one new law...".

My initial reaction was... well, our electorate would never let that happen. But after seeing trump get elected.. I don't have as much faith in the electorate as I once did.

I think I'd still rather see a Federally guided, centrally planned, education system. But that scenario the conservative presented to me did make me think.

You are wrong.

Intent always matters, otherwise Judges would have no real power to strike something down that was obviously attempting to bypass the laws, just by using careful wording.

Judges really are there to use judgment. Not just process words as if they were a programming language.

Likewise, juries are there to determine fuzzy areas as well. Law often says things like "a reasonable person would X". A jury or judge has to decide if X was 'reasonable'.

See the recent court rulings against political gerrymandering in certain states. On paper, the districts were drawn up with reasons x,y,z, which would be legal on their own. However, a judge saw that these districts were very neatly drawn around primarily Black communities. He/She used Judgment and basically said, "Oh come on, you can say x,y,z but I know you are doing 'A'".

They do eat animal products though, like Milk/Cheese, Eggs, Honey, etc..

It would be interesting to see larger studies of vegans. There are a few, like: http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/89/5/1627S.full - scroll down or search for "POTENTIAL NUTRITIONAL SHORTFALLS". There were 5 deficiencies. I wonder if vegetarians do not have those deficiencies because they consume some types of animal products.

I'd rather get out faster with self-checkout, but have employees available to help me find things, or be knowledgeable about the products.

I hate going to places like Home Depot or Lowest and wandering around trying to find someone. But once i get what I need, I'm more than happy to skip the lines and just scan it myself.

I lived way out in the country and there were no kids to hang out with. I played down by a creek, caught frogs/lizards/snacks, played with my dogs, rode my bike, etc..

I can't really see anything wrong with spending time by yourself as a kid. Either using a computer, or riding your bike. It is just exploration, and it teaches you to entertain yourself, and you find out what makes you the most happy.

Youtube could care less about the content. This all started happening because big advertisers like Ford, Walmart, etc, noticed that their ads were being displayed randomly across all sorts of youtube videos. And some of the videos were ones that the big companies didn't want their name associated with.

We are not the customers of youtube. Ford/Walmart, etc.. those are the customers that youtube is trying to please.

So youtube basically de-monetized ANY video that was even remotely "controversial". Critical of terrorism? Bam, no ads. In favor of terrorism? Bam no ads. Left wing, bam no ads. Right wing, bam no ads.

"their 63 current content groups are just political groups censoring conservatives."

Complete and utter bullshit. This liberal show lost 99% of their youtube revenue: https://davidpakman.com/

Well I hope they do something, because what is happening now is stupid. Their algorithm is basically flagging anything even remotely related to religion, politics, any sort of conflict, and de-monetizing it.

For instance, make a video that is critical of terrorism. De-monetized instantly. Shows like this have lost 99% of their youtube revenue: https://davidpakman.com/ .

That isn't how the youtube algorithm is working. It appears to be de-monetizing nearly anything about religion or conflicts or politics (except for big mainstream ones, like Fox/CNN, etc..).

You can make a video about how bad Isis is in the world, and it gets de-monetized. I hope youtube figures it out, because a lot of independent media and political channels have basically lost 99% of their revenue.

Well, not to mention that none of this came about because of a single factor. Everyone likes to try to find the 'one true cause', but this election cycle just seemed like a perfect storm of some truths, lots of lies, a general authoritarian+populist rise across the globe, massive increase in use of disinformation systems (facebook, etc..), please even possible things like personal grudges Putin had against Hillary. No one factor.

They can't be both?

Evidence provided by the FBI to federal prosecutors has just recently resulted in two people close to Trump's cabinet receiving grand jury supoenas. Do you think maybe that is what made Trump fire him and not any of the Hillary/Email crap?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/09/politics/grand-jury-fbi-russia/

You aren't missing anything. But I think you are thinking of this as just a tax/welfare system, no different than any other in history. It isn't.

Think of a (maybe dystopian) future, where 100% of all production is entirely done by automated processes. Processes that can even repair and improve themselves. What then?

Well, someone will own those processes, and be making a lot of profit, with zero labor costs. Do they have an obligation to society to pay for the infrastructure, police, military, etc.. if there are literally no jobs to be had, so no one else has any money at all?

We aren't there yet, but the reason UBI is being discussed and experimented with, is because that is the direction we've been headed for a long time now. US production and efficiency has been climbing every decade. But the gains in profit from that increased production, has not translated into more jobs, or higher paying jobs.

The majority of American workers have not had a pay increase, adjusted for inflation and buying power, in over 30 years. But that doesn't mean someone else isn't getting more money. The owners of production have had record profits. And the wealth and income inequality in the US is approaching historic highs as well. Almost as high as it was right before the great depression.

Or, think of it this way:
In the future, an owner of a factory may have two choices:
1. Employee 1000 people making widgets, make 100,000,000 in profit, Pay 75,000,000 in labor. Net profit, 25 million - minus some regular taxes.
2. Full automation, 0 workers. Make 100,000,000 profit, pay 75,000,000 extra in UBI taxes. Net profit, 25 million - minus some regular taxes.

You are making an assumption that taxes have to go up to support a program like UBI. They don't. Well, not in the way you think.

The entire point of UBI is that productivity and efficiency gains have increased drastically as various types of automation (an numerous other factors) have improved.

Some day, 100% of car manufacturing will be automated. Zero workers needed. So at that point in time, the owners are still making X dollars per year, but have zero labor costs. UBI is the government taking the profit from gains in productivity and spreading it back to the workers that are no longer required. Theoretically, the owner of the car plant will have the same net profit at the end of the day. In that model, owners of production will be able to ask themselves: "Do I want to employee 1000 people, make 100,000,000 million in profit, but spend 75,000,000 million on labor, leaving me 25,000,000 as profit. Or, do I want to employee 0 people, make 100,000,000 million in profit, pay 0 in labor costs, but get taxed 75,000,000, leaving me 25,000,000 million in profit." At least, that is how I understand the theory.

You do realize that we have near historic high wealth and income inequality in the US right now, right? That is because our factories and other processes have become highly automated, requiring less skilled workers, and none of that gain in productivity has benefited anyone except the owners of those production facilities (whatever the product).

Do you think 'the elite' care about the messaging of a campaign vs what is actually done once in office? Because so far Trump has accomplished zero of his promised changes, so..... time will tell I guess.