I live in Ireland and my natural Ebay site is ebay.ie but I can also use ebay.co.uk and presumably other ebay sites as well. The price is the same regardless of site pretty much.
(You do get venders that sell a product for a price but in different currencies e.g $10 or euro 10) Australian Dollars is almost always cheapest.
Where there is a big difference is on which Ebay Site you pay for the items on. If I pay on ebay.co.uk then i get buyer protection and a right to return within 14 days while if I buy on ebay.ie I don't. Sometimes that matters.
Ever since I bought an old macbook which died 3 days after receiving it and getting told by ebay to take it up with paypal who sided with the seller I now use the ebay.co.uk checkout rather than the ebay.ie one (if i had done that with that mac which came from the uk I would have got my money back from the seller).
It also pays to shop around with amazon too, there is
The best place to ship from is Germany best priced shipping. Brexit has made a pretty big difference too. UK prices had got pretty poor over the last few years but the devaluing of Sterling now makes buying from the UK pretty competitive. It's kind of like they have an ongoing 20% off sale. Guess better enjoy that while I can because when the actual exit comes. They are likely to get expensive to buy from with Customs adding Duty and VAT...
One problem i run into is with owner manuals for old film camera's a lot of the time they disappear from the company website when they get taken over by another company. Sometimes archive.org can come to the rescue if I can find where they used to be. Fair enough the new company may only be interested in the digital models and has no interest in the historical product made by the company they acquired but when they make boneheaded choices like erasing the historical information the original company put out for their customers..
Worst still is when a domain name is lapsed and bought by another company who had zero access to the content of the former site they bought a name not a right to control the history of the former site.
The other thing which bugs me is the white washing of old news articles how often that trick gets pulled, I might personally remember an event but find the contemporary records are missing that happens a lot especially in Politics when a past stance becomes embarrassing and then you get told black was white...
At the very least when a website changes hands the new owner should not be able to erase the history of the site under the previous owner.
If you look in the FEMA site, they say that they provide gramts to perform repairs not covered by insurance. And no, they don't do a needs test. Now, the typical rich person does not let their insurance lapse just so that they can get a FEMA grant. Because such a grant is no sure thing. They also point out that SBA loans are the main source of assistance following a disaster. You get a break on interest, but you have to pay them back.
What you are observing is economics. As a city or town population grows, the best land becomes unavailable and those who arrive later or have less funds available must settle for less desirable land. Thus many cities have been extended using landfill which liquifies as the San Francisco Marina District did in the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, or floods. Risks may not be disclosed by developers, or may be discounted by authorities as the risks of global warming are today.
Efforts to protect people who might otherwise buy such land or to mitigate the risks are often labeled as government over-reach or nanny state.
Oh, of course they were caused by misguided engineering efforts. Everything from the Army Corps of Engineers to Smoky Bear goes under that heading. The most basic problem is the fact that we locate cities next to resources and transportation, which means water, without realizing where the 400-year flood plane is. Etc. We have learned something since then.
Our problem, today, is fixing these things. Which is blocked by folks who don't believe in anthropogenic climate change, or even cause and effect at all. They don't, for the most part, register Democratic.
The problem with your explanation is that it's fact-based, and stands on good science. This is the post-truth era. Thus, the counter to your argument will be:
The part I'm having a problem with is the little folks who won't get a second chance. What's reversible for the country may not be for them. Health care is that sort of issue.
so far hasn't done anything irreversible.
I think the first victims have been farmers who can't bring in their crops. Just the people who voted for him in California's central valley and wherever else we depend on guest workers. I don't see citizens lining up to pick those crops. The small family farmers, what's left of them, will feel this worse, the large corporate ones have the lawyers necessary to help them break the rules and truck people in from South of the border.
The second group of victims will be the ones who need health care that doesn't come from a big company. It's a lot more difficult to start a small business when there is no affordable way to get health care. And that is the case for my own small business - I'd be in bad shape if my wife left the University. I think that's the real goal - to keep people from leaving employment in larger companies and going off on their own.
Donald Trump, unfortunately, satisfies a common desire among the populance to right things by means that won't actually right them. It's a desire to rid Washington of inaction by cleaning it out of the current folks who don't seem to get anything done: and then you find that the things they were working on are harder than you understood. It's the feeling that you can get things going right by having a manager who lights a fire under the responsible people: just the way that bank managers pressured employees to increase revenue or be fired until those employees started opening accounts fraudulently for customers who hadn't asked for them.
What I am having a hard time with is how our country gets back out of this. I fear Humpty has had such a great fall that there is no peaceful recovery.
1. Doesn't anyone here know Latin?
2. The plural of parenthesis is parentheses.
3. We need trolls with higher IQs. These ones are just boring.
I think there's a world market for about five computers. -- attr. Thomas J. Watson (Chairman of the Board, IBM), 1943