Since 2014, I've made a fuckton on the stock market and the best part is no one at my broker or bank is rug pulling my investments or my returns. Crypto isn't a Ponzi scheme, it's just fucking retarded. It's WSB for even bigger autists. At least the block chain has value when used properly.

What are you on about? You link redstate (because of course you did, but we'll argue the merits anyway) and it talks about Newsome self-owning because "some California school districts" banned books. However, the article only highlights one single school district, Burbank, which doesn't seem to be districtS - plural. Additionally, these books weren't banned, but removed from required reading lists. They're still available to read within Burbank district schools. The same can't be always be said for Texas, Florida and a few other states', some with tacit or direct approval from those states' governors. I don't think anyone should be banning books - right or left, and curriculum restrictions should be reasonable and contextual. I don't think Mein Kampf should be required reading for the merits of the book itself, but possibly made available for optional reading for historical context as part of a larger lesson plan. Object to this shit in any form - stop limiting criticism to partisanship, and if you're going to argue the point, don't do so in disingenuous fashion.

Or, you know, it will be significantly cheaper to make, is perfectly fine for many in the population and doesn't take away the ability to eat natural egg whites as you see fit. Shit, you can probably just mix in an egg with this and never know the difference. This isn't some woke environmental conspiracy at work here - it's good old capitalism, you just aren't the market for it, and that's fine.

REDUCTION of consumption, not the elimination of it. How is this concept so hard to grasp?

Psst, you still can, dummy. This is about economic benefit and reduction of consumption, not the elimination of it. Your fat ass will still have plenty of real eggs to douse in hot sauce.

We're talking about egg whites here, dumbass. Add a single regular egg and some fucking pepper - you'll enjoy it. Reducing consumption doesn't mean eliminating it. And I guarantee you that your pretentious fat ass is eating plenty of ingredients that come from factory operation and you don't even know the difference.

Or, and I'm sure you'll be shocked to hear this, there are other use cases or preferences that aren't yours. I'm personally right there with you, I couldn't give a shit about the screensaver, but my sister-in-law loves having family photos and shit on whenever it's not streaming.

So...let's say for the sake of argument we exclude that one. We've still named times where sanctions worked and as such, I'm sure you'll abandon that premise. Feel free to argue why you don't think they'll work in this instance, but don't use that excuse to do it.

One instance? How about more than one - and I'll even keep it to instances after 1965: India in 67 Taiwan and South Korea both in 76 El Salvador in the late 80's In 93 sanctions effectively forced regime change in Guatemala, and substantial changes in Malawi Greece hit Albania with sanctions in 95 I guess now is the part where you move the goalposts and talk about "real" countries. I hope at some point you'll understand that we're quickly moving into an era of economic and information warfare supplanting conventional regional proxy wars as a consequence (or benefit, depending on your stance) of global trade and instant communications. Welcome to the party.

That you think either of those are positive examples of "black representation" is part of the problem there, champ.

Did you seriously use the phrase "market based model" without a hint of irony when discussing the US-based broadband landscape? Glorious. As for the "astronomical hidden costs of socialized internet", most municipal networks sell bonds to private investors who are repaid by revenues from the network. Little to no direct taxpayer dollars are used. Fort Collins CO, Sandy OR, and Chattanooga, TN have used similar models. Additionally, when TN moved to restrict Chattanooga's muni from expanding to under-served customers, the state legislators instead moved to offer 45 million in tax breaks to the telcos to build out the very same infrastructure that the muni could have built at ZERO cost to tax payers using existing cash on hand and investment financing.

Perhaps it's a good thing we can be outraged at both - one for naivete/stupidity at best, willful collusion with broadband lobby at worst, and the other for violating the public trust in their failure to deploy. Not being legally obliged to do it doesn't absolve them of judgement.

They're downvoting you because you're displaying a fundamental misunderstanding of Section 230 that all but guarantees you've actually never read it yourself. I'd write in detail about how and why you're wrong, but the EFF has already done so. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/...