More boosters, kiddo!

If anyone wants to grasp the basics: here is some fun reading (leading on to some beautiful math). Changing the idea of parallelity leads to hyperbolic geometry and other fun stuff. :)

Yup! Also one has to mind the order in which one rolls the dice. Since 10 and 5 could be either 05 or 50. As a bonus, if you roll them in order of “tens” to “ones”, getting 10 on the first dice has added suspense since the latter dice determines if it is going to count as a low roll of 0X (by rolling 1-9 on the next dice X) or if it is going to be a max roll of 100 (by rolling another 10).

Roll two d10, once for each digit, and profit?

We have this many places in Europe. The police are not even allowed to wear guns in Norway (and frankly do not need them) unless there is some special intelligence or something making a reason for it. That does not absolve the need for state controlled monopoly on violence. It only means that is should be limited and wielded with the utmost care.

Oof you think the US is superior.

Wherever there is a need there is potential for exploitation by greed. Of course capitalists without a leash are going to wreak havoc on everything.

Fuck that shit. Anyone calling a strike illegal does so because they know they have a losing hand.

A twat with no understanding of how nordic countries have strong labour unions playing a vital role in their economic models. Cowboys with cash can and should go fuck themselves.

Håhåhå

That is part of the process. Under fund the public services and let private companies replace the easily replaceable (read commercially viable parts) and then point at the public ones and say:

1. They are inefficient compared to the private companies.
2. Their efficacy is dwindling and “reform” is needed.

This is at least the playbook they have followed in my country to ruin postal and railroad services, and they are in the process of ruining healthcare as well. To give concrete examples the public postal service needs to be able to deliver mail and packages anywhere in the country while the private ones can target the population centers only. Similarly privatized health care clinics can offer doctors of particular specializations higher pay and less work so that the public hospitals have shortage of such specialized doctors and need to “buy” treatments from the private wards for extortionate sums. The latter example is again used to say that the private are more efficient since it can make a surplus budget, ignoring the whole dynamic in play and that they are actually less efficient and abusing the public system for profit.

We believed that as things had gone well for us for years, that things would continue going that way.

More like right wing politicians dismantled the systems that worked well and now they won’t anymore.

You don’t suck them. You just stick them between your teeth and lip for a few minutes to let the nicotine into the bloodstream.

Of course you both assume x =/= 0 though.

Why should the majority of people settle for the leftover scraps of the capitalist class? I do see that it is possible for UBI to exist within a system where the means of production is under public ownership and democratic control, which I believe is necessary for social justice. However, if UBI is ever implemented in a fundamentally capitalist society, it only means that the wealth disparity has grown so large that the capitalists, in the act of preserving their heads on their necks, allow for a crappy standard of living for the rest. Although I could see myself welcoming UBI for a multitude of reasons, I am also scared that it would entail some form of permanent class disparity with the majority of people forever impoverished.

I agree that they are missing a crucial motive for their actions, namely the cause of doing it for the environment. I still think my critique of the definition’s statement of “violence against property” is valid. It seems to be included in the definition because they want to brand certain acts as terrorism, even though destruction of property is a label they could themselves hold as much as their opponents.

I think that is also why some so called eco-terrorists feel themselves justified in acting out “violence against property”, since they may see it as an act of self defence against the originial portrayers of said “violence”. Ultimately however, I think a distinction should be made between physical violence and destruction of material values. Whether the material value is an entity’s legal property or not should also not matter in this case, in my opinion.

From your link on eco-terrorism:

Eco-terrorism is an act of violence which is committed in support of environmental causes, against people or property.[1][2]

Not sure that I count violence against property as valid. If destruction of material values are classified as violence and eco-terrorism, are then not oil companies and other capitalists destroying the environment eco-terrorists too?

Didn’t know that it was feasible to create a radiation field by running a large motor. Not that I doubt you, but if you have a source I would be very happy to read more about it.

For real, resource extraction is a big one. Finding ice means they can make, besides water, oxygen and rocket fuel. Not to mention that shelters for radiation are incredibly hard to make without a huge amount of mass, which we cannot efficiently get into orbit without a space elevator. Hence being able to extract it from the location of the colony, say dig into the ground or build thick walls with bricks made from soil, is necessary for long term survival of the inhabitants. I think it is cool that due to these reasons having air balloons over Venus might even be a better option due to it having a protective atmosphere.

I still hoard and often just die on my pile of loot :(