Okay, you’re sort if correct. He alluded to it. He mentioned the Russian Empire attacking various neighbors and taking over their territory using excuses of ethnicity and then referred to it as returning and reinforcing, not conquering. He then said it fell to their lot to return and reinforce, as well. Here’s a link that discusses it. Given the date and the discussion, I’m sure you can find other sources for it. That was just the first that appeared on my search.
This isn’t entirely incorrect, but this is pretty much what happened 10 years ago. And here we are. You can argue appeasement or suggest this is a one-time thing, but it’s already the second time. Also, Putin has said he wants to rebuild the Soviet empire, so suggesting he will stop here on his own goes against his own statements.
Let’s say a guy says he likes puppies, but then pays a pile of cash so some people will run a puppy-kicking machine. Would you say he likes puppies or not?
Isn’t it at meme levels when YouTube games have their screen go black and they mention Nvidia crashing?
The trick is to not show discomfort after slapping your testicular tumors.
Not a problem. It’s essentially rolled into our taxes for the most part in Canada. You may have health insurance on top of that, but that isn’t a guarantee and usually is a top-up of our universal coverage. This usually covers things like drug prescriptions, glasses, and hospital conveniences such as semi-private or private rooms. I agree with the general idea, though, that we as a group pay for everyone who is covered. My original point at the top of this thread is that removing people’s eligibility simply because of risky behavior can be very tricky and likely harmful to society.
What makes you think that I, posting in a Canadian community about a Canadian article, have a contract with a healthcare insurance company?
Free climbers don’t usually die the first time, either.
Housing can’t really be a free market for a number of reasons: captive market; regional market restrictions; and high barrier to entry, to name a few.
Here’s a link that gives some insight into the situation, courtesy of @avidamoeba@lemmy.ca .
Way to miss the point. It’s a good thing you don’t engage in any risky behavior, or anything that would have a negative impact on your health. I mean, it’s not like you would be a hypocrite, right?
Or subsidized industries.
The total new car market for 2023 was almost $90 billion. Of that, EV sales count for about 10.7%, or about $9.5 billion. Stats Can provides the first number, electricautonomy.ca was the source for the second, although they got their info from Stats Can, too.
There are a number of possible errors with this data, such as the percentage of EV sales being total sales vs. dollar sales, which would increase the amount spent on EVs since they tend to be more expensive.
So I drink more pop than I should. Why should I have to pay more for my healthcare than my buddy who had a habit of timing running green lights as soon as they turned green. That isn’t illegal, either, yet it’s very risky behavior. It didn’t work out for him just one time, and he nearly died. Why should taxpayers have to pay for him?
The answer is because the vast majority of us engage in risky behavior, or just have the bad taste of passing on our poor genetics to the next generation, and the social cost for penalizing people for not agreeing with societal norms are too high. This includes drug use, even legal ones like alcohol. Sure, don’t spend limited resources such as donated livers on people who aren’t willing to make the lifestyle changes required to make it worthwhile, because someone else will probably have to die for that to happen. But if we could make new livers and the price was reasonable, I wouldn’t even be against that.
This reminds me of when I went to a restaurant with some friends and we had a variety of beers to taste. I’m not a big drinker, and have never liked beer, but whatever, it won’t kill me. So we try 5 or 6, some are better and some are worse, but there’s one that’s far better than the rest. I say, “Well, this one is almost worth drinking,” and they all respond with something along the lines of “Yeah, this one is really good.” That’s when I came to the conclusion that my perception of good and bad were on point for beer, it’s just that my standard for what I was going to enjoy was higher. They can keep their beers, I’ll stick to tastier beverages, alcoholic or otherwise.
Pretty sure that’s a horse skull, and holy fuck, why was that ever made?
Edit: probably not a horse, but some kind of ungulate.
Well, pizza is pretty important, too.
Having addresses be easily legible for emergency services isn’t inconsequential, and is legally required where I live.
There’s no evidence that what feels good to you actually reduces the odds of the perpetrator committing crimes again or reduces the rate of those crimes in society in general, and good evidence that what doesn’t feel good to you does those things. So you will have to decide if you would rather feel good about how the person who did something wrong was punished or have less crime in your society.