This chart is a good example of what happens when transport infrastructure is judged through a purely economic lens versus what happens when affordable travel is seen as a necessary feature of a civilised society. (Not to mention the jobs created and the carbon saved.)
You discuss the CPC while playing video games? Weird flex, but okay.
Isn’t the abacus a mechanical computer?
An overground facility in south Russia whose location is televised to Ukraine? I smell bait.
Never meet your heroes, huh?
‘President’ is mostly a ceremonial office, so they should be able to smile and wave, entertain any visiting dignitaries, and read out whatever speeches Parliament writes for them in a pleasant voice. A feel-good origin story would be a nice bonus.
I see plenty of people, even on this site, who are calling for peace in Ukraine. Unfortunately they get shouted down by armchair warriors who just see all this as part of their geopolitical ‘game’.
Postulated that humans are eusocial creatures similar to ants, termites, seahorses, and naked mole rats because we follow a hierarchical pecking order.
Source? Eusociality does not involve any sort of ‘hierarchical pecking order’. The requirements are co-operative childcare, overlapping generations and division of labour.
The only acceptable western leader to me is one who leaves BRICS alone. Partly because I live in it, and partly because it now contains the majority of the world. Also at least don’t enable literal genocide. I definitely don’t want them to cause internal chaos wherever they leave, but destroying the World Bsnk / IMF and other instruments of neocolonialism would be nice.
People who support genocide are scum. It’s that simple. (I don’t think these three are neoliberals, though.)
How does your doctor have a say in your rent agreement?
White text on white background. Sigh.
Funny you should mention that. I was reading some discussion that several countries’ central banks are buying up gold. There was also one guy speculating that they might make some sort of gold-backed currency for international trade.
Time is a circle, etc.
However, in reality if the governance sets the standard, they can have almost always the cheapest prices. Wide reach, built transportation systems and probably incentivized contracts.
Yes, and yes, but why are either of these a bad thing? Cheap, good quality food seems like a good thing to me.
Essentially everything that fucked up India with the British during ww2.
If the British provided cheap food, they could actually have avoided the Bengal famine. (Unless you mean some other fuckup I’m not aware of.)
Couple of issues here - first, for the Euro to be used as a reserve currency, the EU would have to be a net importer of goods (and exporter of Euros). But EU policy is based on avoiding deficits. Second, for the Euro to be taken seriously by other countries, there should be something manufactured by the EU, that can, at least in theory, be bought with it. But the EU’s manufacturing sector, particularly in Germany, is collapsing.
The UN headquarters are in New York.
Building at capacity might not be the most efficient solution. First, towns grow. Second, China keeps costs down by standardisation (the Chinese HSR system has, if I remember correctly, 3 models of trains and two standards of track). And third, China is vulnerable to earthquakes and floods. So having alternative routes is useful.