leicsmac

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/onion-wins-alex-jones-infowars-bankruptcy-auction-rcna179936 Better news.

I'm curious to know how this would foster better race relations. Or relations between any different demographics, come to that.

Tbf on another thread unindicted US government officials are being labelled as nonces without any qualifier so I reckon it's already there.

The (rather cold) comfort though being that there's no possible outcome where the philosophy they purport "wins" for any length of time.

That's very true. A key part of that debate is, however, a matter of how such preferences are incompatible with long-term survival of all groups.

Matt "I trafficked in underage women and then managed to use money and influence to bend the law into a puzzle ring to avoid charges" Gaetz as Attorney General. Good grief.

I don't think this is even unpopular tbh, just logical. Without the Russia love in, he's just another daft American leader in the typical model - someone to roll eyes at the obvious bigotry and obsession with money and individualism, but not much different from those before from a European perspective (scientific issues aside), especially since that same nationalist bigotry is up in some places on the continent. With it, however, it's a very different, less stable, story. It's almost like everyone's human, isn't it? Such discrimination is institutionalised, that's clear. What's also clear is that such discrimination and the attitudes behind national identity that drive it cannot survive the challenges to come.

... and based on policy decisions elsewhere, long term that list will extend to every human being on the planet and the biosphere itself.

It's a case of correctly identifying the problem, but then getting the solution horribly wrong.

Oh yeah, I'm sure they can satisfy the need for tokenism. WRT Iran, I think it's just another case of War for Fun and Profit (for the right people, of course).

I'm going to be honest, that would be pretty low on the list of things to worry about on that particular matter right now.

... is anyone really expecting that?

Yeah, they do. I honestly think there is such a disconnect between highest and lowest levels of such organisations these days that practically anyone at that level would see at least some human workers as dispensable resources. This one clearly didn't see this particular policy coming from those he backed. Public services are on their arse after years of neglect. They desperately need resources. This may well not be the best way to get it to them, but those complaining about it might want to suggest a better one if this one is that bad. Because one is needed, and fast. NB. As per above, I personally have no bloody idea about what the most effective way would be.

Cristin Milioti is superb too. Great series.

Found elsewhere, relevant to current topic of regulation and economics: Here's how rollbacks hit home and impact the daily lives of the average American: Dirtier Air and Water: Looser pollution controls mean more toxins in the air you breathe and water you drink. This translates to more respiratory issues like asthma, especially in kids, and higher risks of cancer and heart disease over time. You pay the price in higher healthcare costs and sick days off work. Polluted Food and Soil: With fewer pesticide restrictions, chemicals make their way into crops, which means the food at your grocery store could carry more residue linked to health risks. Drinking water may have higher levels of toxins, and nearby rivers and lakes are more likely to be contaminated, limiting where you can safely fish, swim, or let your kids play. Higher Household Costs: By halting energy efficiency standards, appliances use more energy, driving up utility bills. When companies can dump waste in nearby areas without paying cleanup fees, taxpayers (that’s you) end up footing the bill. Pollution cleanup, water treatment, and related healthcare costs often get passed down in the form of higher local and state taxes. Degraded Wildlife and Natural Spaces: Less protection for national parks and refuges means fewer safe areas for you and your family to enjoy outdoors. This affects local economies, too—parks and clean lakes bring tourism dollars and jobs. Oil and gas drilling on public lands erodes recreational spots and wildlife, ultimately limiting the quality of spaces where you’d hike, camp, or vacation. Increased Health Risks: With rollbacks on toxic chemical regulations, more harmful substances are around you—think of pesticides in your food, lead pipes in your water, and chemicals in the air around industrial sites. Long-term exposure means higher risks of diseases, especially for children and seniors, who are more vulnerable to pollutants. Less Support for Sustainable Jobs and Clean Energy: By gutting programs that promote clean energy and sustainable practices, there’s less investment in green jobs and innovation that could keep energy prices down. This leaves the U.S. dependent on polluting industries, while other countries move ahead with greener tech. Financial Hits from Climate Change: By ignoring climate targets, the administration left the U.S. more vulnerable to extreme weather, which has been ramping up in frequency and intensity. This means more tax dollars needed for disaster relief and higher insurance premiums as flooding, hurricanes, and wildfires increase.

Yeah. Yet again it's just sadly unfortunate what the cost of such hubris in the name of "freedom" will be. But then I guess when you put a price on other life at all (not ones own, clearly), you clearly already view it as so dispensable that that price will be low anyway.

Oh, and the American history of hundreds of crashed planes, polluted waterways and countless dead bodies before the establishment of government agencies to help clearly shows companies cannot be trusted to regulate themselves.

It'll be darkly fascinating to see just how more socially unequal the US can be made than it is already (it's already a developed world leader in that regard) over the next four years - as well as the human life and suffering cost - sorry, "collateral damage in the name of efficiency" - that it will take to acheive it. Still, at least Musk will get mostly free rein for getting SpaceX where it needs to go.

My brain reads much less charitable words, but I see what you mean.

As much as progress is often a good thing, the more time passes the more the depiction of football in 2066 in the Neil Arksey book Playing on the Edge seems to be close to reality.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx240l9xq2yo Oil giant Shell has won a landmark case in the Dutch courts, overturning an earlier ruling requiring it to cut its carbon emissions by 45%. The Hague court of appeal said it could not establish that Shell had a "social standard of care" to reduce its emissions by 45% or any other amount, even though it agreed the company had an obligation to citizens to limit emissions. And it's all good news right now, isn't it?

Trumps new pick for the head of the EPA, Lee Zeldin, is about what you'd expect then. https://scorecard.lcv.org/moc/lee-zeldin 14/100 on environmental/conservation issues. "restore US energy dominance” while "protecting access to clean air and water", is the mantra, apparently. Expect lots of the former and none of the latter.

When it comes to matters of history and tribalism, a pox on various parts both houses of the Old Firm is the only way to go, as above. Hope Aberdeen can continue their run of form.

Yeah, again, the issue is with money causing power disparity and inequality, not money itself. Money isn't the problem in of itself, but it does facilitate it and that merits consideration as part of the issue.