Zorque

Hey now, it was slightly more than a third, not half!

Isn't the implication that he's saying Tesla will fail if America fails, not that America will fail if Tesla fails? He's basically saying he has tied his fortunes to America's future, not necessarily the other way around.

Life is unfair, but unless we acknowledge our own failings it will never get better.

You want to walk through life blaming everyone else for everything that goes wrong in your life and take no responsibility for your own actions? Feel free. But just know nothing will ever get better for you.

I even acknowledge, multiple times, that it is not solely the fault of the person. But that does not mean they have no will of their own, no ability to change their circumstances. Sometimes that freedom is not enough, but unless you do something to take charge of your own life, again, nothing will ever change.

Failure often comes at multiple points, it doesn't just fail at one. It's a failure of education, of social pressures, of lack of positive environments, and yes of choice. The problem with free will is that you have the chance to choose wrong. You can blame everyone in the world, but if you don't take accountability for your own actions and choices, nothing will change.

There has never been a time with as much access to information as now. While there as much, likely more, misinformation... that does not mean individuals have no culpability for their own lack of knowledge or understanding.

That doesn't mean it's exclusively their fault, or even anywhere near a majority. But that does not mean they lose all free will for their own actions. It does not mean they have no ability to be better.

Should we place the weight of the world on their shoulders? Absolutely not, that is liable to break them. But we also shouldn't hide them from the burden of their own free will. That only weakens them.

He steps down, then it's Vance. If Vance steps down it's Johnson. It doesn't really get better from there.

I don't recall Hegseth being any ballot I've used.

The only reason to believe it would be better with less people is delusional fantasy.

The problem isn't population, it's policy.

Because they're not communist. At best they're state capitalism, at worst they're dictatorships, which is just capitalism with less steps.

Cities aren't generally overcrowded because they have no other choice, they're overcrowded because cities typically offer the best opportunities. If the population were to drop three quarters overnight, people would flock to cities.

Land use is also about want, not need. We don't have to do it to sustain our population and its growth, it's just the cheapest (re: most profitable) option.

The odds are 1000:0 that they won't, and I still wouldn't take that bet.

Not nobody, just not the 85 million people who decided to fall asleep on election day.

That reminds me, has anyone seen Kathy Griffin recently?