Tretiak

Ironically, the west's most looked to academic expert on Russian Studies would completely disagree with you. He warned that you would see the argument being pitched that NATO remains justified today, to "manage the security threats provoked by its own existence." Even 'US policymakers' advised that continued NATO encroachment would result in a military provocation in Ukraine. Who ignored their advice? The American foreign policy establishment. But I'm sure 'nobody' ever saw that coming, right? You know who else made similar observations? George Kennan, who was the architect of America's containment policy during the Cold War.

And you didn't even carefully read the reply you commented to. He didn't say the US was responsible for the Russian army rolling into Ukraine. He said the US is responsible for engineering the conditions for a proxy war to take place.

People refuse to hold their own side accountable and recognize what their contribution to the problem is.

Bunch of people keep talking about how the US shouldn’t broker peace deals and China should. Hypocrisy at its finest.

Would you have North Korea brokering deals between Thailand and Laos?

There have been wider, longer studies, and what your describing doesn’t never happen.

And I remember people made similar remarks about gentrification. I remain confident that you'll see it with time.

Currently? None, don't have time; :(.

All-time? Starcraft. That wasn't a game to me. That was a philosophy of life back in the day when it was still all the rage in South Korea.

If it doesn't affect the overall convenience of the user, it certainly doesn't hurt; and gives you peace of mind.

What's your browser, idiot?

<3.

Very nice. I'd be willing to guess some people have been reading Michael Bazzell lately.

UBI isn't likely going to work out in the long-term.

UBI would 'inflate' the economy, it wouldn't grow it. Growth (i.e. 'productivity') is more stuff being made. There’s no reasonable argument that the physical quantity of goods/services would increase. In every reasonable scenario, UBI gets inflated away through the supply-side of the production curve.

If your landlord knows you’re getting an extra, say, $5,000 per year in UBI, do you really think your rent isn’t going up? Do you really think AT&T isn’t going to increase the cost of your cell phone bill? Do you really think food is going to magically stay the same price? Gasoline? Clothes? Restaurant prices? And you can continue all the way down the line.

UBI is essentially a transfer mechanism from [insert how it’s funded] to the sector of the economy that produces goods and services to lower income people. In the case of UBI being funded through a VAT, it’s just a closed loop. The people that 'don't' benefit are the lower income people. If you remember Yang's Presidential bid, even he couldn’t address this. When he was asked directly about it, he just handwaved it away, despite the fact that was a glaring hole in the dead center of his keystone policy piece.

Remember your supply and demand curves from Econ 101? Giving everyone $1,000 a month increases demand for just about everything, with a weight towards the people who spend most all of that $1,000. Whether or not prices go up is a function of the ability of supply to respond. Imagine a world where there are only 2 items: potato chips and your apartment. There are a 'ton' of varieties of potato chips, and you can always choose to just not buy potato chips. Your apartment on the other hand, is mandatory and you have to incur a significant cost to move (e.g. it costs money to get a truck, plus you will have to move further from work, and you might have to move to a different apartment, you get the gist).

The potato chip company probably can't really raise prices you'll just switch brands costlessly. or you'll just not buy chips. Your apartment on the other hand is different. I'm not saying your landlord would raise your rent $1,000 instantly, that's not how that works. Instead, he'd bleed you out. Your rent would go up $250, which you'd be pissed about but you'd pay because you still have $750 from UBI. Next year it's going up $300, which you'd be pissed about but you'd pay because you still have $400 from UBI and so on until you get pissed enough to actually move. Now you are going to move to a cheaper apartment, but you have to remember that someone else, before UBI started, was paying a lot less than your 'new' rent post UBI. In other words, the landlord's captured it. Notably, this is exactly what we saw with real estate prices as women entered the workforce. It takes about ~10 years or so, but a huge chunk of the extra income went into real estate. Its hard to imagine how UBI would be any different.

Firefox Gang, checking in.

For the average person, open source doesn't mean very much. I much prefer it as a bit of a techie, but that isn't where the debate lies as a matter of what's important to the common user. People individually have to decide what their point of tradeoffs are between convenience and privacy, and what their intended goals are. If you're trying to disappear, open source may matter a lot more. If you don't want every corporation knowing where you live, but the US Marshalls aren't after you, closed proprietary systems may very well be acceptable.

Citizens overwhelmingly voted for a supposedly pro-Russian Zelenskyy to end this situation.

You mean 'after' democratically elected President Yanukovych was overthrown by a western backed coup, and Zelenskyy was installed?