Stack Exchange
log in

NoDataDumpNoContribution

 Discussion on question by WoJ: Why is…

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Jul 1 01:29
This question could try to cite some comparable studies for the underlying argument that respect for veterans is higher in the US. Currently it seems to be mostly based on portrayal in entertainment media. Maybe there are better sources out there.
 

 Discussion on question by user366312:…

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Apr 25 17:38
@o.m. How would one ask about it? Maybe in retrospective. How often did later proof appear for accusations without initial proof and how often not? Or: How convincing is accusation without proof in general? Or something else?
 

 Discussion on question by JonathanRee…

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Apr 15 17:42
@JonathanReez I see. You don't want to learn what others say. You are here to make a point. You know the "right" answer already.
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Apr 15 17:42
@JonathanReez "So I wanted to hear what that mistake was exactly. Is it a scientific approach?" To me it looks like a scientific approach. There is plenty of scientific discussion of the risks. It's obviously the more conservative approach. And as we already established you don't need examples to be scientifically convinced that there is a risk. Does that satisfy you?
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Apr 15 17:42
@JonathanReez There you have your answer. Just need to corroborate the claim and let me vote on it. Why do you ask if you already know the answer?
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Apr 15 17:42
@JonathanReez I don't think so. For a risk to be perceived as such, you don't need any examples to prove it's there. Example: there is a real risk we all die out. According to your argumentation that would be impossible because it hasn't happened yet. The EU is simply following the more conservative approach. There are more than enough scientific works about the risks of GMOs. Maybe you don't believe in them andwant to ask on a more scientific site about them?
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Apr 15 17:42
"Which of them is closer to the truth?" Both is true. How you weigh them is your personal opinion.
 

 Discussion on question by Marc Le Bih…

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Apr 15 17:41
@Relaxed But this is a different question. One could argue that being a bigger bloc is safer for all in a world with Russia, China and the US. A single market would create more wealth, free movement would increase mobility. But the rebate would probably not coming back. But you could argue for a EU membership of UK under these new conditions. Probably UK would have to realize that first though. And that's why this isn't a topic currently.
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Apr 15 17:41
Some parties in EU argue for closer UK-EU ties. Would that also answer the question? They might think about UK rejoining EU within a reasonable time frame under reasonable conditions, but they do not seem to say it explicitly at the moment.
 

 Discussion between JonathanReez and N…

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Apr 5 11:58
@JonathanReez I see. You don't want to learn what others say. You are here to make a point. You know the "right" answer already.
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Apr 5 11:58
@JonathanReez "So I wanted to hear what that mistake was exactly. Is it a scientific approach?" To me it looks like a scientific approach. There is plenty of scientific discussion of the risks. It's obviously the more conservative approach. And as we already established you don't need examples to be scientifically convinced that there is a risk. Does that satisfy you?
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Apr 5 11:58
@JonathanReez There you have your answer. Just need to corroborate the claim and let me vote on it. Why do you ask if you already know the answer?
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Apr 5 11:58
@JonathanReez I don't think so. For a risk to be perceived as such, you don't need any examples to prove it's there. Example: there is a real risk we all die out. According to your argumentation that would be impossible because it hasn't happened yet. The EU is simply following the more conservative approach. There are more than enough scientific works about the risks of GMOs. Maybe you don't believe in them andwant to ask on a more scientific site about them?
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Apr 5 11:58
"Which of them is closer to the truth?" Both is true. How you weigh them is your personal opinion.
 

 Discussion on answer by Joe W: Trump …

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Mar 25 23:55
@StackExchangeBrokeTheLaw "They tell you who is dominant." Does it? Or does it only show who is wasting some time?
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Mar 25 23:55
Publicity stunt may not really describe it. Meaningless dominance display rather. And you never know. I have the impression this answer simply says no in the first sentence but the question would probably how you know that. It's always a bit difficult to prove a negative.
 

 Discussion on question by user366312:…

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Mar 22 02:00
And Tesla is probably selling less because the Trump administration is unpopular outside of the US (and because there are cheaper alternatives)?
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Mar 22 02:00
But they call it out in both cases as you show with all the links? Musks Nazi tendencies are also ignored by a lot of people.
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Mar 22 02:00
"Why are people..." Might be more a sociology question. Do you include politicians?
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Mar 22 02:00
"These two things don't really add up." Why not? Could you maybe clarify a bit more what you see as not adding up? When comparing two different things there is always the risk of over-simplification.
 

 Discussion on question by EoDmnFOr3q:…

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Mar 13 00:11
Maybe the question should give one example of such a system, even if only theoretical.
 

 Discussion on question by Stop Gaza G…

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Mar 12 22:21
Just reading the question title I expected something else. Homelessness in the US is indeed rather high when compared to its wealth. I thought, the idea would be that the government should support homeless people more one way or the other. But it's about law enforcement and crime loosely related to homelessness. The title could be more specific.
 

 Discussion on question by Barmar: Why…

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Mar 8 16:33
@Kyralessa If that was the purpose why not simply click on a personalized link instead. Even for that propose it looks unprofessional and there are probably easier ways to accomplish the same. Let me guess, they haven't found dead people in the payroll yet.
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Mar 8 16:33
Btw. I would be surprised if they didn't document what they do in one form or another.
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Mar 8 16:33
"started with something like this" Not something like this. You cannot get an overview of what such a big organization like the US government is doing in 24 hours. It's impossible. And writing about assumed resignations is a big no-go. Do you remember last time a big company like Facebook cut jobs? Did Facebook send everyone in their company a similar letter? I guess not. And it wouldn't be helpful. That is totally independent of if there are arguments to be made for or against cuts, it's the process that's looking bad.
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Mar 8 16:33
Off the top of my hat: it might be overreach by Elon Musk and it might even be illegal to take a non-response as resignation. Shouldn't there be a due process for resignations? The uproar might also have to do with the abnormality of the request and the timing. Elon Musk could go top to bottom and much slower if he really wanted to achieve something. Asking everyone is probably just a show of dominance. Maybe ask at workplace.SE for more ideas why this move may be unhelpful.
 

 Discussion on question by Ahmed Tawfi…

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Feb 11 14:27
Half a year ago I was against giving Musk attention here because I thought he is just a random private person with lots of money and an opinion, but now he is officially a politician of the US government, so the attention can be justified.
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Feb 11 14:27
Maybe link to some definition of a Nazi salute. And what is he saying at that moment?
 

 Discussion on question by gerrit: Is …

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Nov 12, 2024 09:43
@gerrit And let another bully get away? Wouldn't it be nice if there were only UN missions in the world. But that's not the case. My impression is that Russia was on the path to imperialism with or without that bombing that only lasted a few days. It gave them a few excuses but they wanted to go there anyway. I don't know what would have stopped them, but I think not this.
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Nov 12, 2024 09:43
"...Those were bombings under NATO command,..." States may not have two militaries, one for defensive actions and one for offensive ones. Anyway this question seems to me to be primarily about Yugoslavia 1999. One could have asked it already then.
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Nov 12, 2024 09:43
Formally, NATO is a defensive alliance. The 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia was outside of the NATO articles, something they did voluntarily beyond their duties as NATO members. Anyway, did really NATO bomb Yugoslavia? I thought it was primarily US forces.
 

 Discussion on answer by MadHatter: Ca…

Imported from a comment discussion on opensource.stackexchange...
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Nov 5, 2024 12:13
@MadHatter Sorry, didn't follow. Thanks for mentioning again. I guess one could maybe add a provision for that.
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Nov 5, 2024 12:13
"...people who can't or won't communicate (for whatever reason)..." I have difficulties imagining any such reason. Everyone always communicates. I think the answer would be better if there were some examples given for that.
 

 Discussion on question by JonathanRee…

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Nov 5, 2024 09:02
@Muschkopp Mail-in ballot is probably similarly easy to access. And I'm sure that Estonia offers multiple ways to vote, not only online. Maybe online voting would be considerably cheaper. But it's not sure that money is really a convincing argument for a less tangible process.
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Nov 5, 2024 09:02
And Estonia is a single case and small country and 20 years is a relatively short term. Maybe Estonia was just lucky to have a flawless record so far. Maybe next year their online voting system gets hacked.
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Nov 5, 2024 09:02
There are many other countries besides Estonia, that do not vote online and have also a flawless track record. That's not a unique point for Estonia. I guess online voting would need to to have other advantages over offline voting to be considered the better option.
 

 Discussion on answer by JMS: What if …

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
NoDataDumpNoContribution
Aug 29, 2023 13:15
We should have asked for the legal angles first.
 

 Discussion on question by ccprog: Are…

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
Trilarion
Jun 7, 2023 12:44
@TadeuszKopec And conveniently it breaks down exactly when the offensive is supposed to start. But who knows (even though that anyway wouldn't be the scope of the question).
Trilarion
Jun 7, 2023 12:44
@ItalianPhilosophers4Monica The scale might be large (I'm not sure) but damage in affected zones is the definition of war. During the whole war in Ukraine, Civilians suffered. Have you seen what is left of Bakhmut? Or all the civilians that died from missile attacks? One could maybe ask if blowing up dams is a legitimate target in a war (but my guess would be yes, it's been done in the past)? About the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, the current news is that there is no immediate risk for it's safety.
Trilarion
Jun 7, 2023 12:44
I'm not sure. The breaking of the dam surely has military implications, but which political implication does it have if any? Does it change politics in any way?
Trilarion
Jun 7, 2023 12:44
I'm on the border of this one for being ontopic. Military arguments are not a focus of this stackexchange site. Elsewhere there might be better expertise be found. And of course both sides are blaming each other. It's war. One side is probably right and the other side is blatantly lying. The only difficult thing is finding out which side is which.
 

 Discussion on answer by Jontia: Will …

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
Trilarion
Apr 27, 2023 13:09
@Jontia Sure it is important, but maybe not so much for this question. On the other hand, many other countries have id as a voting requirement and corresponding suppression doesn't seem to be much of a topic there (maybe it should). One could also compare with these other countries. Belgium for example has the requirement for an id together with a duty to vote. Actually, Belgium could never implement a mandatory voting scheme without some sort of identification system. In this way ids are even beneficial to voting.
Trilarion
Apr 27, 2023 13:09
"The actual number will include those who don't show up because they have no id at all.." That assumes that they would have shown up otherwise. But the relevant quantity would only be those that would like to vote but don't like to have an id, I think. Not sure how big that number would be and if it should be included in this question. The question asks for denied to vote, not for inconvenienced.
 

 Discussion on question by M. Y. Zuo: …

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
Trilarion
Apr 18, 2023 07:53
@M.Y.Zuo "Which country has provided a guarantee for firefighting services?" This is also something I'm missing from the question. Links to actual rights to health care for a few example countries. I guess if one would see the texts of those rights it would become clear what the guarantees are. Most probably never a specific level is guaranteed because health care isn't a black and white thing.
Trilarion
Apr 18, 2023 07:53
The way this question is formulated it seems to assume that rights can be guaranteed always, but they cannot. They depend on the feasibility. For example one country might guarantee their people that they are defended in any case, but still somebody bigger could attack them. So even the most basic thing (safety) one cannot guarantee absolutely. And it's the same with everything else that requires considerable effort and may fail.
Trilarion
Apr 18, 2023 07:53
"The question only applies to countries where both set of rights are 'guaranteed'." Depends on how you define "right to health care". Typically there are no specific promises to a certain level of care been made (or the guaranteed level might be extremely low). It's often more a "we will do all we can and everyone should at least get a little bit of it" kind of right.
 

 Discussion on answer by o.m.: Have an…

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
Trilarion
Feb 14, 2023 11:58
Now the question is still how pacifistic these semi-prominent politicians are and how much they just ride the wave.
 

 Discussion on question by Mocas: Is t…

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
Trilarion
Nov 28, 2022 07:05
@JoeW "which makes it look like you are trying to push something that isn't true" That's not my impression. Mocas simply asks for the truth value of something. This alone is usually not enough to push something. I would rather go with the idea that this is really easy to find out by oneself.
 

 Discussion on question by Jontia: Doe…

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
Trilarion
Oct 20, 2022 18:29
In the mean time Liz Truss resigned. A no confidence vote by the opposition would actually have been very interesting, in my opinion. On the other hand, the British governmental system does not seem to produce long lasting leaders. If I compare the number of different PMs in the UK in the last 20 years with for example Germany, something must be different.
Trilarion
Oct 20, 2022 18:29
@Valorum " It would make the party look united ..." As I said, I would actually like to see that so at the next election voters know exactly to whom to thank for the situation the country is in. I wouldn't like for MPs to be able to say that they were secretly in opposition the whole time. They should own Liz Truss and if that means that they look like they are united that's okay. I think that in other countries a PM cannot change without a vote in Parliament, but in the UK that's possible.