You get a different generation curve (more energy in mornings and evenings) with vertical bi-facial panels. Though this person is in a woody area which might not see that benefit.
I didn't know there is an option to change it back, thanks for pointing that out. I've found it really frustrating when trying to copy different parts of the URL.
Having military bases in Europe (if that's what you're referring to) is mutually beneficial to the the U.S and Europe but I wouldn't call it a subsidy. It's done primarily to preserve America's global sphere of influence.
The economic stimulus ended in the 50's, the cold war 30yrs ago.
You can have free healthcare as well as Pax Americana. If anything I believe that free healthcare (and a better education system) would keep Pax Americana around a lot longer.
The US didn’t fund European security due to its kind nature. Rather, it was due to realpolitik concerns that there would rise another violent, genocidal European hegemon bent on world domination which would invariably threaten US security.
Thanks. We had a free trial version for about three months and then started paid plans based on customer demographics around last summer. So it's been less than a year. Note that I'm based out of Toronto and my friend in South America.
Only in theory. No recent PM hasn't also been an MP (last one was 1830–1903, Robert Gascoyne-Cecil).
I cannot imagine in this day and age that someone would be selected as PM without also being an MP. Now, I can imagine them losing their MP seat during their term as PM and staying on.
The Tories and Labour know that the way the PM is selected isn't exactly Democratic, and they know that if they were to select someone who hasn't had a single vote that would be politically disastrous and likely result in a change to the way PMs are even selected.
The UK's whole political system only works because of mass voter apathy and ignorance (see the AV vote for examples).
Unless this is an argument for literally direct democracy why do we need to vote separately for the prime minister? Do you want to vote for every minister individually? There are more than a hundred so it may take a while. Instead, we elect a representative, who groups together with like-minded representatives to form a government and run the country. Keep it simple.
I think in UK politics talking about apathy and ignorance is often a nice way to talk about other people's ignorance of your better opinions, and their apathy for your better ideas.
> Unless this is an argument for literally direct democracy why do we need to vote separately for the prime minister? Do you want to vote for every minister individually? There are more than a hundred so it may take a while.
This is a textbook example of a "False Dilemma"-type fallacy. Either don't vote for the PM or vote for "more than a hundred" ministers. Those aren't the only two options and you know that.
A vote for a PM could, implicitly, be a vote for the ministers that the PM would select. You select the PM, the PM selects their ministers and cabinet, that gives the public more Democratic power.
> I think in UK politics talking about apathy and ignorance is often a nice way to talk about other people's ignorance of your better opinions, and their apathy for your better ideas.
Three quarters of people 'cannot name their local MP'[0].
Well I didn't actually present any dilemma - you're imagining that. I just asked if you thought we should also vote for all other ministers to see how many votes you thought we should have. I didn't say those were the only two options.
I'm in favour of regularly electing a representative and then letting them get on with it. I favour simplicity and I think too many votes on different issues gets in the way of a coherent government.
If people can't name their MP then that's their business. Perhaps they're focusing their time and energy on something they believe is more important. Maybe they're curing cancer while we argue politics. Who knows.
> A vote for a PM could, implicitly, be a vote for the ministers that the PM would select. You select the PM, the PM selects their ministers and cabinet, that gives the public more Democratic power.
> But as of a little more than a week ago I’m finally convinced that black holes exist, just as General Relativity suggests.
Didn't we know black holes 100% exist 20 yrs ago because of the orbits of the stars around the centre of the galaxy and before that because of quasars?
Well, we had good reason to believe that there were things with approximately their mass in approximately their area that emitted approximately 0 light to us. Which, yeah, isn't quite the same thing, cause you could imagine that if GR was slightly wrong, you could have something slightly different at the center than a True Singularity.
