Honestly the whole concept seems like a media push by vested interests even considering my own bubbles and biases. I have encountered little of it from actual commenters - not even in areas where astroturfing and axe grinding is rampant. Anti-Facebook people usually just say delete your Facebook account not trust bust it. Anti-Amazon usually object to warehouse conditions and complain of counterfit products. Small business owners use it to project their reach. I have purchased comics from Amazon before and it was shipped directly from a neighboring state's comic book shop for one.
The concept of splitting is inane really - what would make a good division?
The selective condemnation is also highly suspicious - Comcast is one of the most hated companies and yet they don't talk about splitting them up or their defacto actual monopolies?
Journalism would be better off not taking liberties just so they can push their PoV.
Yes, there may be reasons to regulate some aspects of tech, and we can have discussions about the merits of breaking companies up.
However, the tendency to gang up and form public opinion on the public’s behalf is concerning and rightfully leads to suspicion on the media, their intentions and allegiance (truth, narrative, etc.)
In my experience, whomever would normally do it. Many of us would meal prep ahead of time and leave the dishes for later. I often fail at this level of preparation and just make really simple meals.
Another Adventist here. One of the best things about living in a community of Adventists is observing Sabbath together. It's still meaningful and refreshing alone, but doing it with all your friends and the neighborhood is incomparably better.
My friends had a whole spectrum of things that were acceptable to do on Sabbath, but the common thread was connection. I miss that intensely, living in the Bay Area.
I met a guy on a bus who was studying English in the city but heading back to his parents to bring veterinary medicine. We hit it off and he invited me back to his family's compound, and it turns out his family was super cool and invited me to stay a couple of days. I kept finding things to do to be helpful, and they were more than willing to keep feeding and housing me. I helped some of the cousins practice English, set up some radios for them, and also worked a bit to get a website up and running for a tourist business they were trying to set up(basically airbnbing their place and showing off traditional bedouin lifestyle).
"According to the College Board, the average cost of tuition and fees for the 2017–2018 school year was $34,740 at private colleges, $9,970 for state residents at public colleges, and $25,620 for out-of-state residents attending public universities." - https://www.collegedata.com/cs/content/content_payarticle_tm...
So in-state is, overall, a shade more than 1/4 the cost of private.
I'm going to try this. The questions my team comes up with haven't been very satisfying and this seems like a good way to find out what they do know vs what they don't.
I would argue we're just as pedigree based as ever. Just look at any list of the wealthiest (whatever demographic) people in the US. Inheritance and connections dominate it.
It's the wage-earners competing in a pseudo-meritocracy, just like fifty or a hundred years ago. The difference now is that our skilled trades require more formal education.
In the top 10, 2 are 1st-generation trust-fund babies (The Koch brothers), 7 are tech company founders, and 1 is self-directed investor. Certainly most of these enjoy great upper-middle-class opportunity and privelege, but these founders did not get their wealth from pedigree-appointed positions at Daddy's company after drinking their way through a Political Science degree.
Then come 3 more trust fund babies (The Walton kids), a self-made casino founder, and another tech company founder.
It's so easy with all the stories of "discovering" around the 1300s/1400s to not realize that earlier cultures were actually interconnected and had appreciable impact on each other.
It's also interesting once you realize that parts of the early modern era were shaped by the efforts of various European kingdoms to reestablish trading routes that were lost after the breakup of the Mongol Empire and, later on, the capture of Constantinople by the Turks.
True, but remember that Rome and China could trade without any Roman and Chinese person ever meeting.
My understanding of the Silk Road is that the cargo got reloaded many times and each individual leg was relatively short, at least in relation to the whole distance.
I'm glad your Opa has you there with him though this stage.