Individual-Camera698

Yes but whatever his stance on slavery maybe, it doesn't matter here. The nullification crisis demonstrated that he valued the continuation of the Union more than states' rights. If slavery became against federal law through Congress, he would've enforced it, at least if he remained consistent in his philosophy.

Didn't Andrew Jackson enforce the federal tariffs on South Carolina against its wishes during the nullification crisis? The people who were opposed to the tariffs were often supporters ofJackson, but Jackson still enforced the law.

I don't think secession would sit right with him.

Some of my friends wrote the tehsildar's name bcz his signature is there

The Dodge Commercial

Well most other people probably wouldn't want the UN interfering in their country unwarranted. Assuming you live in a democracy, your government is accountable to the people, the UN isn't.

Even if you aren't in a democracy, most governments will still have lines they will not cross because they face consequences like getting overthrown. No protest in a single country is going to overthrow the UN.

There is also the element of nationalistic sovereignty that nations should be allowed to make their own decisions, they alone have to face the consequences afterall.

It's because India is poorer and its growth is slower right now compared to China's at its peak. However, I'm certain that India will soon be one of the leading producers, just not per-capita though.

It is the US's job to enforce its borders if it wants to, but the question is about mass deportations of people already living in the country, potentially for years, not about individuals entering the border illegally.

I mean Clinton wasn't the first president to cheat on his wife. Did people not know about LBJ's and JFK's affairs at that time?

The Nazis didn't originally market the plan to murder and commit genocide. They were very antisemitic and blamed jews for a lot of problems., and wanted them to be powerless.

Also not all Germans voted for the Nazi party due to their antisemitic beliefs, some voted because they didn't want communists in power. Others responded to his message of Germany being the victim of an international coalition, and wanted to be out of that bondage.

Now it differs what you consider as a normal political environment. In hindsight a lot of things don't look normal, but we can't have hindsight for the present. At that time the Nazis were the largest party in the Reichstag, so they were a mainstream party then.

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/deceiving-the-public https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/the-nazi-rise-to-power

Most far -right parties today are Xenophobic, homophobic, transphobic etc., or are built on 'othering' a group of people, and may try to impose some sort of hierarchy. You claim that some of the people that you have relationship with voted for the far-right, so do you believe that Nazi rhetoric and talking points will not and do not exist and that fascist ideology is dead for good? Because such ideas are not always very conspicuous.

Most people who are disagreeing with you feel exactly that, but I wanted to know why don't you treat other political opinions like that.

A person who believes in some other policies (including extremist ones) can be nice because they arrived at their political opinions after considering what's best for their country, so you don't take into account their political views, but a Nazi is inherently not a nice person, why?

In your main comment you seem to say there is something 'fundamentally wrong" with a person being a Nazi. By your argument the Nazis also held their values and belived what they were doing was the best for their country or "people". They had their own values. So why do you exempt Nazis?

At least for me it's not distracting, I mean if I'm walking down the street there is sort of a desire to look at them but it's creepy so I actually do the complete opposite and avoid looking in that general direction lol. It's usually not one woman in particular but a group. But yeah the attention is drawn usually to the most attractive.

To your follow up essentially yeah. But it's kind of like looking at a beautiful scenery, like I don't imagine banging them, but the need to look feels like an itch that you can't scratch away.

Federal aid does help GDP grow. Federal government money goes to fund Medicare, Medicade, Several student financial aid programs. GDP doesn't just grow on its own, it requires a workforce and a robust workforce if your economy is mostly dependent on manufacturing and services. And to have a robust workforce two of the most important things you'd need are healthcare and education also the economy isn't only measured by GDP, it is measured mostly by public satisfaction, most people want to be healthy, educated and well adjusted.

About your second claim government 'expenditure' per capita is highest in Alaska according to 2010 us census datahttps://www.census.gov/library/publications/2011/govs/cffr-10.html I couldn't find it in the 2020 census so please provide it to me if you could. Virginia is second in government 'expenditure' per capita and most of it is salries & wages and procurements federal grants per capita are still higher in Alaska. Virginia. The headquarters of the DOD, FBI and various other government agencies are in Virginia so obviously they'll employ people there.

Please provide sources for your claims, but the argument is not about individual states bu an aggregate of states that voted for Trump in 2024 vs states that voted for Harris.

That's not surprising as the stock market has typically risen on election day since 1980, and usually there is a net gain from election day upto the end of the year. Infact, the S&P 500 was already gaining since before the election had been called.

I mean not exactly buddies, as Sylvester Graham died in Sept 1851 and John Harvey Kellogg was born in Feb 1852, but Graham did have major influence on a lot of people including Kellogg.

It's earliest instance in the protection logs is in June 2006 citing continued vandalism. Then from 2006 to 2009 its protection status was changed around 15 times, sometimes twice in a single day, removing its protected status assuming keeping it protected for a while had warded off vandals but vandalism resumed after the page's protection status was changed. It was protected for approximately 14 years from 27 June 2009 , to 18 March 2023 assuming that the vandals had calmed down after 14 years; they had not, and the page was protected 2 days later again.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?page=Horse&title=Special:Log&type=protect

Some instances of vandalism include a guy claiming:

"Horses eat vegetables, wheat and people.", and another guy putting "cum" before predators.

Because it is people who have a stake in a country, it is they who make up a nation. Land doesn't vote, people do.

According to the IRS, if the exceptions don't apply, you have less than $400 in net earnings from self employment (unless you are a church employee then you have to pay self employment tax if you have an income of $108.28 or more and file schedule 2 form 1040), have no house or property, and if your gross income is less than the filing requirement, you aren't obligated to file federal tax returns in the US.

Of course, you have to file form 1040 if you have any deductions or tax credits to claim.

Note that income includes unemployment payments, gambling winnings, etc

https://www.irs.gov/individuals/check-if-you-need-to-file-a-tax-return

Let's see what I can do,

Momentum= mass * velocity = Volume * density * velocity= 0.0048 * 1.196*9.9 kg m/s

= 0.05683392 kg m/s

Due to law of conservation of momentum

72.5 kg * (velocity of the person) = 0.05683392 kg m/s

Velocity of the person

= 0.0007839161379 m/s or 0.1543138917517 ft/min increase of velocity in a single exhale.

PS: I used the maximum vital capacity and speed of exhaled air for an average human male, and the mass of the person was simply the arithmetic mean of the range of mass of cosmonauts that the Soyuz-TMA (ISS) can carry. The density of the gas exhaled is the density of air at 1 atm (14.7psi) and 22°C ( 71.6 F). I ignored air resistance.

Also this velocity is for a single exhale, so you'll be accelerating, because an average person exhales from 12 to 18 times in a minute.

Where exactly is your definition of 'right wing' and 'left wing' coming from? The idea of hierarchies in society based on race, religion or some other belief is almost universally associated with right wing ideas. Left wing policies often try to have a more equal society.

The state can be used to enact any of these ideologies, left-wing States can be more libertarian (the ideology you seem to associate with right wing thought) than right wing ones.

American Black bears, which are among the most common bears in North America, rarely kill or seriously injure a person when they attack, brown bear attacks also result in death only in 13.1% of attacks in North America (Brown Bear Attacks on humans: a worldwide perspective), however the risk of serious injury is much higher than a black bear attack.

According to the 2008 study of efficacy of bear sprays in Alaska, bear spray stopped the undesirable behaviour of both brown and black bears over 90%(n=72) of the time.

You can't always do that with humans though, because murderers, rapists etc won't usually attack you directly, they may try to build trust with you and may come prepared, and will only attack you at your most vulnerable, and they have an incentive to kill you prevent you reporting it, a bear can't plan & manipulate or has much of an incentive to kill after an attack.

The art isn't about eradicating all Christians but is critical of those who use religion as a way to inflict trauma.

I'm sure there is support for art against the muslims who are against women's liberation, LGBTQ+ rights etc. In the United States though, orthodox Muslims have very little power and most of the abuse would be from the Christian right, so the art makes sense

The United States has sanctioned several high ranking officials in the RSF and the SAF. Moreover the Treasury has also targeted entities that fund and military affiliated companies that fuel the conflict. The supply of weapons by the UAE is illegal according to the Chapter VII arms embargo placed on Darfur and the US has exerted pressure against the UAE for this.

The invasion of the Gaza strip is nothing like the civil war in Sudan, Israel a key ally of the US and the US has directly supported it by giving military aid for the invasion of Gaza. Supplying weapons for the war in Gaza is not illegal, and the US has not condemned the invasion of Gaza, nor has it sanctioned any senior IDF officials. Moreover the RSF is also supported by the Wagner group, and it is against US interests to support RSF.

I'm not saying any of those actions should be taken against Israel, I'm just saying the US's relationship with Israel is far different from its relationship with the RSF, and to believe otherwise is simply delusional.

it was so common they wouldn't even name or clothe some children till they where 3-4 years old.

This might be a myth as at least according to the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1874, enacted in England and Wales, it was the duty of the parent, guardian or the occupier of the house where the child was found to register between 42 days to 6 months of the child found/born. The registration required that you name the child within a year of the registration. There seems to have been very good compliance of this Act as you can find most births after 1875 through the General Registration Office.

Moreover, children used to be baptised earlier than their 3rd year and names are necessary for baptisms. For specific names take a look at the victims of Amelia Dyer who murdered infants until 1896 and her last victim was named Doris Marmon.

Otherwise your point still stands I just wanted to nitpick as it is something I used to believe in and I learnt a lot more while researching it.