It's called common decency. You should try it sometime. Not every transaction involves money, corporations, or contracts. It can be something as simple as picking a toothpick out of a dispenser at a restaurant.
They claim that Scandinavian countries are examples of socialism, because anyone who had to use true socialist countries as models for society would very quickly find themselves standing alone. It's an attempt to put a kind face to the evils of socialism, when really it's just a prime example of how introducing capitalism into a socialist system has led to great growth, wealth, and equality. Anyone who claims Scandinavian countries are socialist needs to be laughed at until they get smarter, or shut up.
Capitalist transactions only work because of the threat of violence.
Bullshit. Capitalist transactions (in a free-ish market) work because they benefit all parties to the transaction. Both parties end up richer than they were before, because they both get something they want or need more than what they have. Other than that, I'm more or less in agreement, assuming we are talking about a liberal representative democracy.
Imagine if you had paid Facebook a lot of money to place ads in these popular trending stories, only to find out they aren't actually popular and trending, but selected for placement by Facebook employees.
If Facebook is selling adspace on these newsfeeds based on the assumption that they contain popular trending stories, but in reality they are being selected and censored by Facebook employees, don't you think that might upset some advertisers that entered into a trust with Facebook? Could it be considered fraudulent? Granted, without seeing the advert contracts it's hard to say.
It may have rolled over but if it was ever inverted it happened in the air. Did Tesla also invent unbreakable glass and unscratchable paint? Nothing other than the front, rear, and underside ever touched the ground on that car.
It only costs you your soul, and all the information that Facebook can pull from your account. Just because you don't give them money doesn't mean they don't have a valid contract or aren't engaged in business.
Do you have any evidence that Fox News is more biased than any of the others? It's pretty clear that you don't watch it. You're too busy scanning Vox, ThinkProgress, and Huffingtonpost, while MSNBC is blaring in the background.
So say Facebook were to add a trending stories feature to it's site. It is implied both directly and indirectly that these trending stories are allowed to naturally propagate and appear on a newsfeed. Facebook attracts business with this feature and users sign up for it under those conditions. Only later is it learned that the stories aren't really trending at all but are actually selected and censored by Facebook employees. You don't think there's a case to be made for false advertising?
No, they escaped because they landed in a freshly plowed field. The car did not roll over. They were wearing seatbelts. Airbags deployed correctly. And actually there was not that much damage to the car. It was far from a catastrophic incident. But for PR purposes it excels.
It's not as silly as all those parents who knowingly send their daughters off to college knowing that they have a 20% chance of being raped. The President says so.
No, neither of those links has Trump claiming the unemployment rate is 42%. They both have him quoted saying someone else thinks the unemployment rate is 42%. Your reading comprehension needs some serious work if you double checked the links and still came to the same conclusion.
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't the public immunized? What danger does a non vaccinated family pose?
His kids can't kill your kids, because your kids are immunized.
It's called common decency. You should try it sometime. Not every transaction involves money, corporations, or contracts. It can be something as simple as picking a toothpick out of a dispenser at a restaurant.
There are no socialist countries in Europe. They all folded and dissolved decades ago.
They claim that Scandinavian countries are examples of socialism, because anyone who had to use true socialist countries as models for society would very quickly find themselves standing alone. It's an attempt to put a kind face to the evils of socialism, when really it's just a prime example of how introducing capitalism into a socialist system has led to great growth, wealth, and equality. Anyone who claims Scandinavian countries are socialist needs to be laughed at until they get smarter, or shut up.
Capitalist transactions only work because of the threat of violence.
Bullshit. Capitalist transactions (in a free-ish market) work because they benefit all parties to the transaction. Both parties end up richer than they were before, because they both get something they want or need more than what they have. Other than that, I'm more or less in agreement, assuming we are talking about a liberal representative democracy.
That's true, but in the end it's all about consent. That's what differentiates liberty from tyranny.
Imagine if you had paid Facebook a lot of money to place ads in these popular trending stories, only to find out they aren't actually popular and trending, but selected for placement by Facebook employees.
What descent?
If Facebook is selling adspace on these newsfeeds based on the assumption that they contain popular trending stories, but in reality they are being selected and censored by Facebook employees, don't you think that might upset some advertisers that entered into a trust with Facebook? Could it be considered fraudulent? Granted, without seeing the advert contracts it's hard to say.
It may have rolled over but if it was ever inverted it happened in the air. Did Tesla also invent unbreakable glass and unscratchable paint? Nothing other than the front, rear, and underside ever touched the ground on that car.
It only costs you your soul, and all the information that Facebook can pull from your account. Just because you don't give them money doesn't mean they don't have a valid contract or aren't engaged in business.
Do you have any evidence that Fox News is more biased than any of the others? It's pretty clear that you don't watch it. You're too busy scanning Vox, ThinkProgress, and Huffingtonpost, while MSNBC is blaring in the background.
False advertisement is illegal, on the other hand.
False advertisement is not protected speech.
The first amendment doesn't allow you to make false claims or advertise falsely.
Basically you're saying that the GOP establishment really wanted Trump all along? Are you effing nuts?
So say Facebook were to add a trending stories feature to it's site. It is implied both directly and indirectly that these trending stories are allowed to naturally propagate and appear on a newsfeed. Facebook attracts business with this feature and users sign up for it under those conditions. Only later is it learned that the stories aren't really trending at all but are actually selected and censored by Facebook employees. You don't think there's a case to be made for false advertising?
No, they escaped because they landed in a freshly plowed field. The car did not roll over. They were wearing seatbelts. Airbags deployed correctly. And actually there was not that much damage to the car. It was far from a catastrophic incident. But for PR purposes it excels.
I don't know what MRA is. But I do know what common sense is. And you don't have it.
It's not as silly as all those parents who knowingly send their daughters off to college knowing that they have a 20% chance of being raped. The President says so.
Of course they were on the way out. It's called entropy.
In other words we are now in agreement that you were wrong. Neener.
We aren't Norway.
No, neither of those links has Trump claiming the unemployment rate is 42%. They both have him quoted saying someone else thinks the unemployment rate is 42%. Your reading comprehension needs some serious work if you double checked the links and still came to the same conclusion.