This at least very much depends on what we choose as the real funding date of RCC... oh well, at least current management is very decent as far as its past standards are concerned (and with the second case, with the amount of - yes - mythology which managed to grew around it, we might never know how much exactly it was about the wealthy seeking more influence and savings for themselves)
Plus, as far as Catholics are concerned, I'm pretty sure there also precedents of returning from the dead / zombification...
(which one was it, anyway, when Karol Wojtya essentially (and in stark contrast to his own teachings) chose voluntary death / "euthanasia" by refusing medical treatment in last weeks of his life?)
Apostasy might have harsher claimed consequences though (too lazy to check) - that was the scenario I had on my mind, which would be probably the case more often than not (in the context of "no one is forced to be a Catholic any more", being aware of internal processes of the Church and disliking them, considering how most Christians are Catholic, and also how the Church appears more concerned about those walking away than about losing some potential conversions)
Inclusivistic redemption is only sensible considering how, in practice (and despite generally claims to the contrary), Catholicism... Christianity... heck, pretty much any religion is strongly syncretic; but that's beside the point.
Of course, the upside of this is that no one is forced to be a Catholic any more. If you don't like the way Popes are chosen, you pick a church more to your liking, or make your own.
...well, as far as Catholic Church is concerned, that might land you in eternal damnation (even if of relatively mild type; or even if just purgatory, still)
Indeed he was. However, ironically enough, life expectancy in the area in question increased markedly during his reign... despite all the victims. Generally, bringing a very backwards country up to the status of a superpower.
Even better: sure, heavy censorship. But at the same time - first largely literate generation.
Oh come on, you know perfectly well how it's THE Center only because your two large neighbors couldn't agree which of them should host it, so decided to place it sort of in-between;p (in a country invented as a buffer, to boot!;) )
Yes, the rules of Electoral College, etc., twist the odds a bit... but what does that have to do with simple comparison of urbanization levels and population densities, after TFA discussing broadband penetration on country-wide scales?
(overall your place is not that unique BTW, getting used to the idea would be a positive development in general)
That's probably why I said half (out of those which make sense to discuss - no point with Iceland really, its numbers are wild in all directions); with Finland having quite a bit lower. And their connections with the rest of Europe are generally across the sea...
(but really, there was no red right involved when you wrote "plus it appears their southern regions are more densely populated than much of the eastern United States" just after checking urbanization levels? And considering population densities / how they do have cities in the north)
What in the concept of "population density" do you not understand?
(BTW, the US has higher percentage of urban population than Norway; and do I have to explain why sparsely populated areas tend to not influence "percentage of households" statistics too much?)
Hm, you might be pointing to a solution - promoting (really real... or not, doesn't matter) the military aspect of the issue, how it would be crucial for "defense", might do the trick...;p
(maybe it would be enough to start reminding how it was a military project all along / adding a twist how it never really ceased to be one; but make damn sure it won't become known how some of its crucial ideas were pioneered in - THE HORROR! - France...)
Heck, maybe even health system and diets could be reformed that way - "assuring America its healthy future warriors!"?;)
Which is part of another oft-forgotten factor - those living in rural areas are relatively few and far between. With the emphasis on "few" they don't strongly influence the statistics in the first place.
The US apparently has even slightly higher percentage of urban population than, mentioned in TFS, South Korea; and quite notably higher than Japan (though of course those two can't be directly compared, having much higher population densities)
You do realize you make no sense? Paraphrasing: they had to do it because of hard conditions in gigantic areas (more than in the US, per person / taxpayer / customer)... which in the USA suddenly becomes the issue?
No, it's not because of low population density - for example most Nordic countries have typically much lower ones. And considering how situation with cellular coverage sort of mirrors the broadband one...
The other poster covered how confused about MAD you are. Furthermore, generally, eventual rift between US and allies in question would be certainly unfolding gradually - giving plenty of time to balance nuclear stockpiles, or make any current plans of attack(*) mostly meaningless.
(*)you seriously suggest they are ready? I don't mean this in a yes/no regarding their actual existence, we can't really know and it's irrelevant. I mean... you really so readily bring it up as an existing, waiting to be implemented plans? Nice allying...
...which brings to how, curiously, you praise the unnecessary dickery of Churchill at Mers-el-Kébir - while ignoring how, if necessary, it would most likely end up like Toulon.
Amounts of meat / "classic" livestock anywhere near close to ours require industrial, fossil fuel powered (so far) agriculture. Aiming to eat plant matter directly is much more efficient. Insects are decent, too.
Generally, the less a given place can depend on taking hectares from the past, the more it depends on plant food, insects, etc....that should be a hint.
Maybe one day you'll stop searching for philospher's stone / holy grail, too (not sure how feasible that would be, considering enough of ideological investment to influence nickname like that; on the bright side at some point you did understand how turning whole planet into industrial park of mostly self replicating nuclear power plants is not an optimal solution)
Slashdot Mirror
This at least very much depends on what we choose as the real funding date of RCC... oh well, at least current management is very decent as far as its past standards are concerned (and with the second case, with the amount of - yes - mythology which managed to grew around it, we might never know how much exactly it was about the wealthy seeking more influence and savings for themselves)
Plus, as far as Catholics are concerned, I'm pretty sure there also precedents of returning from the dead / zombification...
(which one was it, anyway, when Karol Wojtya essentially (and in stark contrast to his own teachings) chose voluntary death / "euthanasia" by refusing medical treatment in last weeks of his life?)
Apostasy might have harsher claimed consequences though (too lazy to check) - that was the scenario I had on my mind, which would be probably the case more often than not (in the context of "no one is forced to be a Catholic any more", being aware of internal processes of the Church and disliking them, considering how most Christians are Catholic, and also how the Church appears more concerned about those walking away than about losing some potential conversions)
Inclusivistic redemption is only sensible considering how, in practice (and despite generally claims to the contrary), Catholicism ... Christianity ... heck, pretty much any religion is strongly syncretic; but that's beside the point.
Of course, the upside of this is that no one is forced to be a Catholic any more. If you don't like the way Popes are chosen, you pick a church more to your liking, or make your own.
...well, as far as Catholic Church is concerned, that might land you in eternal damnation (even if of relatively mild type; or even if just purgatory, still)
Indeed he was. However, ironically enough, life expectancy in the area in question increased markedly during his reign... despite all the victims. Generally, bringing a very backwards country up to the status of a superpower.
Even better: sure, heavy censorship. But at the same time - first largely literate generation.
Oh come on, you know perfectly well how it's THE Center only because your two large neighbors couldn't agree which of them should host it, so decided to place it sort of in-between ;p (in a country invented as a buffer, to boot! ;) )
Yes, the rules of Electoral College, etc., twist the odds a bit ... but what does that have to do with simple comparison of urbanization levels and population densities, after TFA discussing broadband penetration on country-wide scales?
(overall your place is not that unique BTW, getting used to the idea would be a positive development in general)
That's probably why I said half (out of those which make sense to discuss - no point with Iceland really, its numbers are wild in all directions); with Finland having quite a bit lower. And their connections with the rest of Europe are generally across the sea...
(but really, there was no red right involved when you wrote "plus it appears their southern regions are more densely populated than much of the eastern United States" just after checking urbanization levels? And considering population densities / how they do have cities in the north)
To be fair, such uses don't really need high speed internet; even SMS can do the job, for example
What in the concept of "population density" do you not understand?
(BTW, the US has higher percentage of urban population than Norway; and do I have to explain why sparsely populated areas tend to not influence "percentage of households" statistics too much?)
So, just like the US? (which BTW also has notably higher urbanization level than half of those Nordic countries)
Choice bad! We, the saviors, how perfect approach and everybody should be happy with it! Conform!
"public safety networks" - somebody wishes for nice video surveillance backbone, probably? (but come on, schools can use good bandwidth)
Hm, you might be pointing to a solution - promoting (really real... or not, doesn't matter) the military aspect of the issue, how it would be crucial for "defense", might do the trick... ;p
(maybe it would be enough to start reminding how it was a military project all along / adding a twist how it never really ceased to be one; but make damn sure it won't become known how some of its crucial ideas were pioneered in - THE HORROR! - France...)
Heck, maybe even health system and diets could be reformed that way - "assuring America its healthy future warriors!"? ;)
It's a miracle!!!
That would probably run counter to some existing Russian laws against desecration of human remains...
But burial - sure, why not?
Which is part of another oft-forgotten factor - those living in rural areas are relatively few and far between. With the emphasis on "few" they don't strongly influence the statistics in the first place.
The US apparently has even slightly higher percentage of urban population than, mentioned in TFS, South Korea; and quite notably higher than Japan (though of course those two can't be directly compared, having much higher population densities)
You do realize you make no sense? Paraphrasing: they had to do it because of hard conditions in gigantic areas (more than in the US, per person / taxpayer / customer) ... which in the USA suddenly becomes the issue?
...but your wife does? O_o
No, it's not because of low population density - for example most Nordic countries have typically much lower ones. And considering how situation with cellular coverage sort of mirrors the broadband one...
There are different degrees of "high predictability" (plus OECD report didn't talk only about education, also economic status)
Apparently in nanny states only around 20% of status is determined by family (vs. around 50% ... and certainly even more in developing places)
The other poster covered how confused about MAD you are. Furthermore, generally, eventual rift between US and allies in question would be certainly unfolding gradually - giving plenty of time to balance nuclear stockpiles, or make any current plans of attack(*) mostly meaningless.
(*)you seriously suggest they are ready? I don't mean this in a yes/no regarding their actual existence, we can't really know and it's irrelevant. I mean... you really so readily bring it up as an existing, waiting to be implemented plans? Nice allying...
Amounts of meat / "classic" livestock anywhere near close to ours require industrial, fossil fuel powered (so far) agriculture. Aiming to eat plant matter directly is much more efficient. Insects are decent, too.
Generally, the less a given place can depend on taking hectares from the past, the more it depends on plant food, insects, etc. ...that should be a hint.
Quod erat demonstrandum...
Maybe one day you'll stop searching for philospher's stone / holy grail, too (not sure how feasible that would be, considering enough of ideological investment to influence nickname like that; on the bright side at some point you did understand how turning whole planet into industrial park of mostly self replicating nuclear power plants is not an optimal solution)
and I did post interesting related technicality