You are right, but I don't think it is just the fault of the media, this is how the human brain works. No one is losing their minds with fear at dull but distressingly common causes of death like heart disease and car accidents. It is the rare, dramatic, unexpected kinds of death and violence that govern our thoughts.

People fear flying for psychological reasons of control/helplessness, not for logical statistical reasons. Fear of 'scary' death is like the negative version of the inaccurate and over-optimistic math that causes people to buy lottery tickets.

The US also has a higher bar for what constitutes slander/libel than the UK, which can also have a chilling effect on speech.

How would a higher bar for defamation have a chilling effect on speech?

The opposite - the UK has the chilling effect.

Anything that makes people accountable for what they say will have a chilling effect on speech, just like people handle real guns with much more care and attention than they do toy guns. The real question is whether the benefit is worth the cost.

The CCP isn't 'responsible' for the people under its boot. It is their lack of responsibility for the people of China that has led to this problem. You act like the socio-demographic situation is not the direct outcome of the policies pursued by the CPP regime.

"Will you be able to arrange for the population to be able to be fed, clothed, housed, and given medical care?"

The government of China does not do any of these things. China, despite their lip-service to historical Communist revolution, has some the worst social programs in the world.

So, is your answer to let them starve? I'm trying to understand if you are answering my question or attempting to dodge by discussing something else.

We are? I suspect many of us are trying to trick ourselves as much as everyone else.

I love how my previous comment was even flagged :-)

They're artificial smiles, I guess you're programmed to use them from an early age.

I've literally seen an American coworker, from a distance, with a normal resting face, put it on once they were at a range where they'd realize it's me, then immediately drop it after passing by (I turned around precisely to see the follow up).

My impression is that they're supposed to be a sign of success. A sort of Instagram reality before its time. People smiling are usually happy and probably successful.

Plus, of course, it relaxes the interlocutor and makes them feel appreciated, up to a point.

All in all, a gimmick.

Energy use is a factor, but not the only one; this article has a concise list of why desalination isn't an easy answer to solving the earth's water needs... currently, anyway.

https://sciencing.com/advantages-disadvantages-desalination-...

Yikes. If a wild animal wandered by and damaged your source of livelihood, I doubt you would espouse a similar view.

It’s not his source of livelihood but it is his home. I think he needs to stay away from the Orcas TBF

That is... really complicated. 'Just improve their standard of living bro' isn't a real solution. It's like saying we can prevent murder by systemically renouncing violence and becoming a more peaceful society. This is obviously true, but the path forward is not obvious.

Right. The actual solution is complicated, so we default to easy "solutions" that don't work. That's the exact point I just made.

I think you are right, but why is the DOE saying something that appears patently false- are they indulging in hyperbole knowing they won't be called out? Are they drinking their own kool-aide?

George Washington Carver is a personal hero of mine. He faced all sorts of hardship and still sought to make the world a better place.

Everyone not familiar should read about him, very inspirational.

It would be magically convenient for all the people he had blackmailed over the years.

From Epstein's point of view what reason would he have not to kill himself. He was NEVER going to leave that cell alive. He could drag it out for the rest of his natural life, or he could check out immediately.

I do think the guards knew/suspected he would do this and went out of their way not to interfere.

What motivation do you suppose the guards had if they "went out of their way not to interfere"?

To me it seems that such a choice on the part of the guards would amount to a serious dereliction of duty.

Why would they willful choose to do that?

I would assume you get a lot of shit protocol when an inmate kills themselves on your watch. Why would the guards be interested in that?