I mean, if there were to be conscription it probably wouldn’t be for technical roles like mechanics or artillery coordinators. It would be for logistical duties (drive this truck, mop this floor, cook this soup) and for dads-army-esque garrison duty. That then frees up the career soldiers to do what they are trained for. Mass mobilisation for an infantry-focused army I cannot see happening, mostly because Russia would be rubble by the time we get that desperate.
I am suicidal so I may fight just so I can die.
Sadly you can get disqualified for that.
Same as any professional. I’ve yet to meet a civil engineer who’s answer is “fewer bridges”
3,700 miles (5,954 km) to a sea target off the west coast of Africa but veered towards the US.
It’s got that red-coat spirit in it
I mean, one part of the economy the government (or, parliament at least) has control of is the money supply, which is pretty much the sole driver of inflation. If he’d genuinely wanted to (not necessarily saying he should’ve) he could’ve.
I mean, the entire purpose behind SMR’s is pretty much to circumvent the political opposition to built-in-place reactors. If companies/nations could build conventional nuclear they would.
yeah your AI overlords were trained by the internet, so I’d not put any money on it.
I mean, Jevon’s Paradox works because the increased efficiency leads to decreased costs. It’s unclear if that’s going to be the case for electric cars because the hardware needed to get to that high efficiency is so expensive, and mostly made cost-effective by government assistance (I.e. eletric cars here in the UK do not pay road tax).
I’m also not sure if lowered costs would massively change the number of drivers (at least in the developed world) in the EU there’s one car for every two people. We’re not going to see that become 5 cars for every two people just because the efficiency increases, demand is too inelastic.
I think the propaganda is the nefarious reason.
Tories have been talking about this since at least the coalition, if they had really wanted to impliment something like this they would’ve. The fact they haven’t implies:
it was a question not a conclusion, as I said, either way is bad, There’s nothing wrong with wanting to know the scope of a problem.
(Thank you, though, link was helpful. <3 )
So I’m all for children ***not ***starving, I’d like to get that out the way. That being said, this article could be a lot more specific.
4 million people experienced destitution in 2022. Destitution is when people cannot afford to meet their most basic physical needs to stay warm, dry, clean and fed.
Is that an “and” or an “or”? Are children hungry and homeless, or are they going hungry to avoid being homeless, neither is good obviously, but it makes the difference between a third world country and a very shitty first world country.
with almost three quarters (72%) of those destitute being in receipt of benefits. charities – such as food banks – to try to prevent people from experiencing the worst of destitution, but the task is too great for them.
Are the destitution statistics based on what people can afford pre or post these thing? Obviously it’s bad when people need to rely on charity & government assistance to afford their essentials, but it’s unclear from the article how stressed these systems are.
Single people of working age continue to be the worst-affected group by far … followed by no statistics pertaining to this group!!!
Idk I just want more figures. That’s all I guess
Cash is king.
The news of KSP 2’s death has got me playing KSP [1] for the first time in years. It’s still abyssmally optimised, but nonetheless fun as ever!