I agree that Bezos should have disclosed his links to the construction through Amazon, but I also think every single reporter for NPR, including and especially the one who wrote this, should disclose their personal, family, and political relationships to political parties and politicians before reporting on them.
This piece would be more useful if it explained what it means by winning. Early on, it seems to define winning as the amount of taxpayer subsidies going towards it, at least in the US; but then it talks about the growth in the rest of the world without showing, at least before I stopped reading, how much of that growth is driven by tax and regulatory incentives.
It was well known before Kimmel made his comments that the shooter was in a romantic relationship with a trans woman. Having said that, even if he did not know about that relationship it was irresponsible of Kimmel to repeat rumors he could not have known were true that the shooter was maga.
Yes but you're not a mind reader and you don't know how much of his firing was due to government pressure vs a decision he was alienating half the country irreparably - and I'm curious to know why you didn't mention his ratings had been slipping. Surely that has some place in the discussion?
There's certainly a place for revisionist history and the Spartan legend seemed like a fair target even before Steven Pressfield's Gates of Fire, but it seems ironic to be skewering the Frank-Miller-300 caricature in service to his own caricature of the "second-amendment-sticker-on-my-pickup-truck" guys who are his real target.
"I just bet those Spartans would be coal rolling me in their diesel Ford F-350's with their lifted tires and MAGA bumpter stickers today if they could!"
It's the most likely interpretation toe because it fits the known facts.
Ungenerous interpretations don't make sense and don't fit the known facts.
Musk isn't hiding his intentions. He's blasting them. He wants to make humans an interplanetary species. He wants his name to be associated with that for millennia. I don't see anything wrong with that and have trouble understanding why people hate him souch for it.
In answer to your question, it is irrelevant. It doesn't matter how much money musk has, or you have, or bezos has, or the government has. What matters is where that money is invested.
If musk was using his money to bang hookers on solid gold yachts, fine, complain about it. But he isn't. He doesn't even own a house.
Stop worrying about another man's dollar and start worrying about being a better and less covetous person.
Yes because companies are totally unchecked and there's no regulation at all and because of this we have governance that brings us Donald Trump and Kamala Harris and bullshit wars and tampons in boys bathrooms and under lock and key at Walgreens. Good grief. This is not the kind of thing technical people or hackers want to read.
"Ignores" may or may not be a strong word, but it's certainly the most accurate one I can think of to describe what you did. You ignored it. As in you failed to account for what is called outside of China "the elephant in the room." Kind of odd that you find it triggering. It's almost as if you are not being entirely honest.
Yes because the straw scenario you imagine, in your attempt to make a point using junior college sarcasm, is literally the only way to get legislation passed. Good grief.
One standard.