All I can say is that the host of behind the bastards is an excellent journalist who does thorough research before each episode. I don't have any expertise in this topic, but in other episodes where I am knowledgeable his research has been accurate.

Anything from Rusty is always good stuff!

Considering Chrysler stopped making sedans in 2016 and Ford stopped in 2018, I think they were well aware how far China was ahead. They didn't even bother trying to compete and just make cars for people who will take the longest to make the switch to electric.

That death toll also includes China who also used Lysenko's fake farming techniques. Russia didn't want to admit their plan wasn't working and China didn't want to admit they were failing using the method that supposedly worked so well in Russia. Farmers reporting low crop yields in both countries were blamed and accused of hiding food for themselves. The deaths definitely fall on a lot of shoulders, but at its heart was Lyselko convincing the government to use his plan with false data and continuing that lie even after he knew it wasn't working.

Communism didn't kill the people so much as Stalin's habit of killing people who disappointed or disagreed with him led to massive falsification of scientific data and crop yields.

Unfortunately I think history shows us that there is always a portion of the population which, through fear or greed, wants to dominate the rest. The constant battle against authoritarianism may be just part of human existence.

I just got done listening to an old Behind the Bastards about Trofim Lysenko who was a Soviet scientist whose job it was to increase crop yield. He ignored Darwinian evolution in favor of a type of Lamarckian evolution that fit better with Stalin's politics. This involved planting massive amounts of seeds per acre with the idea that the seeds would help each other grow better. He falsified his data to show that this worked and in the long run led to the starvation of 30 million people.

I don't mean to criticize communism by mentioning this. Certainly capitalism has shown the same adherence to ideology in spite of evidence with climate change. I just think it was an interesting bit of history in light of the post which is actually good agricultural science they also fits with collectivist thought.

And why don't we stick the whole thing underground to further minimize damage to the landscape. Besides it's way cooler to be called a vault dweller than a condo resident.

The picture on the left is just an argument against lawns.

Absolutely agree, but at some point there will still be someone reporting expenses to the government and that needs to be trustworthy info.

You make a good point, but think of it this way. Someone Googles "tips on buying a new laptop". Companies enrolled with the Google program bump up their prices for that user. But what about websites not enrolled in the program? Their prices stay lower, so if the person buying the laptop ships around even a little bit, they will likely buy from one of the non-affiliated sites.

It only works if the whole marketplace is under the system. Amazon is a shopping experience tailored to keep people inside their system, so it works with them. You aren't going to take the time to price match across multiple websites for a pair of socks. I think it is a lot harder to manipulate prices with big-ticket items, where people will put in the effort to shop around.

This guy had convictions for possession of a machine gun in 2002 and 2022! How the fuck did he get a third one!!!

https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/national-international/donald-trump-assassination-attempt/3970611/

Sounds like the company needs to be forced to pay for full time government employees who supervise the company to insure compliance.

I agree with the broad premise that your information has value, but I wouldn't worry about Google increasing prices just for you. Companies still control their own websites and they aren't going to allow another company to change what they change directly.

What Google sells is the ability for a company to get their website in front of your eyes. They sell the top spaces in your search results. A company who doesn't pay Google gets pushed to page two.vor three. Now in a sense that increases your prices because the cost of the companies increased ad budgets is passed on to you.

Hating people trying to harm you is justified. Hating people because they are different is not. Trump and MAGA Republicans are an existential threat to this country. Moving the country forward is only an option if it still exists as a representative democracy.

For some reason Trump supporters prefer to drive rather than take the busses provided by the candidate.

In other words, he not only failed to challenge the core of Covid ideology—that other human beings are pathogenic so we need to restrict our freedoms and isolate—but used his social media presence, such as it was, to urge others to accept all the dominant lies by the government. He bought the Covid and lockdown ideology and broadcasted it. He seems to have no regrets.

The author is a plague rat who thinks libertarianism means being able to harm others with impunity. Don't waste time on this trash.

Huh. I thought he had died a lot earlier than 2022.

All of that is irrelevant to my point that your right wing government has policies that would be far left in the US

The rubric is literally right below what you quoted

The categories are as follows:

1. Biased Wording/Headlines- Does the source use loaded words to convey emotion to sway the reader. Do headlines match the story?

2. Factual/Sourcing- Does the source report factually and back up claims with well-sourced evidence.

3. Story Choices: Does the source report news from both sides, or do they only publish one side.

4. Political Affiliation: How strongly does the source endorse a particular political ideology? Who do the owners support or donate to?

Just because it is a qualitative and not a quantitative assessment doesn't mean it's arbitrary.