dimreepr

Your teacher/village taught you what to boo at... Indeed, a steady decline in critical thinking; would produce a faith in bullshit...

But you could ask why...

We all are...

Like it or not, your village taught you how to boo... What's hard is, thinking past why we boo?

My apologies to everyone, had a visit from a friend with a bottle of JD. 🤒 But I'm not implying ethical failings in anyone; we all at some point have thrown the first stone. The Diderot effect suggests we're all capable of behaving like a billionaire, I'm just exploring a method of eliminating excuses. Most tax-payer's don't see the point of charity, unless there's a reasonable excuse/sob-story; being a lazy mouse is no excuse, but it is a reason...

We are only human, after all... I don't think you're a troll, I think you're very smart; I'm just asking...

I have, in posting this ethically; it's your job to prove me wrong... Do you not see the difference?

I'm often confused by the economy of thought, perhaps you can explain... Didn't he entertain us???

That's the problem, it's not incorrect... It's just a different version of correct...

It's not money for nothing, it's very entertaining...

The purpose is to explore the nuances of taxes and the value to society for those that don't pay. "Why ethics?" Where would you suggest? OTOH A lot of the infrastructure, rail/road's, canal's, bridge's etc. were built by the billionaire's of their day to facilitate their trade; much like China's belt and road initiative. I'm with you on your "CHIP IN, ASSHOLES.", I just think we need to find a way to persuade them that they're not better than a bin man, just equally useful. The trickle down theory doesn't work, it's an excuse to avoid tax; far more job's are supported by the average tax payer, buying a widget. First we have to understand the parable of the industrious mouse. Why would he/she want too do that?

Not old enough...

Did you build it?

This is for you @Peterkin...

You should start another topic, if you want to find out...

The point of my fly-by-wire example, is to show a disconect between the pilot and the control surfaces, so, theoretically the proximity of the pilot to the control surfaces is irrelevant. The passengers training, I note, doesn't include flight training.

It's called economics, but I'm loathed to refuse a free ride... But, which button?

What button could they push onboard, that's in any way different from the button they push on the ground?

Way to miss the point; it's investor's not the tax payer.

Way to miss the point... They all have a pilot; they just don't need to be onboard...

Most modern aircraft are fly by wire, so technically they are all capable of being flown remotely. No.

But now they can, besides what's the point of a blacked out professional astronaut? I'm with @zapatos on this, it seems valid risk for the extra cargo. But as to the wisdom of space tourism, it's one of the few taxes on a billionaire; why not let them pay for, an otherwise public investment.

Here's a mirror...

me too... I just wonder...

I hesitate to object, since this is in the lounge, but isn't a fog a way to obscure what we see?