Should people also have the freedom of choice to buy snake oil that claims to cure cancer, etc? The opposite of freedom is not regulation. That’s a bunch of propaganda used by people when they want to change an inconvenient topic. It’s used, for example, when talking about the ACA and claiming that nationalized health insurance would rob the people of choosing their blood sucking middle man for health insurance.
will fix this later
TODO
{Burp, chew, mouth noises} Do Not change this because it will break {unintelligible noises}
We’ve got to explore these final frontiers
Prime directives ignored freely-e-e-e-e
We’ve got to keep our mission peaceful
Got to keep these zones in neutrality
Strongbad even has the boxing gloves to punch Q on his hands already. How he types with them on, though, who knows?
Just one?
Do you mean the upper, the sole, or some other part?
For the upper, leather needs to be taken care of. I’m not an expert on that as it’s never been worth it to me to deal with that. Fake leather has certain additives that eventually break down and then the material becomes less supple and resilient. That’s the same reason midsoles typically have a limited lifespan even without use as well.
Bullshit and if it is or if it isn’t.
Oh, sorry, I didn’t know that’s what real life was like. Thanks for setting me straight.
But yeah, being talked down the like that means I’m done with you. Try to be less condescending when you disagree with people.
Yeah, on second thought, you do make a good point.
So one choice doesn’t impact another unless it’s to make a habit? Come on, you can’t have a rule apply to my point but not to your point.
You’re straw manning me. I’m not saying people don’t have a choice. But they’re still going to lose. It doesn’t matter that I have a choice of which piece to move when the point is not to move pieces, but to checkmate. Saying there are choices misses the point.
Again: “compulsively” “helplessly”.
Look, if you’re not interested in admitting that words have meaning, you’re not arguing in good faith and I’m done with you. Have a good one.
CICO is not only reductive to the point of being useless, it’s also bad advice for weight loss or maintenance.
In laymen’s terms: the body reduces metabolism in response to weight loss.
You don’t seem to understand the topic beyond a few catchphrases, so I’m done interacting with you. Have a good one.
Here’s a few ways:
Information: does an individual know chess rules? Openings? En passant? Do they want to spend the time and effort to learn? Are they getting their info from reliable sources or are they learning bongcloud and knooks?
Difference in skill level: the food and diet industries have thousands of specialists on their side with experience in psychology, advertisement, economics, lobbying, etc. Grandmasters can set up traps that new like a good idea to their opponent while thinking 10 steps ahead.
Complexity: chess and diet are not a single choice, but a series of choices, some of which make later moves more difficult.
Effort: it takes a long time to learn enough to even put up a decent resistance to a grandmaster, let alone win. It’s more than I’d care to put in. I don’t want to think about chess all the time. That’s called a chessing disorder.
“Cannot stop choosing”
Come on.
It’s not simple math. It’s biology, sociology, psychology, medicine, etc.
Just on your last point, sugar is not more addictive than narcotics. That’s complete bunk. Provide a primary source for that claim if you want to refute me, but all those headlines about that topic were sensational and were basically based on sugar lighting up the same part of the brain as narcotics, namely the pleasure areas. So we like them both, but that has no bearing on addictiveness.
That’s like saying losing chess against a grandmaster is a choice because you pick where the pieces go.
No.
Big fan of the Citizens United decision and money in politics, I take it?