Except that MDN isn't your hipster startup website with a 20MB hero image that needs to get its point across immediately. You're never going to end up on MDN and say "I have no idea what this is". You're there because you already know what's under the damn fold.
What a genius idea, design only for people with expensive screens, make software only people with a dual Xeon and a GTX1080 can run, and be sure to make the minimum resolution 2560*1900. You're sure to make friends.
Welcome to reality, most people use cheap $20 chinese screens.
And so the solution is to create content for people on 320x480 pixel screens with no contrast? No.
We should try and create the content in the best possible formats, with the highest available standards, and then the user agent, acting on behalf of the user, should scale that to the user’s current system, increasing or decreasing the contrast.
- Countless fiscal advantages have already been given and tried, effectively the same thing as lowering taxes on companies. That includes the CIE, CICE, CIR, the reduction of TVA in restaurants, fiscal benefits for life insurance holders, lowering the ISS to 34.6%, removing taxes on plus-value, the globalised worldwide profits regime, and the countless things that can be listed here : https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niche_fiscale
All of these happened, and the costs have not changed. Some of them were given in exchange of promise of jobs (the change of TVA in restaurants being one of the most notable), and none happened. Profits went up, though.
I would rather have microwave repair costs go up to 80€ than lower our living standards.
>I certainly wouldn’t be happy if I had to pay several hundred euros more for a microwave because of a law mandating the type of screw holes that must be used.
Agreed upon tax deals have to be legal in the framework laid down by the European union if you're a member. Ireland made a deal that wasn't legal. The EU reminded Apple they had to pay it. Nothing more.
>Fight dictatorial control with dictatorial control.
...You do know that communism advocates for a society where control is something done in collaboration with others? Because China, or the USSR calls itself communist does not mean it is. A simple reading of Marx & Engels' work would clarify that.
In fact airports can be / often are built far from urban areas where land is cheaper and space is available not just for the runways and terminals but parking, cargo etc. While you want rail terminals to be in densely connected locations which are more expensive and more difficult to network to.
But my point is that you can relatively easily fly from one airport to many others. For example, the under-construction California HSR goes from LA through Bakersfield in the Central Valley up to SF and then Sacramento. If Fresno in the Central Valley grew, you could expand its commuter airport and then it would be directly linked by air to Burbank, San Jose, San Franciso etc as well as points outside the state. While the cost of adding an HSR terminal in Fresno could be large, especially if the rail doesn't run nearby (as it happens a terminal appears to be planned in Fresno, but the point remains).
I'm still a big supporter of HSR but I recognize the trade offs.
>The notion of no longer blowing up the Middle East and treating Russia as a villain, was impossible for them to stomach re Trump,
Ah, yes, which is why he's threatening North Korea, attacking airfields in Syria, selling weapons to Saudi Arabia (which is currently in a war with Yemen), bombing in Afghanistan, in his own words giving the military "total authorization", authorized a raid in Yemen, and the list goes on.
You were _sold_ no more nation building, by a man who has interests in having his fingers everywhere in the globe. That you bought it hook, line and sinker is yet another problem.
In the same way, the Vietnam war was reasonably popular at first. It was barely around 67 and after countless deaths that the opinion was overwhelmingly negative, forcing the US to go back tail between its legs.
Maybe Americans no longer want war. Every single leader they are electing certainly doesn't share that opinion though. So, either they actually quite enjoy playing world police, or they're quite frankly so manipulable it becomes scary. But go on ahead and blame "the globalists" and "the deep state" (which, intended or not, is very much an InfoWars term, not exactly a reputable source), I am certain that'll do a lot of good.
