Tbh I kinda get it because I have so often seen americans on reddit say that the US "is a republic, not a democracy" so I'm assuming they're being bullshitted (bullshat? Idk that feels wrong) from somewhere and that seems worth correcting.
On the other hand the OP didn't even assert them to be opposed, just that people debate it, which is clearly true.
I also do that. I've missed appointments because of it even. I've learned to just repeat in 24 hour format and get a confirmation to make sure I didn't fuck it up (helps that I live in a country where 24 hour is the default in everything other than speech, where it's mixed, so there's 0 chance the other person will have trouble with 24 hour time).
It's an issue of political will, because it's perfectly possible to keep cycling possible even in those conditions, but yea as long as that isn't there you can't always.
If the food has longer shelf life, stores can keep the same amount of stock as now and sell everything before it goes bad.
Of course, the easy way would be for stores to not stock as much of food that is likely to go bad before all of it is sold, but then they make less money and also customers would cry that they sometimes can't get everything they want.
Yeah I know, I just meant to state I can see where the initial doubt comes from. I already saw the study further up and the reasoning makes sense.
Though I think with dieting in particular general trends are very hard to apply to individuals (most obvious offender being BMI).
Yea i can absolutely see that. Though it's also understandable to doubt it because personally it just doesn't apply - which I think is largely because I don't changr my portion sizes, and I'm probably not the only one. I make food and eat all of it, and I usually eat 2 meals a day + sometimes breakfast. I've found that delaying food intake for as long as possible leads to me eating less overall and losing weight.
In my case, eating breakfast or not is more of a result of how much I ate the previous day.
They're nowhere near the top if you relate it to size though (and also next to none of it is electrified, which is a pretty good indicator of it being mostly old - after all, rail is what even allowrd the country to be built).
But also it's a joke
The second highest voted thing is mildly misleading because left parties are a lot more fractured, especially in EU elections. The afd could have 11% while 9 left wing partirs have 9.8% and be the most voted party, but that would be a better result than we have now with it being the second most voted.
The results are bad, but 16% is at least nowhere nesr a majority. I'm honestly more concerned about the CDU moving closer to the afd and still ending up with 30%, seems almost like many people don't like the afd because they've been told afd bad, but still agree with much of their ideology.
I think germany could have gone worse, and people are quick to see that the AfD has the second most votes and cry disaster, but reality is that left wing votes are just split between more parties. Overall "cdu and further right" seems to bd about evenly split with "left of cdu".
But still, compared to both the previous EU election and the most recent national election, it got quite a bit worse. CDU and AfD combined were at 36% in the last national election, they're up by about 5% each, and that while the CDU has been getting closer to the AfDs position in recent years.
Too many is still better than too few, and it's not close. Useless comments make parsing a bit harder. Missing comments can mean hours of research.
It works both ways depending on the timescale you apply. You could compare the murder of lukes parents to october 7th. It fits the "bad thing where people die happens, response kills far more" that applies to palestine too. And the public perception, especially of people supporting israel, seems to think the conflict started there.
I saw it that way, but still as a post critical of israel saying "it's easy to see an atrocity and want revenge at all costs, but that doesn't make it right". The "yea" at the end implies to me that what we thought with the fiction was maybe mistaken.
Of course, the death star was a weapon of mass destruction seconds from destroying a planet, so there really isn't much moral ambiguity there, but not mentioning that is likely deliberate in order to make the comparison work.
I distrust DeepL ever since I found out it translates "irritating" into german as "irritierend" (which means confusing, and is a common mistranslation for obvious reasons). Though I'm sure google translate does similar dumb things.