TheRealGChu

So are you saying, after the New Deal, the US was/is no longer practicing capitalism? I am afraid I have to disagree.

What? Do you have only a black/white mentality? Of course not. We have a mixed system, as does almost the rest of the world that isn't a dictatorship. Capitalism and socialism are not mutually exclusive; in fact, there's a compelling argument that one really can't exist without the other.

Yes the government funded them with public money, public money paid by the taxpayers.

Yes, that's called socialism. The government levies taxes from its people, then the government redistributes the wealth, that's the very definition of socialism.

That is why renaissance and enlightenment is such a big deal in history.>

Umm...capitalism didn't exist in the Renaissance and Enlightenment. Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations wasn't published until 1776. Most of Europe was still feudal during the Renaissance and Enlightenment. England is the exception, but England was always the exception. So, I'm not sure what you're talking about. The Royal Society, for which Newton, Hooke, Halley, etc., were all members of, was funded by the Crown, hence the name, "Royal Society". The European savants all had royal patrons, like Leibniz, Brahe, and Huygens, that funded their livelihoods.

For note, I am a published historian by education that specialized in Tudor England.

What a simplistic, solipsistic, history-blind take! Do you have no knowledge of the 19th century? Arguably, before the Civil War was the prime time of truly "free markets" and pure capitalism in the US. It was also a time of drastic wealth inequality, exploitation of anyone that wasn't a white, male landowner, to say nothing of slavery. How many thousands died creating the railroads in the US? All of those millionaires like Carnegie, JP Morgan, Vanderbilt, Rockerfeller, all made their money on the backs and deaths of poor people.

Prior to FDR and the New Deal, we'd have Panics, where there'd be massive bank failures about every 20-30 years because of unfettered capitalism. And, just like the Great Recession, the rich got richer and the poor got poorer. It was the New Deal and the FDIC that stopped the cycle.

Workers rights are antithetical to capitalism. Triangles Shirtwaist Factory Fire, children in the coal mines in Appalachia, coolie labor building the railroads.

We are not "wealthier, healthier, and happier" because of capitalism. It was the New Deal that helped shape the world the US has now, for which conservativism has been chipping away since Nixon. Socialistic practices like labor unions, collective bargaining, etc., brought wealth and stability, and created the massive middle-class that we have now. There had been no real middle-class before that, historically, just the rich and the poor. FDIC stopped the Panics; labor unions and collective bargaining brought wealth and education the working class, thus elevating and creating the massive middle-class we have now. Prior to the Great Depression, life was pretty awful and hard if you weren't rich in the US.

I'm not shitting on capitalism, but it needs the limitations that socialism brings to keep it in check, to keep it accountable, and not run roughshod over minorities, women, and children.

Also, scientific advancements actually came a lot from war, sad to say. The exponential growth of computers, GPS, obviously nuclear technology, a lot of medicine and medical procedures (thanks MASH units in Korea!) all came out of war. As for later 20th century advancements? All funded by the government. I'd suggest reading Neil DeGrasse Tyson's book, Accessory to War.

Have you not played Bioshock?

Anyway, any extreme "ism" is inherently unstable without the other side balancing itself. That's cos humans are greedy, selfish fucks. The free market doesn't work because humans are greedy, selfish fucks. Pure capitalism will eventually eat itself. On the flip side, pure socialism doesn't work cos humans are greedy, selfish fucks. Pure socialism will eventually reify itself into complete inertia. Capitalism needs the inherent brakes that socialism provides; while socialism needs to incentives capitalism provides. Pure capitalism causes massive boom/bust cycles. Before the Great Depression, there were the Panics that happened about ever 20-30 years, where, similarly to the Great Recession, banks would overleverage themselves, and go bust. What ended up stopping those kind of panics were the socialistic programs of FDR and the New Deal.

Free markets only work when they're actually free, that means no monopolies. We're in an extreme stage of capitalism right now with monopolizes all over the place. There is no free market. Ppl like to say "late stage capitalism" but it's more more similar to the laissez faire capitalism of the robber-barons of the late 19th century. Monopolies everywhere, wealth concentrated in the <1%, etc. Profits at any cost, including human life. Extreme capitalism is also tied into conservativism. This results in "rules for thee, not for me" circumstances. In other words, capitalists and conservatives believe laws should protect them but not bind them; while poor ppl, minorities and women should have laws binding them, but not protect them. This, of course, leads to massive social inequities and social unrest.

For more context, read the the Wikipedia articles on the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire, child labor in the Appalachian mines and how many children died from it, the Pinochet regime, etc. And, more recently, the actions at Amazon by not letting their employees evacuate or shelter from the horrific tornadoes that ripped through IL and collapsed a warehouse where 6 employees were killed (Amazon is being sued for it). The maquilladores in northern Mexico (thanks NAFTA!), child slavery in South and SE Asia (don't buy Nike), and the general destruction of the environment. Hope you're enjoying your heatwave!

I'm a Minnesotan. We know HHH (though, it prolly helped that a stadium was also named after him =P).

HHH/Mondale/Wellstone. Wellstone died too young.

Haha, exactly like knitting! A billion years ago, I saw this really cool shrug/scarf/shawl type thing. It was on clearance for $5. Tell my husband, I can totally make that! 5 years later, it's done at a cost of about $15 =P

Wild game: throw in rabbit, deer (or elk), buffalo, etc. Alligator is also quite tasty. Sheep, goat (man, nothing beats curry goat, let me tell you).

Depends on what you mean by "background". I'm an ex-lawyer (practiced for a couple years, but hated it, doing other law-related things), but I'm an old school geek that was using the internet in the late 80s, building my own boxes in the 90s, etc. I'm also a woman.

I like the fediverse because it reminds me of the free-wheeling, anarchical days of the interbutts in the early 90s with IRC (EFnet only, mind), usenet, etc., before Endless September.

Those in the Skyrim community knows that Gamerant just skims reddit posts and puts up stupid shit like, "you won't believe what this Skyrim player discovered today!" sort of nonsense.

Anyway, I just write down I, II, III, etc. and mark down with tics every time I cast a spell and at what level. I mean, do you need to get more complicated? This seems like extra work.

No. This is why I have mods. Live Another Life, never go past the Horn of Jurgen quest, then very few dragon spawns. It's the quest with Delphine where Alduin raises the dragon from the dragon grave that really spawns the hobillion dragons. So, if you don't care about the main quest, just don't go past giving the horn to the Greybeards.

Re weaving in ends: I just learned a new technique colloquially called Weavin Steven, where you twist and carry the yarn behind the stitches so it gets twisted and woven into the stitches automatically. It's a bit fiddly, but I loathe weaving in ends, so this looks a pretty good solution. This is obviously only a solution when you have a right/wrong side piece.

I resent that. I eat more than 3 species of animals.