42 million people suddenly not receiving money for food would certainly have some impact on the overall market would it not?
Aside from the politics of the situation, and being solely pragmatic
Should everyone prepare for the worst eventuality?
It is odd that you would assume there would be no theft increase. Survival isn’t a mark against a person’s character
Desperate times call for desperate measures
When it comes down to a basic choice of paying utilities or paying for food when both are needed it is easier to steal food than utilities
Life generally takes the path of least resistance
Certainly, I believe most people would avoid theft if possible, but when faced between dignity and survival it may be an easy choice to steal from those who are objectively price gouging
Though this is is going into a steep tangent while focusing only on theft and does not address the overall question
Yay me. Got my first comment removed on Lemmy.
What an honor, especially considering it broke none of listed rules here
“With all due respect, throwing around the term genocide in relation to Gaza is deeply offensive to many Jewish people who have suffered actual genocides.
Yes, solid reasoning. New genocides can’t exist because there were old ones
Pretty sure there have been many genocides since WW2
Venison, and for the same reason as lamb
Spez has been laser focused on trying to make reddit profitable
His actions speak like he hired some kind of machiavellian ham fisted axe wielding corporate consultants to make that happen
…but at the same time, Spez also want to fully control the main political narrative on Reddit as another revenue stream
Visiting? No.
Saluting a NK General while you are there? Probably.
Oh, did I say something inaccurate?
Not sure why you would disagree with accurate information.
It’s a pretty pathetic look.
Space Force didn’t exist under Obama
30 under 30 alum also includes people like Elizabeth Holmes, Sam Bankman-Fried, Carline Ellison, and Martin Shkreli
I kinda thought using the first vaccine and the most current vaccine in my explanation would infer that I am aware of the difference
The question is meant to be more conceptually overarching and abstract
If the innovation is the airplane then it doesn’t matter if it’s an old timey biplane or or a next generation stealth fighter
If the the innovation is the vaccine then it doesn’t matter if it’s a smallpox vaccine or an mRNA vaccine
It doesn’t seem like you’re understanding what I’m saying much at all.
By your definition everything is innovative
Maybe that in of itself is the problem here, equating the words innovative and invention.
Try replacing innovative with groundbreaking or original perhaps
But saying that advent of aviation and automobiles is just bikes and trains with wings or more wheels kinda goes to prove a lack of arguing in good faith here
I am also thankful that my children were born in this era as well
There has been significant progress in the treatment of cystic fibrosis
Still not the kind of innovation I am talking about
I don’t see very many humans naturally flapping their arms flying around very often
There was that one guy, but I’d say it was more falling with style than flying
… and he didn’t stick the landing
I also disagree
Your reply in of itself is a fallacy
An airplane relying upon improvements engine and material design does not negate the very real revelation of human flight to the world
Nor does your oversimplified and ultimately incorrect explanation steam engines and evolution of horse drawn vehicles
Especially considering the first automobiles were steam powered
It completely misses the point
The horseless carriage itself was the innovation
I apologize for not explaining the question more thoroughly
I am talking about innovation in a fully realized concept
I always thought that flying cars would be the next major leap in innovation, but it’s still in its fledgling stages
Not the definition I am referring to
Conceptually, improving upon something isn’t entirely original
It can be hard to grasp. We can’t imagine what life and the mindset of people were before a concept existed because we have always had it.
Yes, we can imagine the difficulty of travel before the invention of aircraft
But it’s hard for us to understand the profound difference to life and everyone’s worldview at the time
People fantasized about human flight for what seemed like forever to them, so long that it became a fantasy that many believed would never be realized
Then suddenly it was
What have we experienced collectively since the 80s that is like that?
Yes, we’ve certainly progressed in nearly every field
But are they truly innovative or are they a natural evolution of something that already existed?
Sounds good to me