Like drawing a picture of Pitbull from memory.

Uh, more like “Escape from New York”

When you close a business on paper you don’t suddenly lose access to services in the name of that business.

Yes you do. Your bank account is in the old business’s name, and any lines of credit you have will be in that business’s name as well. Doing anything for a new business is harder than for an established one. Once you explain “oh yeah I did own that one, I just changed the name for tax purposes” you sound like a scammer.

Banks and suppliers (good ones) are not going to waste their time figuring out your scheme. They will just drop you.

I mean, I would assume that someone who doesn’t get a new enough car doesn’t have enough money to pay for commercial insurance. Also offering people rides on the street is a bad idea (because you can get robbed) and possibly illegal. This is just running an unlicensed taxi service. Gypsy cabs have been around for hundreds of years. It’s not a good idea.

That’s a terrible idea. His insurance won’t cover him in an accident. If a passenger is injured he may be on the hook for the medical care.

What a weird thing to say.

Edit: lol, 1 day old account

This is a child’s thinking. A child wants the bully to get punched in the nose. An adult knows that this comes from insecurity. Bullies do not fear violence, they fear ridicule.

Lol. Pickleball stuff is getting more expensive than tennis equipment. It’s actually a good time to get into a real sport.

You can buy new tennis balls for like $1 each, while pickleballs are more. Think about that: tennis balls are rubber and fuzz, hard to make. Pickleballs are just plastic. Same with the racquets. Pickleball stuff is just plastic and maybe a rubber grip. Tennis racquets can be all kinds of expensive carbon fiber.

JFK is not considered one of the best. He didn’t even have a full term, so there’s no way to know. People liked him because he was young and handsome and died that way.

He started the Vietnam War. His only real test was the Cuban Missile Crisis. He did adopt Keynesianism economic policies (over more classical policies) and proposed the bill that became the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Those are all important, but he honestly wasn’t in office long enough to do much.

And besides, like you said he was 43, not 35. AOC would not be able to do anything because she doesn’t have the relationships yet. Good presidents don’t come from the House of Representatives. They come from the Senate (JFK, Obama), Governors (FDR), or Vice Presidents (Harris).

Honestly, 35 is too young to be president. 40 to 60 is probably the sweet spot. Make the upper limit 65 or 70 (but start negotiating at 60).

Like I said, I’m not an expert but I think big drones that can take down a bridge aren’t piloted by two dudes in a bush.

Ok then, fighter-bombers or more artillery. If the bridge is in range of Ukrainian drones, then the drone base station is in range of counter fire.

Plus, as soon as the cars can drive themselves people will stop needing Uber in many cases.

No parking? Just tell your car to go park on a street 10 blocks away.

Drunk? Car drives itself while you sleep.

Going to the airport? Car drops you off and returns home. Car also picks you up when you are back.

This is combined with the fact that people will do more disgusting things in an Uber without the driver there. If you have ever driven for Uber, you know that 10% of people are trying to eat or drink in the car. They are going to spill and it’s going to end up like the back of a bus.

Well I’m not an expert, but it’s possible to use cruise missiles and long range bombers to provide cover for the few days it might take to evacuate. Maybe they are busy blowing up apartment buildings and hospitals though.

Ukrainian forces were "striking pontoon bridges and engineering equipment in the western part of their operational zone

These engineers have a shit job if the military is forcing them to work under fire. Usually you try to defend the less armed part of the military (medics, command, engineers, supply) because that’s what really powers the organization. If you can’t defend your weak spots, you are going to lose.

They were not that close, they just drove in from Belarus and dropped some paratroopers with no support. That’s a good strategy for losing your best troops.

They also didn’t use a few days of bombing to soften up the targets. Ukraine was surprised but all of their equipment was intact. That’s like number one in any attack plan.

They basically underestimated the Ukrainians and thought they would just run away. Those paratroopers were very good but they are only scary to local police, not to a trained military. Without heavy support, they were sitting ducks at the airport.

I’m not sure I buy the pricing-people-out angle either tbh, we have a pretty rich market of MVNOs who act as an anchor on the MNO pricing, and it would look like anti-competitive market collision if suddenly the operating costs for these companies went up after a merger.

Do you think that would change anything? After the merger it’s hard to walk it back. People would scream about “losing jobs” or something.

The point of a merger is to make more money, both through improved pricing power and through lower costs.

So you are against the Russian military invading Ukraine in 2014? And again in 2022? And Syria in 2015? And Georgia in 2008?

Russia can end the fighting just by leaving Ukrainian territory. You are “against war”, so why not advocate for that?

Edit: just ignore this guy. His posts are mostly downvoted.

It’s not just that. People fought duels over their honor in the past. We don’t have duels anymore, so we shouldn’t rely on a judge to recuse themselves.

It is a founding concept of European law that no one should be a judge in their own case:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nemo_iudex_in_causa_sua

Are they searching based on evidence (fair)?

Do you really think that there’s a bunch of children running drugs around so they need to be strip searched? Let me repeat that: do you think children are committing crimes right and left?

The police searched them, so if there was “evidence” they would have been arrested. “Child drug gangs” would be all over the news. Since that didn’t happen, we know that these children were targeted based on assumptions (probably race).

Black children have a problem with people assuming they are older than they really are and treating them like adults. If you think there’s a ton of “evidence” that literal children are committing a ton of crime, you’re part of the problem.