What does this even mean? According to this article, Palantir was selected for this contract in a rushed, no-bid process several years ago

“UK Government Ends One Of Palantir’s Contracts” would be a more accurate headline

Yeah but much of the stuff that’s being traded on today lacks a body of evidence with which to make an informed prediction and is essentially random unless someone has insider knowledge

Just a heads up that there’s no such thing as “insider trading” on these betting markets. All of this is perfectly legal, and the platforms actually depend on insiders to improve their “predictive” accuracy. It’s also legitimately impossible to fully regulate this (besides shutting them down altogether, for which I’m totally on board) due to the sheer volume of people who have access to a bit of insider info

Engaging with the argument would be a better look than yelling derogatory things. And it’s spelled “subsidize”

Ok. What would that realistically look like? How does your plan account for the significantly higher cost burden that would be born by people who are lower income, given they’re less likely to be able to afford fuel-efficient vehicles? And how do you account for EVs, or variability in carbon emissions?

Regardless, we’re talking about funding for roads, which is a related but totally separate issue from everything else I just mentioned. Roads are a public service, and I’m vehemently against the libertarian idea of “pay per use” you’re advocating

I have no idea what sort of model you’re advocating for here

A ton of public services use roads. Actually, literally all public services use roads. School buses use roads to bring children to school. The post office uses roads, as do firefighters and EMS. So does your electric service, waste collection, and water service

Fyi, “obstrusive” is not a word that exists. I think you were trying for “obtrusive” but actually needed the word “intrusive.”

Clearly still happening recently in Canada, how about the US?

Have any examples?

Was thinking the same thing, I hadn’t heard about Hannity in a long time

Trump’s attacks on the Pope plus that picture of him as Jesus really seemed to touch a nerve among some of their die-hard supporters in a way we don’t typically see. They’re really going to keep going after the Pope?

Them why did you ask that question

This has been headline news all over the world for the last 24 hours. Go read your news source of choice and quit yer bitchin

This argument falls flat on its face when you apply it to what just happened in Hungary

She stated during the event she was there for a reason. Trump asked her for her opinion on trans folks in sports, and she said “I have no opinion on that. I’m here about taxes on tips.” She was deadpan with it too

Iran has Trump’s nuts in a vise right now. They’ve successfully made the Strait reopening contingent upon Israel stopping its attacks on Lebanon, which means Trump would have to put on big boy pants and stop Netanyahu, but Trump doesn’t have the life skills to put on big boy pants. Trump threatens total war with Iran, but knows that would be the end of his administration domestically. He has left Iran with more power than they had before he attacked, and doesn’t know what to do, so is trying to bully NATO into saving him, which NATO will never succumb to.

I just don’t understand your point I guess