> Significant portions of those disapproving are people who want to intensify the war in Gaza, so I doubt an ICC warrant would make them more opposed to Netanyahu.
Israel has a multi-party legislature. Netanyahu can be outflanked on the right.
He was outflanked by the right in 2019 when Avigdor Lieberman's Yisrael Beiteinu and Lapid's Yamina withdrew it's support for Likud and joined Bennett's and Lapid's anti-Netanyahu coalition in 2021, but Bibi was able to leverage fringe Kahanist and Mizrahi parties to reclaim the top seat.
Hell, Bibi would make a coalition with the Arab List/Ra'am (the Islamist Party in Israel) if it meant remaining PM (and thus retaining immunity)
Traditionally, the hard right Jewish parties would always win around 20 seats in Knesset but would never be a major part of any coalition - but Bibi has alienated just about every single faction in Israel at this point trying to extend his rule.
Certainly, but if he is outflanked on the right it won't be because of the ICC arrest warrant. If anything, that might help prevent him from being outflanked on the right.
One can work hard and still not cancel holidays for work. Plenty of people work through holidays and don't "achieve much in life". I've known many people in higher positions who use all of their time off.
It's awful for most. If a person lives long enough, they will likely lose the ability to drive. A lack of walkable infrastructure basically means social death at that point. How many people struggle with the decision to try to take the keys away from their parents?
Also, cars create mobility issues by injuring people.
> While the plants themselves are expensive, producing wind and solar power at large scale and offsetting intermittency incurs costs in the form of increased transmission capacity and storage requirements.
My understanding is that solar and wind are cheaper than nuclear even when accounting for storage.
That's before you get to the externalized costs, such as waste disposal and decomissioning.
> My understanding is that solar and wind are cheaper than nuclear even when accounting for storage.
This understanding is either based on geographically limited storage options (hydroelectric storage), or is incorrect. The amount of batteries required to even out intermittent sources is many times more than the amount of batteries produced. The cost of a 1 GWh facility is very different from a 1 TWh facility. The latter is 2x the amount of batteries produced worldwide each year. But it's only 2 hours of the USA's electricity consumption. That's how big of a mismatch there exists between battery supply and the demands of grid storage.
> That's before you get to the externalized costs, such as waste disposal and decomissioning.
Waste disposal and decommissioning are already factored into nuclear power's cost. They have to pre-pay the cost of disposal and decommissioning.
The cost estimates are for a 4 hour storage system - not enough for diurnal let alone seasonal storage. Furthermore, actually attempting to build storage systems at grid scale would cause battery prices to skyrocket. Even just 4 hours of electricity supply for the world works out to 10,000 GWh of batteries (global electricity demand is ~60 TWh per day). In 2023, 680 GWh of batteries were produced [1]. If you were to try and build 10,000 GWh worth of battery storage you'd buy up all the batteries on the market, causing the price to skyrocket. And even if you literally bought every single battery produced in 2023 you still wouldn't have 1/10th the batteries required to provision just four hours of storage (and not to mention you'd kill 100% of EV production in the process). The scale between the batteries produced and the amount of batteries required to deliver even small amounts of storage are vast.
And we're not even talking about electrifying other fossil fuels uses like heating, transportation, etc. That's going to make electricity demand even larger.
Workplace democracy is the only answer. Any other system is just some form of private ownership, with all the same problems. If we have a different system for choosing owners, it's either not private ownership or we arrive right back where we started.
Donald Rumsfeld is responsible for the deaths of one million innocent Iraqi civilians at the cost of 3 trillion American dollars for nothing except the enrichment of a few. I agree that every person is complicated, but any possible nuance here is completely overwhelmed by the amount of destruction. Donald Rumsfeld is absolutely evil.
You might think you are smart for hedging, but if you think killing one million innocent lives just makes a person "complicated", you've lost the plot.
On what basis are you holding Donald Rumsfeld responsible for the invasion?
If it's all on him, then wouldn't that absolve a lot of other powerful people around him, who were also pushing for it, and at least one of whom was his superior in the chain of command?
Nothing about that has anything to do with whether something he said was insightful or not. It’s possible for evil people to say smart things and for good people to say bullshit things.
It wasn't insightful (and nowhere did I say that Dondald Rumsfeld was incapable of saying something insightful). We knew then what he was trying to claim we didn't know. Even Dick Cheney said on the record (during the first Iraq War) that a full invasion would be a Vietnam style quagmire.
Rumsfeld said a smart-sounding thing he got from somewhere else, but it was just a lie. He knew the WMD claim was made up because he helped manufacture it. Iraq's non-involvement in 9/11 and our inability to accomplish regime change were "known knowns" prior to the invasion.
I have to wager that the Iraqi people probably prefer the current order of things. I would guess that they would keep things the way they are rather than bring back Saddam.
> It's still true that complex carbs, usually having more micro nutrients and being slower to metabolize are better for us.
So your friends are correct, even if their reasoning is wrong.
> If the cookie is made with oats, butter, and nuts, it may actually be much slower than the apple in provoking an insulin response.
This claim requires evidence. My understanding is that the slower digestion preventing the insulin spike is due to the apple's sugar being embedded in the fiber.
Also, even if this claim is correct, then your friends are "only" right about practically all cookies.
> Toast with butter and brown sugar and cinnamon produces is better than just toast.
Money has always been a social contract. Just because it's a "financial tradition" doesn't change that. Shiny metals are no more valuable to hungry people than numbers in a database. The myth of King Midas shows this is nothing new.
Noah. That's simply not true. Lyn Alden's "Broken Money" does a couple+ chapters on the history of money. "Cross cultural" transactions are essentially. You can't have a "social contract" across sometimes conflicting cultures. Long to short, this is why we eventually ended up using gold.
You absolutely can have a social contract across conflicting cultures. You just gave an example: commerce valuing gold is a social agreement. Another example is countries at war each other following the rules of war (not always, but even one instance makes your claim false).
Rumsfeld's embarrassment over that line was well earned. He was trying to sell a war based on Iraq having weapons of mass destruction. He was asked why we should go along when there was no evidence for that. He tried to sound smart saying, "Sometimes you don't know what you don't know", basically admitting that there was no evidence to justify his predetermined course of action.
They weren't "unknown unknowns". We knew. He knew too, but he was trying to muddy the waters. He got his way at the expense of one million dead Iraqi civilians, thousands of dead US soldiers, and 3 trillion dollars of US money.
As work should be. I want to have spontaneous moments with my family, friends, and neighbors, which are more common when working from home.