zapatos

In addition, Federal law makes recreational marijuana use illegal while many state laws allow it.

Depends on which constitution you are talking about. A state judge's ruling on the US constitutionality of a law has no bearing on anyone who is not in that state. Similarly, laws that run afoul of a state constitution but not of the US constitution will not be ruled on by Federal judges as they have no jurisdiction.

I don't think the word "monopoly" means what you think it means. Russia consumes more than it produces. That is why they are a net importer of food.

Any thoughts on why we are not seeing Ukrainian special operations taking place in Crimea or over the Russian border? I would imagine they would have an outsized impact as Russian forces would be tied up addressing these sort of 'behind the lines' operations. I understand that small attacks in, say, Moscow might provoke the Russians beyond what benefit to the Ukrainians might be gained, but in areas that are part of Russia's military staging these attacks might be expected.

Why does it bother you?

One of the reasons the US rejected the Polish MiGs for Ukraine was that the US feared sending weapons capable of striking Russian soil would be an unacceptable escalation for Russia. The jets could be in Moscow in under an hour. While tactically a waste of effort, the Dolittle Raid in WWII was an eye opener for the Japanese people and a huge morale boost for the Americans.

I don't see why not. What obstacles do you think can not be overcome?

Money? Influence? Power? All the usual stuff. Also, a lack of real things to document is a motive for making things up.

Har!

I cannot find a direct answer to that question, but given that Ukraine is asking for the fighters, it is probably safe to assume they think they can use them.

There is also the Russia/Ukraine cyber battle that should be considered. While it seems likely Russia holds the upper hand over Ukraine, Russia probably has a lot more to lose.

But if the egg came from the last non-chicken that birthed a chicken, it's not really a "chicken" egg that the first chicken was hatched from.

It's a silly question no matter how you look at it. A fertilized ovum can be considered a chicken in the same way a human's fertilized egg can be considered a human. Where you choose to grant chickenhood/personhood is a philosophical/religious question that has no definitive answer.

The egg came first. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1989/04/03/dinosaur-egg-may-hold-rare-fossilized-embryo/8b22ab46-5c4e-44a0-b8e4-88335e71dbf9/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/how-the-chicken-conquered-the-world-87583657/

What a lovely metaphor! 🙂 (I don't know what is happening but every time I try to upvote your post it shows up as a nasty red down vote. Well, here's a verbal +1. 😄)

Not me.

You filled in for deepend marvelously! 😄

World population of T-Rex. Zero. Just as meaningful as your chart.

I see your point. Although how can you conclude they are behaving as if there is an objective measure? Why not conclude they are behaving as if they just want their world to function in a way that is preferable to them for whatever personal reasons? If I have a piece of land that you want to take by eminent domain, we are both taking a stand not based on an objective measure of right and wrong, but on what is in our own best interests. Primarily because they are created by man and do not flow from some fundamental property of the universe. Because in private enterprise I believe I should have certain rights (within limits) to behave as I wish. To me 'socioeconomic class' does not rise to the level of superseding my rights.

Well, that makes it easy then. When you ask "Am I wrong to pick the rich one?", simply look at the 'objective measure of right and wrong' and you'll have your answer. As it stands, we live in a society that behaves as if there is NO objective measure of right and wrong. The evidence for this is the diametrically opposed views on abortion, the death penalty, BLM, Trans rights, war, gay marriage, inter-racial marriage, taking kids from their parents at the border, hunting for sport, fishing for sport, the zoo, veganism, gender affirming care, and a list too long to post here. I thought I gave a direct answer to your direct question. Perhaps you wanted me to answer that 'laws' could stop you? To answer your question "should socioeconomic class be a protected characteristic?" my answer is: No - In private enterprise. Yes - in government hires, along with all other characteristics such as hair color, politics, etc. All decisions on hiring and firing should be based on performance.

As long as you are not discriminating against protected groups, you can hire pretty much anyone you wish. Usually the policies of the college you work for. Many companies have such policies although they are not compelled to do so. "Right" and "wrong" are subjective. Depends on who you ask.

Is that roughly 100% of what had been amassed at the Ukrainian border? As opposed to 100% of ALL military combat force?

There is a "secret" airfield just outside Ukraine that is a staging point for supplies going into the country. Seems like a good place to make the exchange.

Possibly, but that is the way it's been done since the end of WWII, all over the world, between the Soviets/Russia and US/NATO. Everyone knows the rules. Not to say it may not fail this time, but as long as Russians and NATO are not pulling the trigger on each other, I expect cooler heads to prevail.