So they’re going to use up their last available reserves in a desperate and pointless assault whereafter they still get curbstomped by their opponent who still maintains air superiority and controls large amounts of armoured reserves?

Sounds about right.

Agreed

They just voted to end the strike and the agreement did not restore their pensions.

I love rats, but that feels oddly mean : (

Apparently at least two people did. I say anything; instant downvotes.

Don’t know why I bother anymore.

Have a good week too Oppo : )

Why do I bother saying anything. Nowhere did I say Harris wouldn’t do that either.

But he has explicitly stated that that was one of his goals. Harris sending more weapons to Israel isn’t her asking Netenyahu to draw up invasion plans of the West Bank.

He has explicitly stated that Israel should fully militarily annex the West Bank and urged Netenyahu to draw up plans as he wished to provide additional military aid if they did so. So at the very least it can get as bad as doing Gaza 2.

This used to be how the Vice President was chosen. The loser of the presidential election automatically became the other’s vice president. This was changed for… obvious reason.

Is this fucking loss. I swear to god.

Essentially. But also in the sense that there would be no Leninism without Marx or his thought since a massive portion of Leninist thought is essentially just evolved Marxist arguments.

For example that’s why in physics entire fields are named after the people who radically developed them, such as Einsteinian physics, since there would be no further discoveries or innovations related to Einsteinian physics without Einstein and his thought.

The Thing!

An incredible look at paranoia and how it tears groups apart! The ending is also legendary and unmatched in cinema.

Not gory, but there are strong elements of Cronenberg style body horror. No extreme blood or gore though.

Because Lenin’s works fundamentally builds off of Marx’s foundational writings, and other communists such as Stalin thought it would be incredibly disrespectful to sweep Marx under the rug and attribute all of Marxism-Leninism to Lenin alone.

True, but now you’ve just invented the Concorde problem again. How are you going to fill enough seats on a daily/weekly basis to justify a route? That’s if you even manage to make this economical.

Concorde was killed by the internet as major businesses could simply have a video call or email conference instead of needing to send physical delegates to major financial capitals. That took away their core repeat customer base, and they weren’t able to recover past that point. Who will be the main customer base for this?

I think you misunderstood what I meant by the word modern, I should have worded myself better, but what I meant is that even if prices were reduced significantly to 5-10 thousand dollars per ticket as compared to a current day valuation of the approximately 60,000 dollars that a 20,000 dollar concorde ticket would have cost in 1985… who is able to afford that price?

It doesn’t matter what technology comes into play, bringing the price of a suborbital liner to modern day airfare prices would be impossible. 5-10 thousand dollars from 60 thousand is already an astronomical drop. What customers have 5-10 thousand dollars lying around for a single flight?

There is no economy of scale for a niche luxury product with more economical alternatives. You have an incredibly small subset of customers, and dropping the price from 10 thousand to 8 thousand isn’t going to drive up business at all. Especially when a one way flight from New York to Beijing is 400-1,500 dollars, and as has been shown through endless industry studies, the primary concern for airline customers is by far price.

I know all this. Nothing you mentioned prevents Chinese companies from making bad or speculative investments. Regulatory authorities are not going to step in just because one company invested into a bunk project that went nowhere. Hundreds of companies go bankrupt in China every week, and hundreds more are formed, as it would be a bureaucratic nightmare for the central economic office to micromanage the investments of individual firms. Speculative venture capital is also not “gaming the system” as insider trading and short selling are, and the entire point is that there is a high risk to those investments.

I don’t see how you describing China’s mixed command economy is at all relevant to a small startup firm taking a risk on a single aircraft frame. A bird in a cage can still choke itself on a poor investment and die.

What worries me is that those profit calculations don’t mean that Chinese firms aren’t just as susceptible as western firms to speculative investing and venture capital interests.

Hopefully this goes somewhere, but even with a modern price of 5,000 dollars. I’m still confused as to who this plane is meant to serve. It is outclassed by trains for regional travel, and is entirely uneconomical for long distance flights since while it can save fuel while cruising, it will chew through a massive quantity of fuel while accelerating and climbing.

Also the Blackbird sacrifices a LOT to be as light and aerodynamic as it is, as is evident by the pilot requiring an entire spacesuit. That’s not really conducive to commercial travel.

Didn’t the internet essentially make the Concord obsolete? Its main purpose was flying businessmen from New York to London/Paris so they could finish major transactions before the markets closed.

Tickets were also 20,000 dollars in 1985 money, so even if China makes a plane with a modern ticket price of 10,000-15,000… who exactly is the customer base for this?