Search results

*shrugs* Theatrical outrage is also a centuries-old part of the metagame, so to speak. It seems silly to judge.

There's a huge difference between "theft" and "not selling". In the scenario you present, Bob is the rightful owner of the home theater system. That's not at all analogous to Ticketmaster, which by your argument is unfairly refusing to sell the home theater for a price Bob considers reasonable...

1. I fail to see how "the government should intervene broadly to prevent anything I feel is unfair" is supposedly the exact same logic as, "The government should minimize intervention in freely conducted business even if I think it's unfair." 2. There is no rule on this site that I have to...

Which is absolutely fair and within their rights. If scalpers are willing to offer more for the tickets, then scalpers rightfully deserve all the tickets.

To a very great degree, "anti-competitive practices" are absolutely part of free market capitalism. Why should companies facilitate competition? Again, when it comes to a market of frivolous luxuries, I'm willing to allow a lot more shenanigans simply because, again no one is actually hurt by...

Sure, but Ticketmaster did the work to secure those exclusive contracts and business deals. I think they have the right to profit from their work as they see fit, especially since no one is even remotely harmed. I can "buy" government intervention in things like healthcare, but anything short of...

To be fair, that's a *lot* more food than one portion of fancy mac and cheese. All but one of those items are in the $12-$16 range, which actually puts this towards the low end of the 'family restaurant' range, it's just that these customers had eight food items plus drinks. Also, restaurants...

Ticketmaster is widely hated by customers for a reason. And yet, the free market's final verdict is that they're a massively successful company and none of the whining and bitching customers do translates into not doing business with them, even though literally everything they sell is a...

It's not legal trickery any more than convicting a guy on state charges after a federal pardon or vice versa. A pardon only covers the charges you were actually convicted on.

I don't think "unofficial rumors that they're considering doing a thing" really amounts to much. What can be said is that by law, the Department of Interior is required to release a plan for new oil and gas leases in federal waters every five years, and Biden made a campaign promise to end new...

A ruling this sweeping is pretty much guaranteed to go to SCOTUS, and in any case, it would only apply within the jurisdiction of the 5th Circuit (Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas). So even if the ruling stands as-is, it would basically force a large number of cases *from those states* to go to...

*shrugs* I was literally quoting from the article posted because I found it an amusing point.

SparkToro used the same audit on Musk himself and found that nearly 70.2% of Musk’s 93.3 million Twitter followers were fake.

400K is the figure Zachowon gave, not me. I'm simply pointing out that his math is terribly off when he says that 400K is equal to a "season and a half" of the flu.

CDC statistics for the United States are that in the past ten years, the flu has ranged from 9 to 45 million *cases* each year, producing 140K-810K hospitalizations and 12K to 61K deaths, with *average* deaths for a flu season being 36K. By simple division, this makes 400K deaths from COVID...

Carter, and there was a second attempt being planned and trained for but which wasn't ultimately carried out due to the Iranians releasing the hostages on their own. So Carter was definitely not guilty of inaction.

To be fair, that was an Act of Plot Asspull, and she was *right*. . .

To be fair, the Vice President has always been the chair of the National Space Council. This is not a special appointment.

Asserting that she was not making claims of fact in the first place is the easiest way to argue for the slander case being completely dismissed, which she apparently *really* wants over fighting it out over sufficiency of evidence.

Sidney Powell is now asserting *as her formal legal position* that she never had any evidence, but that she can't be accused of slander because no one could possibly take any of her accusations as a factual claim.