Lineup

Right! And that's really a great point, it can be a positive for individuals. Except that for society it has negative value. This is like opening a mine, extracting all the resources, and leaving behind a poisonous scab on the earth. (Not coincidentally the way I picture MZ.)

Making statements as fact does not help to clarify the discussion. Try posing a question instead. You are not adequately informed on reactor design or operation

And, so commonly, oblivious to any of this himself. Next stop Ayn Rand. I've tried to expunge Walden from my mind, but I'll note that it was pretty useful getting dates in college ("university", said EU)

From a duplication of effort standpoint, how much of this can be combined (-intended) into a single process with the right implement? I know little about farming.... What is the purpose of the mowing? I know that things like alfalfa are often tilled into the soil to improve fertility. <p> Would a mower/tiller/broadcaster (all in one pass) be feasible or is there a reason these things happen separately? It would represent a substantial time & cost savings

This is a very North American discussion, dunelover, though Canadians might have a bone to pick with you concerning your categorization. While I don't imagine that insurance companies will cease to exist, I do imagine that benefits of these plans will become next to nonexistent and the cost will increase dramatically. Though it may end with differentiation and one plan might be available for traumatic injury and one for genetic disorder, exclusively. Regardless, the point stands, if the party that's supposed to pay the bill for my party has even greater incentive to litigate, then I likely will be SOL. And, you're absolutely right, it isn't very much like a commune. However, my insurance rates in North America keep going up because people are unhealthy & overweight and we've subsidized corn sugar into everything edible. For-profit insurance companies are what 'we' have and they have formalized the average cost of care into their hedges. You are not in an insurance bubble, you are in a world of statistics and actuarial science.

That's on the mark! It's also pretty clear that manufacturers did want to utilize this as it reduces tooling costs a lot. But, in attempts to increase fuel efficiency/reduce weight(cost) they lost rigidity and went to unibody. Composite & battery technology are enabling these types of designs again. As for the lead comment, it's true that the exact same 'skateboard' isn't going to perform, but keep the board and swap 'trucks & wheels'. There's your sports car cum minivan. It's about the chassis not the rolling

It will have the effect of increasing premiums for all participants, so I'm inclined to agree. Particularly for insurance such as LTC, if you can determine (for yourself) definitive need for the insurance - you will absolutely buy it. But at that point you are not seeking insurance because you have certainty. Rather, you would be cheating everyone that has purchased "insurance". All other participants will soon cease opting for LTC insurance due to expense unless they too have knowledge of definitive need.... LTC companies pay operation costs, salaries, bonuses, become inslovent, file for bankruptcy, and no one else gets anything.

Now equalize labor cost... tada!

The references there mislead - The article concerning the ships states "minor salvage is still carried out to recover small pieces of steel" - "Primary" is an overstatement. In reality, a steel manufacturer can produce low background steel by using virgin ore for the smelting, but must know in advance of the run and be advised not to incorporate recycled material (including alloying agents). Some are willing to accommodate such requests for additional cost.

'_' -_- '_' Wot?

Or a widely publicized and plausible parallel construction.

>...right to liberty are the obvious examples >..."Right to liberty," are much, much murkier.

Uh... I'm not sure what it is that you are trying to say, or if you are sure of what you are trying to say, or if you have a very appropriate username.

Moreover the freedoms [0] that you mentioned are aspirational. Also, not the constitutional freedoms of speech and religion, which are enshrined therein.

0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Freedoms