No need for. Solar panels and batteries are at an historically low price and will even become more affordable. There’s simply no economical justification for nuclear energy.

How many solar panels and batteries are needed to power every electrical grid on the planet?

Where do we locate all of the panels and batteries?

Where do we get all of the materials for all of the panels and batteries?

What is the total cost to operate and maintain that global power grid?

What is the lifespan of the grid?

What happens to all of the panels and batteries at end of life, and how much does it cost?

Your phone.

Agreed. I didn't expect anything more than what is happening, even if I would prefer some clear answers on very direct and fact based questions.

Are you someone that can fully respect people who disagree with you, or treat people with dignity who reject what you believe in?

What does this have to do with either of the questions asked in this thread?

The best part about this information is that the Conservative Party cannot deny any of it, and every other party can support the allegations.

The better question is:

Can Pierre Poilievre stop shooting himself in the foot long enough to not become the next O'Toole or Sheer?

I cannot wait to see what caliber he uses next, and how much of the foot goes with it.

Don't worry he also says that he will balance that budget as long as he forms Government twice in a row.

Just like the good ol' Liberal days for Rustad from 2005-2022.

Because social media is just that: media. They’re platforms for ads and marketing that are more akin to broadcast media with a parasocial interactive twist. Contrast that with social networking which facilitates connections between actual people.

At some point in the last two decades, those distinctions have blurred, often to great shareholder benefit.

That is one way to say a lot while saying nothing at all, and it is weird how many people want to pretend they aren't using social media while using social media.

What are you doing to make "connections between actual people"? How is that different from anyone else using a different platform?

Lemmy is not social media to you because there is no one using it to advertise, market, or broadcast themselves to the greater population?

Or is it because there is no "media" available on the website?

Or is it just because you say so?

And? I can post definitions too! Dictionaries are not that difficult to use.

message board noun 1: a board or sign on which messages or notices are displayed an electronic message board 2: a public electronic forum that allows users to post or read messages or to post or download files and that is accessed by computer over a network (such as the Internet)

True, you can post definitions and demonstrate that dictionaries are very easy to use.

Try reading and understanding those definitions next.

When you are all caught up I won't be here to finish whatever it is you are trying for here.

Because message boards have existed both in physical and online for a god damn millenia before fucking facebook and myspace were a whisper in the balls of the creator’s fathers. I have no fucking idea who any of you clown shoes are and I don’t fucking care either.

Children playing show and tell is more social media than online message boards.

Cool story.

Social Media, noun, forms of electronic communication (such as websites for social networking and microblogging) through which users create online communities to share information, ideas, personal messages, and other content (such as videos)

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/social media

Social Media, Noun, websites and computer programs that allow people to communicate and share information, opinions, pictures, videos, etc. on the internet, especially social networking websites:

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/social-media

Have a good day.

Your claim was "No tax dollars!".

I proved you wrong immediately.

Justify your support of one genocide and condemnation of the other all you want, but you will be continuing the conversation by yourself.

How did you come to that conclusion?

Seems like they don’t care about tiktok at all Idk if I’d call that support.

China has more trade ties to the US than Israel does.

I see no calls to stop investing in Chinese companies, or buying Chinese products because of the Genocide happening within their borders.

Also, I can’t speak for him here but none of my tax dollars go to the Chinese government

"With data provided by the Congressional Research Service, Senator Ernst and Open the Books determined more than $490 million from U.S. grants and contracts were paid to organizations in China since 2017 and another $870 million were paid to entities in Russia."

https://www.ernst.senate.gov/news/press-releases/ernst-tracks-over-13-billion-of-us-tax-dollars-sent-to-china-and-russia-promises-accountability-for-every-penny

Seems America just loves supporting Genocidal regimes with tax money, and Americans love pretending it doesn't end up there.

So if hes from a country aiding Isreal like me he has an obligation to say something about it or else be complicit is his labor buying weapons for genocide. Its the same reason US protestors focused on Biden instead of Netenyahu when this stated. We don’t get to vote for or against Bibi, but Biden, we do.

It is morally okay to support, or completely ignore, countries like China according to you and the person I originally responded to.

Can you elaborate on why that is without making false claims about tax dollars?

Time to call India's bluff and pull out of the country completely sending everyone who is not a Canadian citizen or Permanent resident back, including all official representation from the Indian Government.

If you don't want to be an ally you don't get the benefits of being one.

Social media is bad for your brain. There’s plenty of communities on lemmy

If social media is bad for your brain why is lemmy, a social media site, not?

What is the difference between Israel and China to make it morally right for you to support one genocidal regime and not the other?

I think it would be better to remind everyone that Pierre has been in politics officially since 2004, and this has been his shtick the whole time.

The best part about this is in the post debate interview when he was asked about this story, and he revised it at that time, he welled up tears in his eyes while he was telling the new fake story.

He didn't just lie, he forced a fake emotional response to tell the lie.

That is a terrible headline and even worse article. It doesn't even do the job of summarizing the main points or events of the debate.

"Any attempt to compare or equate the Nuremberg Trials or Nazi Germany to the COVID-19 pandemic is completely inappropriate and unacceptable," he wrote. "I strongly condemn any such comparisons and reaffirm my commitment to preserving the integrity of historical truths."

British Columbia Conservative Leader John Rustad says he "misunderstood the question"

I mean... Fair if he did indeed misunderstand what was being asked.

In the video, a participant asks Rustad if he is "for Nuremberg 2.0."

At first, Rustad doesn't seem to hear the question. But then, after the questioner repeats "Nuremberg," Rustad responds:

"Nuremberg 2.0? Ah, yes ... That's something outside the scope in terms of the jurisdiction of British Columbia. But we would certainly be participating with other jurisdictions as we look at those sorts of issues," he answers.

In the video, Rustad goes on to say that he would form a panel made up of "some people who are impacted ... a labour lawyer ... and a few other experts, in terms of being able to give advice to government."

"I have not given thought to what a final panel should look like. That's sort of the thing that's in my head in terms of the approach we should be looking at," he says.

Too bad for him he was caught on video understanding the question by claiming to have given thought to an official panel for such a thing.