@pjhenry1216
@kbin.socialAn article I came across said there are no plans for the 5 in the US, so not at the moment at least.
At that point you're getting a very specific phone for a very specific purpose. It's not the rule but the exception. So it doesn't apply as a reason for any other phone. You've argued why the LG has a 3.5mm jack, not why Fairphone should have a 3.5mm jack. I'd also be curious as to how powerfully it can even drive headphones at that point. It must also have a stronger amplifier than most phones too. It'd be meaningless without it. What's the point of high fidelity if it can't drive headphones that can utilize it.
This is all getting away from the purpose of the Fairphone. It's not a dedicated music player. It's not advertising high fidelity music, psrticyij relation to other phones. I don't think anyone is calling that LG phone "green" either.
Congratulations to anyone who can think of an edge case that wouldn't apply to the Fairphone. Might as well mention a tensor chip not being in the Fairphone.
Sorry, didn't realize the world revolves around the extreme minority when discussing what's good for the human race as a whole.
You're right. How could anyone ever make any argument against anecdotal case by case stories. Obviously the entire collected data on human nutrition is useless as a whole because it doesn't apply to small percentages of the population. Oh silly me and not understanding that general concepts aren't important.
You're just describing American children raised in a poor diet. Beans are a staple food among not of the world population, including their children. They're super easy to prepare as well. Talking about the extremely fatty and unhealthy cheese like that is probably one of the many reasons the US is obese and unhealthy.
Cheese is not a healthy part of a diet in any quantity where it provides a significant protein of the person's protein needs.
Ok, leave a note behind to explain to your children's family why they're in extreme poverty because some folks didn't want to gradually remove a subsidy in a controlled fashion. Again. You're just punishing more future people. But I guess since you don't have to meet them, you're ok with sacrificing their livelihood.
You will never get a UBI while large amounts are subsidizing specific industries. Wanna know where you can get that money though?
The thing is, I don't even think we disagree that much. You just are taking the one approach I advocated against (but still argued would be better than doing nothing; ie keeping the subsidies) and pretending that's my whole argument. I argued for gradual removal of subsidies to correct the market over time. You are advocating for a scenario that likely will never occur without some other large scale disaster or giant swing in public consciousness (UBI will never occur prior to ag having a market bubble pop.... one will never happen during our life, one has a chance to).
Because it supports middle rural America and that's where conservative strongholds are.
I've never heard any politician say the subsidies exist because people like it. It's always in support of jobs, etc. Are you daft? Point to one politician or lobbyist claiming subsidies are needed because folks like the flavor.
There is freedom of selection, but it's not a free market. We're literally discussing that in this post. Milk is substantially cheaper due to subsidies. Many people can't afford to simply purchase the more expensive one when a cheaper version is available. However, in a free market, it wouldn't be that much cheaper.
New products take time to surpass old products. You have false advertising and bad information floating around as truth and people think milk needs to be had to be healthy. It was so heavily advertised to boomers through millennials and even some of gen z, that I'm not surprised many have fallen for the marketing like you so heavily did.
For someone who gets paid hourly, I'm only willing to go so far with unpaid work past when I'm supposed to stop.