Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Then why were the Londoners, who live there, mad at them?Right, exactly - because if he knew even the basics of Britain's governance he'd know that the monarchy and aristocracy have no input on legislature, regardless of how they were involved in the story.
I'm not anti-education.And somehow you're able to pull an anti-education claim out of thin air from the look on someone's face.
Then why were the Londoners, who live there, mad at them?
Were they mistaking them for members of Parliament or something?
Apparently the crowd, who lives there, know something you don't?We get it, you just read things for the pictures.
The rioteers came from all over the country. Londoners don't particularly want to set their own city on fire...Apparently the crowd, who lives there, know something you don't?
Got it -- (I think).Some elements of the recent protests have generally been anti-establishment, not just against this particular piece of legislation. That's why some of them attacked the royal car. Charles and Camilla have had nothing to do with the actual legislature.
Apparently the crowd, who lives there, know something you don't?
on the right-hand side of every single post I've made in this thread said:Location: London
Actually, I agree with you -- this is why you won't see me in the Politics section here.You're just digging the whole deeper AV, and whistlin' a tune while you go...
So, to use your [cheap] example
they attacked the Simpkins because they're made at Congress.
Have I got that right?
What_everThe Royal Family are largely uninvolved in this, but they're a tax-subsided institution that most people see as serving no real purpose beyond attracting tourists. Banking system still isn't popular either, for obvious reasons.
-- Sorry, I was going by your flag.
Actually, I agree with you -- this is why you won't see me in the Politics section here.
But I do think it's a good point about supply-and-demand.
And why would they raise it in the first place?Your "supply-and-demand" point is so fundamental, that I will not give you credit for making a good point. It's not even a problem of supply and demand. If you raise the cost of tuition by an outrageous amount, of course fewer people will be able to pay for it. It's such a fundamental economic principle that I would categorize it as common knowledge.
"A scientific man ought to have no wishes, no affections, -- a mere heart of stone."- Charles Darwin
Can you tell me the source of your quotation, as it doesn't sound like Darwin at all? Thank you.
And why would they raise it in the first place?
Hint: Hi demand, low supply = high costs.*
* High prices actually, but let's not get technical.
It's in context. Darwin is advising scientists to remain objective, and leave aside their hopes, anticipations, religious beliefs, and other personal biases - as a scientist, you must have a mere heart of stone.It's legit. Google it. I assume that it's out of context, because from what I remember, Darwin was a fairly religious man.
It's in context. Darwin is advising scientists to remain objective, and leave aside their hopes, anticipations, religious beliefs, and other personal biases - as a scientist, you must have a mere heart of stone.
As for his religion, Darwin became decidedly non-religious after the death of his young daughter.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?