Why not just compare the model 3 to an 18-wheeler then? Those weigh way more. Would have made his point better.

And it’s a completely meaningful comparison, as long as you throw away the fact that different vehicles are used for different things.

A model 3 to an f150 is absolutely apples and oranges.

Why not just launch it directly but background the process so it doesn’t hang up your terminal?

I would think the bigger issue would be the permanent ceasefire.

I would think Israel doesn’t trust Hamas not to break it, and it complicates the question of, “how do we respond if Hamas kills a bunch of people.”

Yeah, I’d be interested in how many people go to the inauguration of other countries heads of state.

Like, my best guess is that it’s a dig at, like, Gov Abbott, but I agree that I don’t think I’d expect him to, even if he was a Democrat.

But does it protect a company who is throwing out food that someone then eats? They aren’t a good Samaritan in that case.

And even if it’s lawful federally, they may run against local ordinances.

And even if every single thing is above board, that still doesn’t stop them from getting sued. It just means they’d win. But legal costs being what they are, it’s probably cheaper to just run off anybody who might be litigious before something can happen.

Fair. I’ll admit, I did start skimming at some point and you’re right, it’s pretty explicit in section 5 and I just didn’t see it.

It’s a wall of text though for sure. I probably would have skimmed it in the same way if I was looking to travel there, lol. Which is on me for sure, but I also wouldn’t expect the penalty for skimming the list and missing something to be ten grand out of my pocket, lol.

I can’t find the pork ban on the link you provided. The closest I saw was “Quarantine inspection of animals, plants and their derived products” which isn’t a prohibition of anything in particular, and the link to the relevant authority literally goes to a dead page.

I googled what not to bring into Taiwan, and this was the first link that came up: https://support.carousell.com/hc/en-us/articles/115008674167-List-of-Prohibited-Content-Taiwan

I can see pursuing that and not putting together that your lunch violates it. It has a big red text about animal product imports, but specifies that it’s about animals under quarantine, which makes it seem like more of a livestock restriction. Especially when it starts referencing legal codes instead of giving you any kind of meaningful explanation.

Combine that with the fact that the dude was Indonesian and routed through a Hong Kong airport, and I think it’s not wildly unreasonable that he would have missed the memo, even if he’d done his due diligence.

And I stand by that, even if he’d not done his due diligence, the punishment is excessive. This feels like more of a “we confiscate the offending material, slap you with a $500 fine, and send you on your way.”

It’s not like he was smuggling in livestock. He had the equivalent of a carnitas burrito from Chipotle in his bag.

The guy was from Indonesia and routed to Taiwan via Hong Kong. There’s a good chance there were no signs or announcements in a language he could understand.

Check what though, that’s the issue. I would never think that my carnitas burrito from Chipotle might catch me a 10k fine.

And let’s be real, there’s no reason to put that “(maybe)” in there. Are you suggesting the dude was like, “Ahahaha, my dastardly plan is in motion! I’m going to snuggle 4oz of pork hidden away in my lunch, in direct violation of import controls. It’s so clever because I have absolutely no discernable reason I would want to do this on purpose!!!”

And what are you recommending me check? Google every item on the “ingredients” list on my coke zero to make sure I’m not smuggling red dye number 33 into a country that bans it?

Most civilized countries don’t fine people $10k for breaking laws that it would be very reasonable they have no idea exist.

I mean, I don’t know that that changes my point at all, but if you’d really like me to rephrase it:

I don’t Google every item in my suitcase to make sure the the type of cotton my socks are made of won’t get me immediately deported and fined $10,000 that I don’t have.

I mean, that headline implies intentionality, no? I doubt the guy knew that his lunch would get him slapped with a $10k fine.

I know I don’t Google every single item in my bag to make sure that something like the type of cotton my socks are made of doesn’t get me thrown in jail.

It seems counterproductive to pay for tickets to go see a comedian just to protest heckle.

Like, you just gave that man money to yell at him. I’m sure he’s drying his tears with the dollar bills.

See, I feel like your whole post could be summarized as, “some people’s mental illness makes them unable to work and earn money, so they’re too poor to afford treatment, and therefore the morally correct thing is to just let those people kill themselves.”

And while I don’t think that’s exactly what you meant, it’s how it comes across. Almost all of your points are some variation of who’s gonna pay for their treatment and take care of their physical needs.

And I would strongly argue that the answer is instead to have more robust social safety nets to cover those needs. Allowing people to kill themselves as the solution is hella dystopian.

But, I’m not saying that this is 100% always right. This is a hard issue with no clear answers, and I am absolutely not minimizing the pain of mental illness. My point is that mental illness is much less understood than physical illness, and I wouldn’t trust any diagnosis that said the condition could never be resolved. In the same way that I would be loathe to euthanize someone with a physical illness that has an acceptable chance of being transient, I’m loath to do the same with most if not all cases of mental illness. Especially if the person is otherwise very young/healthy.

I think the question is one of balance for me personally. Where do you draw the line?

Like, this person seems to have been in a pretty long queue and had a lot of time to evaluate, but is that denying her dignity? Should there be a waiting period, or is that denying someone healthcare?

I think we would all agree that we shouldn’t allow an 18yo who just broke up with their first SO to decide to have a doctor help them unalive themselves, right?

Is the three and a half years of waiting and treatments that this woman has undergone too much? Not enough?

I’ll admit that it feels bad to me to allow a 29yo to go down this particular path. People who are seeking death are rarely in the kind of headspace where I think they are able to meaningfully consent to that?

And this feels meaningfully different than the case of a 90yo who’s body is slowly failing them. This is an otherwise healthy young person.

Idk, there are no easy answers here. Bodily autonomy is important, but so is helping people not engage in extremely self destructive behavior. If we didn’t have that imperative, fire departments wouldn’t try and stop people from jumping off bridges, right? Where is that line? I don’t know, and I wouldn’t want to have to make that call.

Fair. Ngl, I just pulled up a map of Israel. Kinda surprised how much bigger the West Bank is than Gaza. My Middle Eastern geography isn’t exactly stellar.

Fair point though. It’s not exactly near the heart of the issue in Gaza. If the majority of the Israeli retaliation is there, it makes sense the West Bank should have little to no casualties.

What’s the cut off for describing someone as a “youth”? 27 seems over that line to me.

But ngl, I’m kinda surprised the number is as low as 500, considering 35k have been killed in total, by all reports.

I mean, yeah, there was definitely more nuance in the article that I didn’t capture in my ten word summary for sure.

I was mostly just rebutting the guy who was talking about tax exemptions without copy pasting the whole article, lol.

Yeah, I didn’t bother to mention it because it was unrelated to the BLM stuff, but it really sucks for them. Definitely a lot going wrong at once. And it sounds like there’s a pretty deep need where they’re at too.