That’s nonsense. How could you possibly know the cost of accumulating roadside dirt? Or the cost of reclamation? Or the cost of material disposal.

Guaranteed it’s less than it costs to mine. That’s the only important part.

In addition to being one of the world’s most visible ambassadors of car culture

Seems weird. But hey, maybe the Children of the Forest’s magic is all obsidian-dagger-to-the-heart-based.

None of them will be good.

As the proud owner of an original DMG, my mind immediately screamed “YOU’RE DAMAGING THE SPINE”, before I realized it was a photoshop.

That was accurately labelled! That really WAS an entirely self-righteous rant!

Interestingly, the argument that “she knew her value” and it didn’t matter that it wasn’t acknowledged, is something the write Ta-Nehesi Coates talks about in the context of religiosity in the black, southern community. It doesn’t matter that black people might regard it as noble that they turn the other cheek, and…

BTW, they are called Inuit. “Eskimo” is regarded as kind of a racist term, and has been for a while.

The show sucked. It wasn’t serious enough to be Orphan Black. It wasn’t cornball enough to be Stargate. It didn’t know what it wanted to be, so it wasn’t anything.

Sure thing man, who needs new entertainment when a human being is completely satisfied reliving the vague memories of PREVIOUS entertainment, right?

This was a decent character and actress stuck in a pretty dreary show. There’s a reason viewing numbers were dwindling - because people DIDN’T LIKE THIS.

Someone might want to help her off her high horse. Maybe it should be mentioned to her that her crappy show is only about a half-a-letter-grade better than this old stinker.

As both a Jays fan and an MLB fan, I’m slightly pissed that Bautista’s slide gets labelled a hard slide. The call on that play seems shitty, because it’s not adhering to the MLB’s new rules.

That’s horseshit.

Congratulations. You’ve taken the appropriate line drilled into you by the contemporary justice system: immediately and with no reason ignore the child entirely, and then impart a vicious motive to the mother involved in this case.

It doesn’t twist logic in the slightest. Not having insurance means that you are clearly risking having someone shoulder the economic burden of your health care. In this case, all you have to do is pay a fee to the IRS to help mitigate this shared risk.

This looks like garbage. 20 seconds of fictional nonsense science, followed by 1:30 of acrobatics?

Archimedes did it first:

“Forbes” might know a lot about economics. But a single forbes contributor is just a person, and knows what an ordinary human being knows. In this case, he could perhaps use an econ refresher course, or a more diligent editor.