Index fund, most definitely. And find one that has low administrative fees, I know that Vanguard has at least a few that are super low.
Index fund, most definitely. And find one that has low administrative fees, I know that Vanguard has at least a few that are super low.
Those are also good examples - but Europeans most definitely sought to destroy any quipu they found.
Maybe Threads doesn’t, what about Meta?
Nope, it makes you less safe, too, especially if the threat is closer than 25 feet. They have the opportunity to wrest the gun from your control and use it against you.
… anything well-documented …
There would be a lot more well-documented ancient things if racists hadn’t actively destroyed ancient documents.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quipu for example.
I’m still going to stand by my previous comment.
My point was that for small arms to be used as an effective protection against threat, they must be used before the threat is imminent, i.e., in a “first strike” offensive capacity.
While it’s possible that an open carried firearm might have a deterrent effect, its presence makes every situation into “one with a gun in it,” which is necessarily less safe than one without a gun in it.
Care to elaborate?
There is always a subtext of racism in these claims, because the ancient people that are referred to are always more brown, and surely brown people couldn’t have accomplished anything of significance on their own.
And in this specific case, none of the workers were street-level, getting into randos cars. That doesn’t necessarily mean that all of the workers were willing participants, but I would bet that with the level of clientele involved, almost all were.
So you know, if you have taken a perishable item from a cooler in a grocery store and later decide that you don’t want it, the store has to throw it away.
More than twice. I assume you’re referring to the US Civil War and January 6, 2021.
I’m sure there are more.
For a gun to be effective against an attacker, that attacker needs to be about 25 feet away or farther when you decide to shoot them. Closer than that, it’s a melee before you get an accurate shot off.
This means that you need to escalate a situation to gunplay way before you’re in actual physical danger, in most cases.
Unless you’re walking along brandishing your weapon, in order to be ready for a possible threat. This in itself escalates any situation you’re in to “one with a gun in it,” whether you’re ever in any danger or not.
Small arms are offensive weapons. They cannot be used for defense without making otherwise safe conditions unsafe, or by escalating a possibly threatening situation into a definitely dangerous one.
That’s how campaign speeches work. There are speechwriters, and they don’t write a whole brand new speech for every campaign stop.
It pleases me to know that Kamala Harris lives rent-free in his head.
Zelenskyy meeting with Trump is just Zelenskyy meeting with Putin with extra steps.
Funny how when it was what the business needed, during lockdowns, work from home was great. What changed?
He sure knew the situation when he was calling Robinson “Martin Luther King times two.”
Is it just me, or is it objectively funny that Trump’s campaign appears to be easily hackable?
That’s because it is entirely reasonable to want to watch the intro sometimes, while it is never reasonable to want to watch ads.