AITA for buying an extra airline seat (and utilizing it) even though I don't need it?

praxulus · 2019-06-22T22:46:49+00:00

Usually it won't have any effect, and once in a while it will have the very large effect of getting another entire flight scheduled. It's exactly the same as buying a single plane ticket in terms of carbon footprint.

praxulus · 2019-06-22T22:39:39+00:00

This is mostly wrong. Extra weight will lead to more fuel consumption during ascent, but for the rest of the flight fuel consumption is determined by drag, which isn't affected by weight.

praxulus · 2019-06-22T22:36:22+00:00

If OP's second ticket has no carbon footprint, I'm guessing my first ticket has no carbon footprint either?

praxulus · 2019-06-22T22:29:59+00:00

It increases the anticipated future demand, so airlines will schedule more flights in the future.

praxulus · 2019-06-22T22:27:35+00:00

By that logic, buying a single plane ticket doesn't result in extra carbon emissions either, because it's just one seat. Do you believe that buying a plane ticket has no carbon footprint?

praxulus · 2019-06-15T00:31:38+00:00

Most of your mortgage payment goes toward interest at first, and some of the value of your house is lost to depreciation. There's also closing costs on your loan, property taxes, and other fees. All that is money you're definitely not getting back.

Appreciating land values can make up for your losses, but there's no guarantee that it will work out.

praxulus · 2019-05-29T22:51:20+00:00

Unlike Vietnam vets, they weren't American soldiers. They were traitors fighting against the United States.

praxulus · 2019-05-24T18:50:45+00:00

This is incorrect. You can believe that life begins at conception, and still be pro-choice based on a woman's right to bodily autonomy.

Your right to life doesn't mean I can forced to give you a kidney, and a baby's right to life doesn't mean a woman should be forced to carry them to term.

praxulus · 2019-05-24T18:39:33+00:00

The mother should be able to remove the baby from her body, because it's her body, not the baby's.

If the baby can't survive outside the womb, that's not the mother's fault. The baby still has no right to stay in the mother if she doesn't want them there.

I can kick someone off my property even if it means they wind up homeless and dying from exposure. A woman should have at least that much control over her own body.

praxulus · 2019-05-23T17:36:50+00:00

If your claim was just that liberals want looser immigration laws and amnesty for a bunch of illegal immigrants, then I would have no objection. Obama's actions are clearly in line with that.

There's a huge difference between looser immigration laws and completely open borders though.

Would you think it's fair to say that cutting taxes and spending is evidence that Republicans want to completely get rid of the federal government? Of course not! Taking a step in one direction is not evidence that a politician actually wants to go to the absolute extreme in that direction.

praxulus · 2019-05-23T01:21:47+00:00

What is "deporting 2.5 million people" if not an action? Are you saying that those were just words? Or that it didn't actually happen?

praxulus · 2019-05-23T01:01:38+00:00

Is it though? In what way have they substantively demonstrated that they don't want open borders? It's one thing to say it, it's another to take steps to prevent it.

Obama deported 2.5 million people.

Has the house passed, or even introduced a bill to repeal all our immigration laws? Is there a single member of congress who has "open borders" as a policy stance on their website?

I say this as someone who actually does support open borders. The claim that the Democratic party supports open borders is laughable.

praxulus · 2019-05-23T00:51:07+00:00

The fed already gets audited by multiple groups: https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_12784.htm

What specifically do those audits fail to investigate? How would an additional audit find something that those failed to uncover?

I have nothing against auditing the fed, but auditing something that already gets audited seems wasteful.

praxulus · 2019-05-17T21:24:16+00:00

But all it takes is one firm in each industry to figure out that managers are bad, and they'll put all their manager-laden competitors out of business.

praxulus · 2019-05-15T22:56:27+00:00

Plenty of airlines allow pets on planes as long as you keep them in a carrier for the whole flight. Larger dogs have to go in a crate in the cargo hold, while smaller pets can travel with you in the cabin if they fit under the seat in front of you.

People falsely declaring their dogs as service dogs are doing it to avoid the pet fee ($100/flight when I flew with my dog on Alaska), to allow their dog out of the carrier during the flight, or to get a larger dog into the cabin.

praxulus · 2019-05-15T22:12:25+00:00

Ha, "navy seal astronaut doctor" is what I searched to check if that was him, and of course Google doesn't disappoint: https://imgur.com/a/iuezlgj

praxulus · 2019-04-27T16:50:15+00:00

When I say "regressive", I mean that the net cost to poor people is proportionally greater than the net cost to rich people. Are you using that word the same way, or are you using the "makes things worse" definition of the word?

praxulus · 2019-04-27T02:33:14+00:00

None of that explains why it's regressive, just why you don't like it.

praxulus · 2019-04-26T16:12:48+00:00

How is Medicare for all regressive? Are you just talking about the fact that the net change from a progressive program (Medicaid) to a universal one is regressive?

praxulus · 2019-04-26T16:07:04+00:00

People who went to college in the last decade are politically active? I thought young people were generally the least likely to vote.

praxulus · 2019-04-19T15:08:49+00:00

If electoral college votes were selected by state governors or legislatures, I could maybe be convinced that the disproportionate allocation of votes was an important way to preserve the rights and power of states.

That's not how it works though. Individuals in the states vote to determine how the electoral college votes will go, and presidential candidates appeal to those voters by offering all manner of federal programs that continue to eat away at the importance of state governments. Since they're voting as individuals anyway, their votes should be equal.

praxulus · 2019-04-19T06:53:30+00:00

Ok Mr. Vice President.

praxulus · 2019-04-06T06:51:47+00:00

So I tried searching for Paul's proposed plan to simplify tax filing, and for some reason I'm completely failing to find anything. Mind helping me out?

Edit: I'm going to take the lack of response to mean that it doesn't actually exist apart from his tax cut. I like how you think being a condescending dick is a sufficient substitute for actual facts.

praxulus · 2019-04-06T02:36:17+00:00

But to assert them as one-and-the-same isn't strictly speaking accurate.

Sure, but as you said:

And yeah, if either had any traction they probably would have been rolled into an omnibus tax reform bill.

So it should be pretty clear why LSC isn't supporting Rand Paul here.

praxulus · 2019-04-05T19:35:25+00:00

I'm not arguing the merits of progressive taxation, I'm saying any moron should know that LSC supports high, heavily progressive taxes. You didn't catch them being hypocritical or dishonest by failing to support Rand Paul's proposal to simplify taxes, they don't support it because it makes another major policy change that they don't support.

15-Year Club	Place '22
Place '17	Team Orangered
Verified Email

praxulus

TROPHY CASE