It's not outdated. The chance of a newer electronic communication method being ubiquitous and also relatively open (e.g. not associated directly with a company) is slim. PGP encryption (another "old" technology) solves the privacy nightmare piece. People just have to use it.
Also I recommend selfhosting email. Mailinabox.email is pretty brainless.
Why do people use these crap apps when podcasting is the only media which, from it's inception, is entirely liberated? You can get a FLOSS app and access pretty much everything. Anything you can't access doesn't deserve your attention.
Just don't use iphones or apple products. It's a solvable problem. I recommend books. Any history book about a great civilization can explain what is happening now better than the news or movies anyway.
My ipad is a glorified notebook. I don't get any news from Apple, Google or the usual suspects because I assume it is all curated distraction bait. I learn all I need to know about how things are going by looking out my car window when driving through town. (It's not going well)
The fact that Jon Stewart worked for Apple for a podcast and is now again on television working for some TV station shows that he has very little to offer in the way of anything meaningful. He had more than enough notoriety to start a podcast in his basement where he could say anything he wanted and get compelling guests. He has more than enough money to hire a crew and create a self-produced show online and get real viewership. People should really ask themselves why he is sticking with the big companies. It's because he likes the money and is an expert at getting the narrative out there. The Daily Show has always been lowest common denominator "subversion" that takes itself seriously enough to shame non-approved worldviews but not enough to be held accountable in any meaningful way. It's like if a teenager was a show.
Love or hate Tucker Carlson he is doing what Jon Stewart should have done years ago.
I think I agree on the first part Mamon represents a personification of wealth/greed which a Priest might say is really just another way of saying a love of self (e.g. pride). A message in this parable is "to whom much is given much will be required". As well as the "a man cannot serve two masters" bit.
Jesus existed. He's perhaps the most documented pre-modern figure.
Romans crucified serious offenders. That includes the categories you provided as well as thieves, murderers etc
The Pharisees brought Christ to the Romans because they considered him a heretic and demanded his execution. Pontius Pilate found no fault in him and offered Barrabas instead. The Pharisees rejected Barrabas and Pilate, fearing rebellion, granted their wish and washed his hands of it all. While the Romans crucified Christ the Pharisees were his accusers.
We live with the consequences of Adam's sin (death) which is a mercy because it means we can become sanctified and enter the kingdom of God instead of being eternally fallen. God loves you but hates your sin. God does not torture you. The experience of God is heaven for those that are sanctified but hell for those that are not. A poor analogy would be that a football game is the same for everyone but only those for a certain team are happy with the outcome. (Just to give an idea of how a shared experience can be different for different people) Finally Christ didn't ask anyone to execute him but he knew they would. He lived a perfect, sinless life. His death allowed him to enter hades and conquer death thereby freeing man from the damnation of sin and grafting all of mankind into the new covenant which allowed all to be saved through Christ.
Yes. He was justified in exposing their corruption and hypocrisy in a way they would understand. His house of worship was turned into a "den of thieves" where merchants were taking advantage of poor widows etc
The scummy sales person is a stereotype. They exist sure but if you've ever worked with a good one they can really help particularly if you're buying something complex. I used to work for a company that sold complex manufacturing equipment and without a salesperson theres no way most customers would know what they needed to maintain it etc.
Years ago somebody threw a brick off an overpass and shattered my Dad's windshield while he was on the highway. He drives for a living so he was able to maintain control but it could have easily killed him and others.
It's really cheap to make a book but that doesn't stop publishers from selling them at a large markup. This is a pretty basic supply/demand scenario. The pharma company doesn't owe anyone anything. They exist to make money. The best way to lower the cost is for a competing product to enter the market.
No idea on the statistics but this does happen. I think the onus is on the government to negotiate for the IP though. Big pharma is going to try to get the best deal they can and most of the time that's accepting tax dollars and then selling the drug at a more conservative markup to taxpayers. If the government contract was restructured to get the actual IP then they could offer another contract for production and get competing offers.
It's not outdated. The chance of a newer electronic communication method being ubiquitous and also relatively open (e.g. not associated directly with a company) is slim. PGP encryption (another "old" technology) solves the privacy nightmare piece. People just have to use it.
Also I recommend selfhosting email. Mailinabox.email is pretty brainless.