IMO guaranteed child welfare (including universal lunch) is 100% consistent with any major political idealogy that is internally consistent.
Libertarianism? The whole basis is the personal choice, autonomy, and the ethics of consent. Children fundamentally cannot consent. They still, however, individual agents. They simply are in a state where social order defines their outcome. As society, we must then take this to maximize their outcomes and ultimately their personal liberty - when they reach an age where they can operate with it.
Therefore, we have to choose between depriving others of a relatively small resource, or depriving children of a major resource: the nature of their ability to participate with full autonomy and personal liberty.
It still doesn't really make much sense in a world where the vast majority of things are replicated. The only things that would give them worth are things that cannot be replicated:
Also tea has caffeine as well (technically dark chocolate too, but less than tea so not really a concern).
And again, the solution to sleep issues are to not have caffeine (tea, coffee, or otherwise) more than a few hours after you wake up.
Withdrawal symptoms are not a major concern - they are temporary at best.
Edit: there are plenty of sources of polyphenols - but frankly the average American does not get nearly enough generally. If you have a typical American diet, I would not recommend quitting coffee as a health measure unless you have already drastically increased consumption of polyphenols generally.
Welder isn't too crazy of a tool. It's usually more like, get your 3d printer AND your welder AND your CNC AND your drill press AND your table saw plus a million other hyper specific gadgets.
Except most people are not going to tolerate having a multiplicity of apps, and if people in your circle don't already use signal, they definitely won't now. Whereas previously, I was getting pretty decent traction from people slowly adding it.
Meh, maybe 10% of a single generation at most know how to use computers. Technically savvy millenials vastly overestimate how technically savvy other millenials are.
They are astronomical because we build too large. That accounts for the vast majority of home ownership cost increases. The average home size is up 230%+ from the 70s, or 300% per person.
This makes up the vast majority of the difference in prices seen since that time.
Other direct causes are that we add two or three car garages (30k+) and increased home construction standards ( which add cost up front but often save money long term).
When looking at a price per area, the price is almost static (after accounting for inflation).
It doesn't matter if people support it if they don't remember it well enough to come out to vote when it matters. You see this with Biden already, people completely missing the effort they have made for tons of work that people support.
It's the same thing with recycling, companies trying to sell the idea that climate change is a personal failing of every single person even though said companies are responsible for like 90% of carbon emissions.
God I wish this talking point would die.
Companies emit on the basis of your consumption. This is not arbitrary, emit out of no where.
Individuals being unwilling to tolerate even minor inconveniences or adjustments to their lifestyle makes systemic change impossible. Government and industry won't change until collective individuals are willing to deal with it.
Meat consumption, housing size, housing location, voting patterns, vehicle choice and use, are all individually driven decisions.
IMO guaranteed child welfare (including universal lunch) is 100% consistent with any major political idealogy that is internally consistent.
Libertarianism? The whole basis is the personal choice, autonomy, and the ethics of consent. Children fundamentally cannot consent. They still, however, individual agents. They simply are in a state where social order defines their outcome. As society, we must then take this to maximize their outcomes and ultimately their personal liberty - when they reach an age where they can operate with it.
Therefore, we have to choose between depriving others of a relatively small resource, or depriving children of a major resource: the nature of their ability to participate with full autonomy and personal liberty.
The choice, in my opinion, is very clear.