Any boot that can actually be resoled. You might pay a higher up front cost, but they will be worth the investment when you're putting your third outlsole on them in instead of getting yet another pair of shoes.
Edit: also, the AK isn't actually cheap to make, it's just the US market was flooded with surplus guns no one wanted for a good while.
They're just plain wrong about 1911s though. Those things have been surpassed many times over in every category that you would care about in a hand gun, including reliability. I know a few gunsmiths. They're always fixing 1911 platforms, well beyond what your would expect for their popularity. Everyone always says "two world wars," and they were a great gun for they're era, but there's a reason they got replaced.
I'd rather advisements list the highest price for the area they cover than have false advertising with the prices at the store.
I want to expand on your expansion of my glib comment. While taxing the poor and working class at a higher proportional rate is obviously immoral, it's also bad economic policy. The working class are essentially the "engine" of the economy. Their income circles back into the greater economy at a much higher rate than a rich person's. The harder you tax them, more more you slow down the economy. While is technically true for any tax bracket, you can tax the rich much more aggressively with very little impact on the overall economy, because so much of their money is for toys.
We're actually seeing a big problem right now, with so many billionaires they are running out of decent places to put their money that's worth their time. We have way too many billionaires and not enough millionaires and small business owners. A billionaire will never invest in your taco truck, but the local "fairly rich" guy might. The billionaires are betting big on AI, in part, because they have no other bets they can make. We need to tax their asses way more aggressively and pump that money into micro businesses to make our economies robust.
(While I'm speaking about the US in particular, this is somewhat of a global trend.)
I wasn't thinking about that at all, but they probably aren't trying very hard, if I had to guess. What's their current monetization model?
I'm pretty sure it's actually short for chili con carne, tomates, espinaca, frijoles, maíze, arroz, más frijoles, calabacín, brócoli, pimientos verdes, comino, chipotle, y pimentón ahumado.
That's the same advantage all the other options have, too.
That is a laughably stupid tax policy.
Other folks have let you know what's up. You can read more about it at https://electionscience.org
Personally I think their recent website remodel really took a lot of the meat and potatoes out of their presentation, but I'm not a media guru, so what do I know?
I'm not sure if Approval would weed out extremists in practice or not, but using the current voter behavior under FPTP and extrapolating to Approval doesn't really hold water. Even in Fargo and St. Louis we're already seeing different voting behavior, where only 30% of voters chose to be strategic in who they vote for. Under a FPTP election you pretty much have to make a strategic decision.
Yes, actually. RCV is complicated enough that it causes poor NYC voters to submit invalid ballots at a higher rate than their rich and counterparts, something that doesn't happen with "choose one." Still, RCV is good, but Approval Voting is better. Under Approval, an invalid ballot is impossible unless you put in illegal markings, which would invalidate a ballot under any method.
Here's where the problem is. The sheriff is viewing the potential for the kid to get hit by a person driving a car as the kid's fault, when of course the fault should lie completely with her person operating heavy machinery.