u/brainwad

Because the unbearableness is inversely proportional to free time, probably. The luxury of time to protest is not something I expect people struggling to pay health insurance have. Political parties do keep organising direct democratic proposals to reduce the burden of health insurance premiums. But these are not guaranteed to pass, because they are in the end just redistribution, so anyone worse off has an incentive to vote no, and usually they focus only on low-income earners, i.e. a minority of the electorate.

What I am trying to say here is the following; Place the Swiss residents to be in first line priority to employment.

So, you want to withdraw from the freedom of movement treaty. The whole point of that treaty was to integrate Switzerland into the EU labour market.

It's 5% of the population and 1/23 canton votes with majority Italian speakers. But it's not Italian speaking cantons that would drive it, it's all the rural German speaking ones. 

As far as I could understand the stance of the initiants, it was basically that they would trade a higher amount of war outside Switzerland in exchange for lower risk of war inside. Which, given it came from the SVP, is totally on brand: the rest of the world only exists as a boogeyman threatening Swiss quality of life.

If it had been approved by 50%, it would probably have gotten the majority of cantons, too, since the voters for this leaned heavily to small, rural cantons.

Wil si jedes Jaar e halb Milliarde budgetiert zum Immo kaufe, aber meistens chönd gar nöd alles usgää.

The whole Medicare levy does. And it has to, the constitution forbids hypothecated taxes. 

Which two parties? For national or state level polls it will necessarily be a fudge with a 3 horse race like this. Only electorate level polling would be accurate, but that'd require 150x the expense to run. 

The sign can only override the bike light; the regular lights don't apply at all to bikes since the bike lights are there. The bike light could be set to go green -> yellow -> flashing yellow -> red+yellow -> green instead, which would be clearer, but the meaning is the same with red + that sign. 

The companies will want to enforce common in office days, so the peak load will barely reduce. But the revenue would crater as people only travel 2-3 days a week. 

The big ones are to be ignored by bikes, since they have their own signals, so surely it can only override the bike ones? 

My guess is the bike lights are new and the right-on-red sign predates them. Otherwise it'd have been installed down there instead? 

It is a bit odd, but I imagine the reason for it is that the bicycle right can go green, so that light can't be set to a permanent flashing yellow, and can do so independently of both the right phase for cars and the straight phase for bikes, so it can't be merged with either of those lights. 

It's undeniable that their pre-contact societies were more primitive than most of the rest of the world at the time, and certainly far more primitive than modern Australia. I do subscribe to a world view in which human progress is generally good, and so I do, all else being equal, prefer more developed societies. Certainly we in the 21st century have little to learn from pre-contact aboriginal culture, and what have to learn is mainly knowledge about things unique to this continent, e.g. about animals and plants.

Source?

Like, all available evidence? When you look at what is known about them – things like landscape modification and fish traps/ponds – they are still less impressive than what was achieved in the rest of the world.

We'll have to agree to disagree. I think living longer, more prosperous lives is worth the extra instability. Though actually primitive societies are not really that stable, they are exposed to a lot of risk from the environment.

I'm defining primitive in the usual way, e.g. Wiktionary has "Natural or premodern environment or conditions; life lacking modern technology and society." and "Of or pertaining to the beginning or origin, or to early times; original; primordial; primeval; first.". The etymological root of the word is from "primus", i.e. "first" – it derives from the idea that primitive things are close to their "original" state of nature. It's not a moral judgement, but a factual one: you are primitive if you are living close to the state of our very ancient ancestors.

This is all justification for why Aboriginals were primitive, no? If you look at the breadth of human societies, they were at the least developed level.

Australia has never had the same need

I think this can't be true, right? Pre-modern societies will grow until they hit their Mathusian limit; surely after 60k years Aboriginals had reached equilibirium at the limit, too. This meant their total population had to be limited by available resources, and so the discovery of agriculture would have been a boon to them by increasing their available calories.

Right, but agriculture was independently discovered at least 5 times on Earth and there have been native agricultural state societies on every continent but Australia (and Antarctica, obv). And it's not like Australia was uniquely unsuited to agriculture – you didn't need Eurasian species/knowledge to do it; the Americas also had agriculture and states before contact.

I don't think the people are inferior, certainly not the ones living today who grew up in contact with the rest of humanity. But there are surprisingly few archaeological signs of complex societies here compared to pretty much everywhere else.

Yeah it's not polite to mock people's ancestors, so people don't say it out loud, but any student of ancient history can look at the other continents, compare them to here, and notice the differences. 

In mine they discovered one outlet had no ground. That was nice to know and get fixed... But it's mostly overkill.

Like you make an email address for the kid that just forwards to both parents' emails. 

I don't get what you mean about anti-avoidance; due to the lack of capital gains tax there is a huge incentive to structure income as gains instead of normal income. 

Arguably this is an incentive to merge with neighbouring gemeine to get better economies of scale. 

I took my son to the Kindernotfall by train (Triemli). It's fine for sub-ambulance emergencies. 

FWIW traveling with a newborn on public transport is totally fine. My son didn't get into a car until he was 1½ (in a foreign country).