• 0 Posts
  • 18 Comments
Joined 10 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 30th, 2025

help-circle
  • Lot of misinformation in this thread. Every drug has side effects but that doesn’t mean everyone or even a majority of people will experience them.

    Minoxidil was originally designed as a blood pressure med and was found to support hair growth. Kind of like Viagra was designed for pulmonary hypertension and it was later found that it supported erections.

    The doses of minoxidil given to support the anagen or thicker phase of hair growth {2.5 to 5 mg) are much lower than those given for blood pressure (10 to 20 mg). The higher doses are more commonly associated with side effects like lightheadedness, palpitations, lower extremity edema and pericardial effusion.

    Detasteride or Finasteride decrease the conversion of testosterone to dihydrotestosterone. Scalp DHT accelerates follicle minituarization. This medication has a long half life so if youve taken it for weeks it stays in your system for weeks even after youve stopped it. There are people that have reported longer standing mood changes due to this drug.

    I know many who tolerate both just fine but everyone should assess their own risk tolerance and make a decision based on that. The topical formulations help but the oral combination is much more effective and for those that pursue a hair transplant these meds will always be started afterwards (often beforehand as well) because otherwise your DHT will just wipe out the transplanted follicles.



  • This is absolutely true.

    Even with the advent of the Industrial Revolution, Britain initially struggled to compete with the sheer quality and cost-effectiveness of Indian hand-woven fabrics.

    They instituted a 100% tariff on importation of Indian fabric to support their nascent mechanized textile manufacturing.

    This allowed them to hone the machinery by creating a sandbox to grow their new expertise in. The quality could not match what was produced by hand but the sheer volume and efficiency could easily outdo manual methods.

    Over time as they gained political influence, they were able to point guns at and break the thumbs of the right people in India effectively eradicating Indias domestic textile industry.

    They then forced Indian markets to accept British cloth with no tariff, making that consumer sandbox bigger.

    Minus the colonial / coercive economics at the end there, this is an example of Britain using tariffs very effectively to grow their own industry while taking down a global leader in textiles (one that even the Romans wrote of 1500 years prior).

    May well have played out the same without supportive policy, but the protectionism certainly helped them grow their own industry faster and the violent / coercive colonial element helped them remove a traditional, higher quality though analog/manual competitor sooner.

    What America is doing is more of a dying empire vibe. Protection for the sake of clinging to the old and familiar way, with no plan or strategy to adapt for the future.


  • Depends how much the average consumer is paying attention. Many probably don’t know that every EV can use the Tesla chargers now.

    The competition here is certainly constrained. Most car manufacturers are making less EVs due to decreasing overall demand and expirarion of federal EV tax credits.

    The real competition is on the other side of the Pacific. Europe and Canada have accepted that on some level while the US continues to artificially prop up its EV market ex-China.

    There are legitimate concerns don’t get me wrong. But the US won’t be able to hide from a more dynamic and competitive product forever.


  • Tesla has 35% market share in Norway.

    France saw an increase in Tesla registrations by 203% year over year.

    Sweden had a 144% increase in registrations. Denmark had a 96% increase.

    In the US, the core demographic remains white male, ~48 years old, with a household income exceeding $140,000, particularly in conservative states (Texas/Florida).

    Part of the problem is that competition is still lacking in many ways especially when it comes to charging infrastructure.




  • Saying ‘It will just negatively impact your credit score’ like it’s nothing in a capitalist nation where nearly all financial trust is based on how effectively you pay back your creditors is a pretty wild take.

    Especially when a car and home are the bare minimum for most people to be able to function in the US (public transport is laughable anywhere outside a metropolis) and the average person isn’t getting either without a loan.

    I wouldn’t be so quick to ignore medical debt. The average retired couple spends $350000 on medical expenses in the US. The system is a lot more dysfunctional than you make it out to be.



  • Easiest pathway is CR1(Spousal). Just have to be married to an American for two years. For an employment based green card the timeline is 3 to 4 years (best case scenario, often much longer depending on your country of origin) and you’re almost definitely going to be working for an American company that’s eager to exploit your labor.

    Being married to an American, especially in this day and age, is a unique hardship I wouldn’t wish on most but I think it can be stomached for 48 months. I can understand why from a Canadian perspective, in 2026, it would be unpalatable.







  • It seems like ordinary citizens can nominate local delegates that are then screened by a commission run by the party. The elected (party approved) delegates then vote on policy. This system can certainly give an illusion of democracy but ultimately the party is curating all political discourse by only allowing for party approved delegates to become electable in addition to exerting absolute control over local media.

    In more ideal circumstances, delegates would not be screened for party loyalty, such that if other (less ruling party favorable) perspectives became popular, a new coalition could eventually accumulate the political power to form an opposition party to the ruling one.

    In other words, I think we should be skeptical towards the notion that a one party state can be ‘democratic’.