u/No-Silver826

Can you have a hybrid design turbofan engine that doubles as a turbojet engine? This way, a supersonic jet can change their configuration for efficiency.

I'm reading this:

The Hittites were an ancient Indo-European people who emerged in Anatolia around the beginning of the 2nd millennium BCE, likely migrating from regions north of the Black Sea or the Caucasus. SOURCE: Wiki

The Yamnaya were there around 5300 BC - 2600 BC, so how is it that the Hittites were considered a pre-Yamnaya group?

What can I do to protect my white shirt's collar from stains? Even after I wash them and put an anti-staining agent, like the detergant itself, I still see brown stains on the neck lining.

Armenia is also known as "Hayasthan," so is this word also cognate with "Hattusa/Hittite?" They lived in similar areas, and I've been hearing that the Hittites have less Yamnaya ancestry. I'm also hearing that the Armenians have less Yamnaya ancestry. So perhaps the two are related.

Our city counselors could do one small step to make this place even more transportation-friendly, and that is mandate that MIT and Harvard shuttle services should be a shared service with us - even if we're not affiliated with Harvard or MIT.

What do you think?

In the USA, it's basically viewed that NAFTA did a lot of destructive things to the economy of the USA in that it created a lot of rust belt cities, although this seemed to have started in the '70s -way before the '90s.

Moreover, it was responsible for the USA losing manufacturing jobs, which is true, but...

• We already established here in a previous post that although the aggregate good that NAFTA did (made a lot of items cheaper for hundreds of millions of consumers), it did some bad as well (i.e. made us lose millions of jobs). And even though a hundred million consumers saving a lot of money is better than a few millions losing their job, you'd think that somehow the aggregation of the money saved could have somehow developed a welfare fund for these displaced workers.
• Anyways, is the belief in capitalism compatible with being pro-NAFTA?
• Do people in Mexico absolutely love NAFTA, and did NAFTA strengthen their belief in the "Law of comparative advantages?"
• NAFTA sounds quite capitalistic to me, since it successfully made corporations more profitable. However, capitalism and socialism is a stance on WHO owns it. So what could NAFTA have done to be a socialistic policy?

Why does dough shrink when you're trying to flatten it out, and how can we prevent this from happening?

Is it because the dough is too cold, and cold dough shrinks?

I was surprised that the gas taxes generated and consumed by the gas/diesel industries are about the same. So why do we need them anyways since they both behave antagonistly? The tax makes diesel/gas more expensive, but the subsidy makes it cheaper. So we should eliminate them to reduce the bureaucratic inefficiency and to allow the industry to set prices and not a centrally-planned command-style economic plan that the nation has devised.

In a free market capitalistic society that's in equilibrium for many generations, everyone has housing, food, healthcare, water, clothes, etc. This society has evolved in a way to sustainably produce these things in such a way that the people feel confident to start families and hence, don't have scarcity in mind.

However, suppose that in this society, the farmers can't sell their produce at a profit. Is this a good thing? It means that the food prices, relative to other products and services, is inexpensive. This scenario, for the general public, is better than having too little food that's priced too high. The farmers can't get a good wage for their work, so in my opinion, this society has too many farmers who should consider a new vocation.

In our society in the USA, we subsidize farmers (probably for republican votes), but this tells me that we're taxing some industry to subsidize farmers, but this leads to much in inefficiency because it costs money to administer this bureaucracy, and there are losses associated with this re-allocation.

How is it possible in a steady-state society that an essential product or service requires subsidization? Subsidizing an industry for essential items indicate to me that this society is now unsustainable. Also, some other parts of this society is either too profitable and able to generate a lot of profit, which is then shared in the form of subsidies. But profitable sector that's generating profits is also not sustainable, because it implies that there's a shortage of this product or service.