The shareholder is the owner; it is right and proper that the business serve them (at least in part).

Instead, I see the problem as one of liability and regulation.
The directors of early joint-stock companies were liable to the limits of their PERSONAL FORTUNE.
Nowadays, that liability is so diminished that "corporations" can break criminal law and the human beings who did it are not punished but instead the corporation pays some fine.
Similarly, industry-specific regulatory agencies are co-opted (because who has more interest in the regulator than businesses in that industry) and used to insulate them from both competition and ordinary liability (ie common law as adjudicated in normal courts).

I bought the dip, but the dip dipped
(to the tune of I fought the Law)

I think there's a real risk of discontinuation here.
If the dollar price crashes too quickly for the difficulty algo to adjust, commercial mining will stop (due to unprofitability).

Be the person you aspire to be

Hello!

I think there's some self-loathing in there too

Yeah, wet shaving is great.

IMO Double-edge razors are the best
(as opposed to a shavette or a straight razor or multiblade cart)

This whole thing is such a libtard moment to me...

He could be standing up yelling about how much he loves tacos and they're gonna remove him from the hearing.
If he wedges his arm between a door and the frame so they can't drag him out, there's a risk it's going to get broken.

I say this despite agreeing with his actual point completely.
The US seems to be subservient to Israel, probably due to weird and improper influence (blackmail, threats of assassination, etc).

"the birth of an American Empire"

Friend, you are 180 years late

Nah, democracy is the enemy

Thanks for the recommendations

Virtually all of them but with special attention to Plato, Kant, and by extension virtually all modern Western philosophy:

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-transcendental-idealism/

> In the first edition (A) of the Critique of Pure Reason, published in 1781, Kant argues for a surprising set of claims about space, time, and objects:
> Space and time are merely the forms of our sensible intuition of objects. They are not beings that exist independently of our intuition (things in themselves), nor are they properties of, nor relations among, such beings.
> The objects we intuit in space and time are appearances, not objects that exist independently of our intuition (things in themselves). This is also true of the mental states we intuit in introspection; in “inner sense” (introspective awareness of my inner states) I intuit only how I appear to myself, not how I am “in myself”.