This is my same argument for gun ownership as well. While I’m not against people owning guns, to think that us civilians would survive any decent length of time of the government finally came down on us is laughable.

No, the way it is currently is any time someone in the news that is seemingly healthy but has a major heart issue (for example Bronny James) they immediately jump and say “IT WAS THE VACCINE!”.

Lol it’s like going back in time. I remember the days when sites wouldn’t support certain browsers because of differences in programming (accidental, if you will). Now, we’ve gone full circle and are intentionally blocking use of a site when not using a particular browser. Wouldn’t this be considered monopolistic?

I mean, it’s valid, if not for the incorrect reason. I personally fast past breakfast all the time , mainly because I’m not a huge fan of it. Otherwise, yeah…

I agree. This situation is a bit different, but my point was the general idea of price gouging of a product.

Nothing wrong at all with charging for the main version to support development as long as it’s not gouging. I don’t think this is gouging in the slightest.

It is remarkably close to a real bill. If not for the numbers being obviously wrong, I can imagine someone mistaking this for a real bill.