This article[0] and a clarifying comment[1] answer the question for JS. I think it's the same for Python. Apparently your model (which was mine, too) is out of date!
I think the argument is that there are multiple judicial philosophies that can be chosen from, and you can generally predict what outcomes will result from following a philosophy consistently over time, so a justice chooses the philosophy that results in the outcomes they want. And therefore they could have chosen their philosophy for partisan outcome-based reasons, so consistently following it is no defense to accusations of partisanship.
I would call it a duty more than a debt. I feel that I have a duty to look after my elders, but I do not think my children owe me a debt for conceiving them or for performing my own duty to take care of them.
One possibility is that he "works hard" at that, too, e.g. by consciously thinking about what the best things to do with them are and endeavoring to spend as much as possible doing them. Perhaps if you internalize the idea that spending time with your family is in fact work, of a different but also valuable nature, then you will not find it as difficult.
This is an excellent question that I never thought of!
My guess is that
- there is a large range of cal concentrations that work fine without tasting bad, and
- the amount of water absorbed by the corn is very hard to predict, as it varies from batch to batch, and
- unlike brining meat, it is unlikely that two people doing this by hand would vary how much water they are adding by 5x or even 3x, because there is no reason to add a lot more water than is needed, and
- recipes are simpler if you base the cal amount on the corn amount and then add "enough water" (which may change once you start cooking).
So maybe no one doing it for non-industrial audiences has bothered narrowing it down.
I use around half as much as you (3:1 water to corn and 1% cal by weight of corn) and it works well for me.
You can get a smooth product from a food processor if you are willing to do it in small batches, very slowly (I take around 5 minutes to process 1 cup of nixtamal in my 11-cup food processor, with pauses to scrape it down). I can do that without adding too much water (and in fact I have to add more water after I'm done processing).
I also bought from Masienda; they are indeed great!
> It’s time to set the record straight, friends: food processors absolutely work for turning nixtamal into masa.
> A basalt molino will still yield the best results for making masa.
Primavera's masa was smoother than my Indian wet grinder masa, which I am certain is smoother than food processor masa. One can also make tortillas from masa harina. The question is what has been lost? The limitations of masa harina by itself are widely understood.
Before giving up on already available home equipment, I'd compromise on the percentage of masa harina rather than the smoothness of the masa. For example, a commercial blender such as the Vita-Prep can puree anything if one adds enough water. Then dry out the water, as the Masienda blog advises, either by dehydration or by adding masa harina. The limitations of masa harina aren't apparent in smaller quantities.
As I wrote, I didn't find the "drying out" step to be necessary. If you are patient enough you can process the nixtamal into dough with only a tiny bit of water added.
Edit: I don't have a wet grinder so I can't compare to that. It is smooth enough to get the pocket though.
> to actually do anything with that paper wealth, he needs to sell the stock or engage in a similar realization event, in which case that gain will be taxed
The ProPublica analysis that the BBC refers to [1] explains it: you borrow with the capital as collateral and then when you die the debt is repaid by selling some of the capital. But because of the stepped-up basis on death there is never a "realization" of positive gains.
Having implemented it for a job, this has been my impression of container scanning as well. Either your container has an OS, in which case you don't use 99% of the software on it and so 99% of the vulnerabilities found do not affect you, or else you have a container with "scratch" as the base image, in which case the scanner has no insight.
[0] https://hacks.mozilla.org/2015/05/es6-in-depth-generators/
[1] https://hacks.mozilla.org/2015/05/es6-in-depth-generators/#c...