Voila.

Not having to deal with state management.

Not having to deal with browser compatibility issues (and mobile vs desktop).

Not having to deal with weird input validation stuff dual layer stuff that is inherent in web apps, but not a big deal elsewhere.

Not having to deal with laggy and unstable connections at the UI layer.

Etc, etc.

Orders of magnitude more BS, plumbing, awkwardness, head scratching, etc.

It’s the same reason there is a different legal system in the military than for everyone else.

Sometimes, you need to round up all the men and start killing folks - or everyone else dies. Such is life. Making it easy to find them is a basic operational best practice.

And yes, you could parallel sets of even series transformers together. It will work fine, until something happens and then it doesn’t (or explodes). Making that not happen is relatively non trivial and is a lot of why keeping a working power grid working is non trivial and a lot of work.

At larger scales, when this goes wrong it can cause grid blackouts. Smaller scales, fires.

Since a single transformer rated for the load it will carry is pretty simple and ‘just works’ in almost all scenarios, it’s more economical just using a single one when you can.

No sane way to do that with two different power plants on opposite sides of the state, of course.

If you’re really careful you could have parallel sets of series transformers feeding into a common feed.

At a much larger scale, that is exactly what the grid is, actually.

It just sucks dramatically from an operational perspective compared to having one correctly sized transformer.

It’s the same kind of problem.

(And notably, it’s not that it’s actually completely impossible to do it that way - just impractical compared to the alternative. You could actually make something that kind of sorta worked for an aircraft carrier by joining tens of thousands of small pontoons and support ships. Operationally, it would just suck compared to the alternative.)

With that struggling neighbor, are you talking about helping them take out their trash at night when they’re tired - or paying unemployment benefits for years?

Notably, in my experience, the ones who talk the most usually just keep talking - and aren’t the ones on the hook for actually doing the hard caregiving when things are really tough. But hey, maybe you’re different?

One big difference we have here is you’re again talking hand waving generalities, and I’m talking concrete economic behaviors and policy. It’s easy to say ‘if you can help you should’, it’s harder when it’s ’where is the line for “can” and “should” exactly when we’re talking millions of people and trillions of dollars’, and people you’ll likely never meet in your life - and taxes that definitely come out of your paycheck each month.

Move the line too much one way, and it incentivizes being a victim. Move it too much the other way, and it crushes people with legitimate problems. Both are real issues.

Is ‘caring’ (what does that mean exactly?) for someone on death row good or bad? You’ll likely find splits in answers along ‘political’ lines, especially depending on things like the nature of the crime, who the victim was, etc.

Is ‘caring’ (again, in what way?) for someone in Palestine good or bad? Or worth how much money to do? Similar split. How about Iran?

What about someone in the inner cities? Who doesn’t work?

Etc.

Hand wavy general statements are easy to have, but when it gets down to actual implementation is when real groups of people start to have very different concrete opinions on how it should be done.

You’ll also find lots of shaming among the group and against ‘outsiders’ trying to enforce idealogy. And if you think that part doesn’t happen, just read your own comment - it’s a mild form of that!

That is politics.

Which reinforces my point?