This is important, but unfortunately off-topic in this community. (As far as I can tell, the “most of the people who ‘did what they could’ just kept driving their cars” bit that’s presented as a quote isn’t actually in the linked article, and nothing else about it talks about cars, car dependency, or land use topics themselves – the closest it gets is mentioning fossil fuels.) I encourage folks to crosspost it far and wide to communities other than this one.
I hope Europe is scrambling to launch new satellites to pick up the slack. (For their own sake, not the US’, of course.)
Not fewer roads (It’s still important to have good street grid connectivity and small block sizes), but narrower roads and smaller parking lots.
I was so confused until I got to the edit.
It’s not even a very big house. It looks maybe 40’ or so wide and somewhat less deep, so I’m guessing it’s maybe 3000 sq. ft. total. I would almost hesitate to even bestow the status of ‘McMansion’ on it.
Nice try, Padmé.
I’m sure they are. They have to be, unless they’re steel inside instead (which is unlikely), because you can’t make real stacked-stone masonry that skinny and have it be stable.
And that’s my problem with it: it’s fraudulent. Not even in an intentional “flouting the rules to make a modernist point” kind of way either; just out of ignorant and lazy design.
Amazing how we went from every fetus is a valuable, beautiful person, to fuck the kids, let them starve.
That’s not a transition; those ideas are held simultaneously. Moreover, they are not in conflict with each other, once you understand what MAGAs goals actually are.
Stop thinking that the argument you made somehow exposes their stupidity or hypocrisy or whatever, because it doesn’t. All it does is reveal that you’re still in denial and being too charitable about their motivations.
If you create more hungry children now, it’s something that you cannot fix in the future. The children you harm with this will live diminished lives,
Consider that “live diminished lives” implies “become more susceptible to MAGA indoctrination” and you’ll realize that they know exactly what they’re doing and they’re doing it on purpose.
No, this is what happens when you (a) have a “allowed until proven unsafe” regulatory framework instead of a “prohibited until proven safe” one, and perhaps more importantly (b) abjectly refuse to consider any weed control method other than ones that can be accomplished by indiscriminate use of a sprayer.
I would, but that doesn’t work for stuff coming up through cracks in concrete, or through chain link fence.
For that sort of stuff, I recommend vinegar or propane. lMO the only reason to use a fancy commercial herbicide is when you need it to be selective, e.g. when you’re trying to get rid of broad leaf lawn weeds without killing the grass, too. (Edit: I’m not endorsing that as a good reason, BTW, as I’m more of a [email protected] sympathizer myself. I’m just saying that it’s the only one that’s even plausible.)
That’s because Ace Hardware is franchised. It’s essentially a bunch of small businesses that use the same branding.
Unfortunately, it doesn’t work like that. You have to lobby to change zoning laws to make it happen.
I hate columns like that. Everything else is kind of a (bad) choice, but those columns are just objectively wrong because masonry doesn’t work like that.
FYI, you can tell Markdown what language your preformatted section is in so that it does syntax highlighting correctly -- or in the case of plaintext, not at all. Just put 'text' after the initial three backticks, like this:
```text
[Contents of preformatted section]
```
Yep, but it’s even more than that.
American Christian Zionism is not a pro-Jewish policy. It is about (a) getting rid of the Jews by getting them to all go back to the Holy Land, and more importantly, (b) triggering the “End Times,” for which the Jews returning to the Holy Land is a prerequisite. American Christian Zionists do not give a flying fuck about Jews; they’re just delusional racist death-cultists who think they’re gonna get “Raptured.”
It’s the newspaper doing an “allegedly” thing. He was sentenced to life for these crimes that the prosecutor says he did. That way if it turns out he didn’t actually do it and later goes free, the newspaper will be less likely to get sued for libel.
I don’t think you’re wrong, but I think we should stop to consider how fucking absurd that is on the newspaper’s part. The entire fucking point of a criminal conviction is supposed to be that it’s been proven beyond reasonable doubt that the perp did, in fact, do the thing he was convicted for. Libel is, by definition, no longer a valid consideration.
A reporter continuing to use “allgedly” or other reported speech after that point isn’t covering its ass; it’s editorializing in favor of the perp or even sowing doubt about the validity of the rule of law.
I am confused both about why immigrants would want to go to the UK in the first place instead of staying in France, and about why French police wouldn’t be perfectly happy to see them go and let the UK deal with them.