The Republicans are much better about using topics they don’t care as much about to generate support so they can achieve the ones they do.

The Democrats tend to want to die on every hill, which is ultimately a losing strategy.

I think this is more agreeing than contradictory. If more immigration is desirable, then expand legal immigration.

As you say, a system built around exploiting illegal workers is bad for everyone.

On the one hand that’s true.

On the other hand it’s up the country to decide who gets those documents. Anyone without those shouldn’t come in.

If more immigration is desirable, then expand legal immigration.

They’ll probably strike down one or two of them just so they can claim “look, we’re still independent!!”

Of course the ones to get struck down have already been agreed upon

I think you may have missed the point a bit. It’s exactly these ‘empty promises’ which have been the democrats issue over the past 30 years.

They get elected on messages like ‘make the economy work work everyday americans’ and then once in office they prioritize the status quo and making sure that nothing major changes. This benefits the wealth and damages everyday people, many of whom voted for them in the hopes that the democrats would improve their situation.

As awful as much of their platform is, the Republicans have proven that they aren’t scared to break things and make big changes. This appeals to many voters who feel let down by empty promises.

I use tumbleweed and it’s fine. I’ve been using it for about 2 years and there are a few things that were easier with fedora (e.g. Waydroid) but it’s not enough of a difference that I felt the need to switch back.

That being said, if I had to choose today and do a fresh install I would probably use Fedora.

It’s definitely still true in Central Europe

Or how people tend to prefer Pepsi in blind tests (I think it’s sweeter or something, if i remember correctly) but overwhelmingly chose CocaCola if given the choice.

Holy hell, I thought Croatian was bad with things like trg

I’m not in a particularly desirable area… I’m also not in the US though.

A bug reason why the only desirable areas tend to be walkable in the US is just because there are so few.

If you promoted widespread walkable city-design, then prices will become more accessible to everyone. Even the poorest areas lf my city are super walkable, even moreso than many of the richer areas.

I actually live mostly surrounded by public housing! But I’m also not in the US…

The poorest part of my city is also the most densely populated and has an absolute shit-load of walkable grocery stores.

It tends to be much easier in walkable/well designed areas because you have a much higher density of grocery stores.

I have about 8 within a 2-10 minute walk. So I don’t really do a big weekly shop, but rather a couple small ones throughout the week.

So yeah, depends hugely on how human-friendly the area is

It’s a fun story, however I also found it really interesting after learning German that this is really overblown outside of Germany.

I once tried to reference it with German friends and they didn’t even understand why it was supposed to be funny!

I know this is unpopular and goes against the ideals of the early internet, but the open internet (especially social networks) is hugely damaging at the moment.

This isn’t just “people having different opinions”, but rather full-scale cyber warfare that’s currently happening. It’s also only going to get worse…

Propaganda works, and it works quite well. Nobody is fully immune.

So unless you feel like having Musk/Russia/China dictate your life (through forcing their shit agenda), banning their attack vectors is really the only play.

As I was reading it, I kept thinking how the writing was higher quality than a usual shitpost… this all.lakes sense now!

It’s definitely true. There are so few places that are really walkable in the US and the demand is quite high… once you live that way, it’s hard to go back.

We really need to build more walkable areas, but it’s difficult for a lot of (mostly-nonsensical) reasons.

The only thing to keep in mind, however, is that the math changes significantly when you remove cars from the equation. Our rent is higher than somewhere less walkable, but it’s also roughly equivalent to the full price of owning two cars. So comparatively, we save a bunch of money despite higher rent.

The two are closely connected.

You can’t really build affordable and convenient car-dependent style housing (think single-family suburbs) for everyone because they take too much space. So you’ll always end up with the situation where well-located houses are outrageously expensive and you get cheaper by buying something much further out. Essentially people are willing to pay a premium to no have to drive for a long time to get anywhere.

The only reason why conveniently-located suburbs were ever affordable (think 50s or 60s) is because most people back then didn’t have a car yet, so the demand wasn’t saturated.

Being a scientist is a ridiculously hard career path these days.

Yeah weed easily smells at least as bad

The flexibility of the rights platform is actually one of their greatest strengths.

They are happy to flip-flop on things that they kinda care about in order to keep people onside and get what they really care about.

We on the left should learn from this. Less purity tests and trying to die on every hill or we’re fucked.