I just came up with a thought the other day! This would be a decades long approach and I have no idea if it would work. The idea is for generic American cities, that have a few sky scrapers in a downtown and then the burbs.

Start with 3-5 square blocks in the heart of downtown and close the roads. Make them permanently pedestrian only. These roads are typically very wide, so allow food trucks/vendors to occupy a portion of the center. Add bike lanes, and add really good reliable public transit around this area. Let that marinate for a few years, then add another chunk of the same size.

I think you would see this portion of the city become a very popular residential area. Businesses will figure out how to provide amenities where people gather. By starting small you are not requireing people to get rid of their cars, just not use them in certain areas. As this expands you will have a larger and larger portion of the population that finds it inconvenient and expensive to own a car once their needs are met in this ever expanding bubble.

I doubt you could ever get this done, but it’s an idea!

It’s a monarchy… So yeah…

Cat probability: 98.3%

deleted by creator

Is this the same Bob Ballard that found the Titanic and the Bismark?

I agree, we all have search engines and if someone doesn’t understand a word or phrase they can learn it on their own. Brilliant write up!

Was this the root cause??? Hahahaha

Looks like forced perspective. I think the hawk isn’t looking at the little bird, but from our angle it looks like they’re face to face, so we assume they are much closer than they are.

Thank you for your service in spreading the gospel of the scissors sisters.

Certainly could if it had good contact. If it was air gapped (held up by hair), it could be an effective barrier for shorter wavelengths.

I took some antenna theory courses back in the day and yes, you are correct. Some frequencies reflect off the upper atmosphere so there would be a longer effective range at higher incident angles (going into the top of the head) but it wouldn’t completely block radio waves. Going from memory, the wavelengths that reflect off the upper atmosphere are long enough that a tin foil hat wouldn’t cause much interference anyways.

TLDR: Fashionable, but not practical.

Love your optimism

You’re right. I was being very Ameri-centric. I subconsciously interchange free speech and the first amendment even though they are not equal.

I do believe that individuals and private institutions should have this right to react though. I don’t agree with how it was used in this situation, but I absolutely believe the hospital should have the right to terminate someone based on the opinions they openly share.

If this same employee was sharing an anti-vax opinion I would want the hospital to be able to remove them from the role.

That is not what free speech means.

Free speech means the government cannot prohibit free speech. A private institution can take any lawful action they want in retaliation/reaction.

I agree that it really sucks that saying something true can get you fired, but this isn’t an infringement of the first amendment.

In reality capitalism is one of the most authoritarian systems in history.

This statement is pretty disingenuous. First, authoritarian is a political system, not an economic one, but for the sake of argument let’s call authoritarian “the lack of personal choice or opportunity”. I feel like this definition captures the sentiment of the original post.

Don’t get me wrong, there are many flaws with the inequalities of capitalism, but it does provide much more freedom of opportunity than feudalism and substance farming in terms of economic systems. Those two have been the staple of civilization since its inception. Personally, I would choose the system where the deck is stacked against me, rather than the system where I don’t get delt a hand.

So no, I don’t think capitalism ranks as one of the most authoritarian systems in history. There are many changes we can make to reduce inequality and make the world “less authoritarian” though. Might be a better to push those ideas of improvement rather than pretending that we live in the worst time in history.

This is the way.

Command statement = an action

Question statement = a status

Easy, kings side bishop red carpet promenade

It is a politically savvy and ethically correct move. Really nice when those line up.

The argument I’m making is that we should not call them chemicals when they don’t have the capacity to make chemical reactions.

An analogy could be how we use the word weed. We call unwanted plants weeds. If there is mint growing in your yard and you don’t want it, it’s a weed. If you sell your house and the next owner likes it that mint is not a weed anymore. It’s still mint (element) but no longer a weed (chemical).

You make a good point. I should have said “things in the plasma state” should not be considered chemicals.