basedgod's comments

Good riddance. The world is rid of a horrible person who has done horrible things, and who has never once tried to do the right thing in the face of adversity.

She could have done so much more, spoken out against so many atrocities, in her own family and Britain's role in the world in general. She could have attempted to use the last vestiges of monarchical power - likely ending the monarchy in the process - and stopped Brexit, or this turmoil that has ensued because of it.

But she chose not to do any of this. Because the "prestige" of this disgusting tradition was worth more to her than the lives of any of the citizens she "rules" (symbolically) over.

It would have been hard to have had a worse monarch than her.

oh no dipshits who sell their cars can no longer be paid in $7k worth of cash and need to be paid with a bank transfer won't somebody please think of the dipshits

lots of people got enormous value from the labor of enslaved people

start considering the lives of people beyond yourself

great another example of abusing public taxpayer dollars to subsidize rural homes that shouldnt exist

infrastructure outside of dense towns is unsustainable with the extremely low amount in taxes rural areas pay

these people do not deserve the same standard of living as those in sustainable areas

subsidize them to move to urban areas, not their lifestyle that uses 20x the infrastructure load an urbanite does

Amerika can't keep building out the same levels of roads utilities and municipal water to rural areas as it does to cities. this standard of living does not scale. it is not sustainable.

if you don't believe me, go look at 100 year infrastructure costs once a suburb needs replacing. this is why every town in America is failing

what

the river doesn't ask questions. doesn't judge you. doesn't rear it's ugly head of spatial conformity when your bike doesn't fit.

it merely politely swallows whatever you put into it, wherever you are, leaving you free to go about your day

vs the municipal trash can, where you'll be fined if it doesn't fit, and have to lug it in

way more fun to toss and dump on one last wild ride of your bike

bikes don't float hth

you keep using that word, "dog pilled"

I do not think it means what you think it means

https://incels.wiki/w/Dogpill

a ham sandwich could have accomplished what he did. Rather, probably could have accomplished more than him. he was so incompetent that he probably accomplished less Republican agenda than if a lobotomized generic Republican candidate was in his stead. any generic Republican president would have been able to appoint the same Supreme Court judges. he changed nothing about this calculus after getting elected.

essentially, I believe almost any other person other than him could have accomplished more towards the Republican agenda than he did. it's almost unprecedented how little he did in spite of the power the Republicans had in 2016.

I think what matters more is not his current views on any particular subject or knowledge thereof. but rather his well demonstrated ability to not only challenge his own views( and the current prevailing views/ countercurrent views ) - but also that of being able to surround himself by writers and collaboraters and and other people who can challenge his views.

it's very analogous to empiricism in research. I wouldn't trust him to get the right answer on his own, nor on the first time. but, I'd trust him, that it put up the the task on the issue of governance, he wouldn't be arrogant enough to assume he knows the only right way to do something, and hed actually try to sorround himself by intelligent capable people, and rely on their advice to get things done

I could see this being true. we only ever see him attack. Republicans, because most of what they do is so idiotic and insane. there's an implicit agreement with the viewer that He's doing this because the Democrats are so much more tame in comparison, that he doesn't need to spend time on them

it's from this cloth of shadows. we can infer his political beliefs and projector own. but he very well. could be a neoliberal hack who blindly trusts in his party, like Biden

I'm torn between doubting his actual efficacy from never holding office nor being in government, with that of thinking it doesn't really matter, that what we really need is an effective leader with moral and ideological direction, who leaves the policies up to our bureaucratic state

because biden- and almost every other recent president – have been politicians for decades, then yet still get nothing done.

John Stewart, at least has the truck record of being able to deeply research issues and find and stand for his moral ground in a consistent, predictable manner

I wouldn't trust him to " run the country" by himself. but I also don't think you need to be able to do that to be president. John Kennedy in a 1960s filled his kitchen cabinet full of highly intelligent people to help him govern. as a counterexample, George w. Bush was rather unintelligent, but filled his cabinet full of insanely intelligent( but evil ) and was highly effective in pursuing his agenda

If nothing else, John Stewart would be moral compass for the country

to preempt somebody jumping in on this with a dumb take on Trump: he accomplished rather little as a president, certainly far less than he could have, because he filled his cabinet with blithering yes men, Rather than a cohesive team that could strategize

you are a either a blithering moron, or acting in bad faith

few people are saying "the gestapo will literally be called to your house the second you miss a period in a red state"

but rather, that this data can and will be used as collaborating evidence in a criminal trial.

a state prosecuting an abortion will have to prove the person is actually pregnant, and there is zero reason to believe they wouldn't use this data as one more tool in their arsenal building a rock solid case. it's not as if people undergoing illegal abortions are going to have good records that can be looked up otherwise

you are a bad person

this garbage bridge does not serve it's residents above replacement.

ferries already existed, as well as other ways to get to the areas north of the city.

the main issue with this bridge is that it is the enemy of better, and a bridge/tunnel with forward thinking infrastructure and transit can now never be built, now that we have this antiquated garbage bridge built, merely for the myth of car ownership

the civil planning doesn't even extend to the rest of the city, it's merely plopped down onto an arbitrary section of it.

it would have been better to not have been built at all. a more ugly bridge built later on wouldn't have had the nimbys we have today, and could have been torn down and retrofitted without it being sacrilegious

it's a bargain for the city but still a blight on it's residents that does not serve them in any way

it makes the lives of a few rich people better as they can commute to their yachts better, but that's about it

sf would have been completely fine as a city without this bridge

a bridge to nowhere, that's a blight on that neighborhood in SF (in the middle of a beautiful park), and has served to fuel and encourage car culture, and does not integrate with public transit in the slightest

few civic minded people celebrate the freeways that have torn 20th century cities apart, and this bridge is (a very pretty) extension of this

you are an irrational toxic person who cannot recognize simple patterns.

you have provided zero arguments as to why red states would not use this tool in their arsenal

nobody is saying "the entire prosecution will start and end on somebody missing a period in their all"

but rather, its collaborating evidence that can be used in a multitude of ways

BART (and all subways in the US) costs $2 billion per mile to build a few years ago (somebody posted a while back BART + other subways recent construction costs), probably close to $4 billion per mile now due to inflation and higher materials costs

I don't think spending $100s of billions on subway into the suburbs will even make a dent on housing prices

actually, this is good for Bitcoin

you're right, there's absolutely no systemic bias in testing, and the tests themselves accurately measure intelligence and giftedness

you don't know what you're talking about or anything about induction stoves

induction stoves are far more efficient in terms of heat transferred to food vs gas, which mostly heats the air instead

and yeah it's a bummer the one time every 2 years you go to use all 4 burners at once you won't be able to max amp it

you are using infantile logic to argue your point, that:

-california grows food -americans need food to eat -therefoe, there should be absolutely no restrictions whatsoever on agriculture, and farmers should be able to use as much water and grown in the most wasteful ways possible, because after all we need food

there's tons of crops in drought stricken California that are grown relatively efficiently. there's tons more where football fields of water are used to grow calorie empty foods in horribly inefficient ways

farmers have such a lock over the feeble minded such as yourself that any blame they share over instances of wasteful water use is deflected because "hey we're growing food here and you need to eat"

the state could issue subsidies for farmers to upgrade to lower impact irrigation systems. for other types of crops, their water usage is way too high compared to their caloric yield, and these crops should no longer be grown. our consumerist society doesn't justify growing literally whatever we want wherever we want, regardless of the externalities of water usage