@anti_dan's banner p

anti_dan


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 06 20:59:06 UTC

				

User ID: 887

anti_dan


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 06 20:59:06 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 887

Indeed. My wife has a few childless friends, some are happy about it, some are not (one was explicitly flipped from the former to the latter by hanging out with my son). This "dangerous" part isn't really it. Its far more about the "doing stuff" bit. The ones who are happy about it are "scared" of not being able to jet off to Europe on a whim. The stats also say that most of these people live to regret their short term thinking in their 20s and 30s. Children are an investment. For most people the early pain ends up being paid back surprisingly quickly. Now, a small subsection of parents dislike their kids. I'd argue many of them dislike the kid because they dislike themselves and made a kid in their image.

I find the timing of this alongside the Russia Today fake indictments of Russians who will never face a real trial to be suspicious. The DOJ has lost its presumption of objectivity, and it really feels like they are trying to say, "pay no attention to the fact that the DNC of our second largest state was severely compromised by the PRC. A few right leaning youtubers got paid a few million dollars by a media company secretly financed by Russia!"

From 12-18 I worked in various spots. Mostly refereeing. There are almost no 12 year old referees anymore. The state makes it really hard to start before 15 now. Cant be solo before 16. I used to solo ref 10 year olds as a 13 year old who rode a bike to the field and it was fine. Now they have 30 year olds doing that.

Also at 18 I worked for a glass company right after HS. The owner wanted me to stay on full time. I went to college on a full ride for engineering instead. But, perhaps in a different economic system I could have become head of the plant with no degree and started earning 50k a year out of HS and 100k by age 22. But that is simply not done.

13 year olds aren't meaningfully more useless than 18 year olds in many roles. Particularly when you are comparing an intelligent 13 y/o to a illiterate illegal 18 year old. What has happened is they've been regulated and credentialed out of competition. Plus once they are 16 or so, they are still being economically undercut by unregulate, illegal labor, meaning they can't get the entry level job that serves as a stepping stone to, for example, become a master carpenter. Thus the system pushes them into education because sheepskins is the only other way to get into those higher level jobs now.

It's not about "education", unless you think it is impossible to have an education system that doesn't result in arrested development well into your thirties.

This does seem to be the pattern to me. Education extends adolescence and then the education becomes a justification as to why you can't settle in a community where you have something other than your "dream job". So you had a few HS boyfriends, a college BF, then you are with another guy in a different place after college for a few years, then that gets broken off because one of you is moving from Columbus to Chicago for a high powered job and the other has to choose between their employment and the spouse, they pick employment and another few years of courtship have been wasted.

Food in Europe does take up a higher % of their income though.

Palestinians have every right to engage in armed resistance. Israel is taking more than combatants prisoner and not providing trials.

Well if its an armed resistance then they are POWs and not hostages. You are trying to have it both ways. In one part of your frame this is a legitimate war, so the Gazans are entitled to violence. Yet, in the other part of your frame Israel is not entitled to carry out its war in an effective manner, which, given normal rules of engagement + Hamas's tactics would ordinarily entitle Israel to a genocide. Which you would, obviously, again object to.

Fundamentally what the region needs is a situation in which Palestinians are in control of the situation and have a stable arrangement that they are satisfied with.

So a genocide of Israel is necessary? The people of Gaza have spoken and they prefer death to coexistence.

This seems like it would increase the cost of goods significantly compared to the current system. Places like Amazon already face significant last step of delivery costs. Doing so for every supplier to a grocery store? That will make Biden's inflation look like childs play.

You see how calling convicted terrorists "hostages" makes people suspicious of your point of view right? Why are we conflating the West Bank and Gaza? They will never be one nation again unless they ethnically cleanse Israel off the map. Of course there were trade controls in Gaza, it is, I don't know how many times it must be stated, run by a terrorist organization whos interest is killing Jews and using its own citizens as human shields to try and get American and European Leftists sad.

Then how will the delivery truck utilize the road effectively?

Well mainstream LGBT activists disagree with you.

While your interpretation is what the courts actually do in practice, I find it fairly reprehensible. The court doesn't know that the severability clause (terminating all American law prior to 1890) isn't what the legislators actually wanted in the beginning. They are engaged in mind reading by not sticking to pure textual readings and saying "this is what the legislators told us they wanted".

Why would we even contemplate comparing those two pictures? One is urban and one is not.

Which is why many trips require a connection. Yes, which is why public transit doesn't work in practice as a substitute good for private cars. It has to be imposed on people through poverty or draconian regulation. Yes some cities make it mostly work even for the more moderately wealthy, but they are the exception. Lets, take, for example, London. Webley Stadium to Tottenham Stadium is 20-30 minutes by car and 75-105 minutes by transit.

So it indeed requires ripping up all the buildings in a city to have a good bike lane.

More teachers than religious groups engage in sex acts with their subordinates. Even per capita it is very close.

Order of operations is important in discussions like this. If you are a bicycle urban enthusiast, you should be 100x a police enthusiast. In fact, the idea of posting about bikes shouldn't even cross your mind until you get called a racist and a classicist hundreds of thousands of times because of your Draconian (by today's standards) policing proposals.

If not, you are unserious.

Even if enacted, this wouldn't solve the issue.

First of all, it is intentionally wasteful. Once a road that can accommodate a delivery vehicle or pickup truck is constructed for their purposes, why shouldn't I be able to use it to go visit my cousin? Are we supposed to let this resource go unused 99% of the time?

Second of all, it doesn't fix the problem that people don't live in a line. I know there is that Dubai city idea. Great for them. Most of the time transit is totally useless to get to anywhere you want to go other than, perhaps, an urban core.

Third, it doesnt solve capacity. Carrying grocery bags is heavy. Bike or walk.

Many problems. All solved by the humble automobile.

Well, obviously biking at high speeds is deranged behavior for the sidewalk. Biking at those same speeds is also deranged behavior on a road where cars are easily doubling your speed.

Unless you are just banning cars and making the streets for bikes (ive been to a Greek Island that does this) they just exist as an oddity that is discordant with the rest of traffic around them. They are a menace for the same reason your mother in law that insists on going 55 in the left lane on the highway because its the limit is a menace, just orders of magnitude more, particularly to themselves.

Different speeds of vehicles should not be on the same road, whether it is called a road or a sidewalk or a grocery store aisle (slow walkers should have to finish before 9AM).

Bikes and cars are only substitute goods in a small percentage of use cases.

In small town America, 100% of adult cyclists have car licenses. What you're observing is that most people are 'suicidal, law-breaking, moving hazards'.

Weird that many of these people's neighbors can successfully own a cache of firearms for their entire adult life without brandishing it against themselves or another innocent human. Only target dummies, deer, and turkey need be afraid of these allegedly "suicidal, law-breaking, moving hazards."

Transit is no good for drivers because it wastes good gas tax money subsidizing 3 people on a 70 person bus. Very few lines actually get people off the roads because most potential lines don't have many potential customers. I make a trip to our in-laws very often. There is no direct line. Its a 3 transfer trip. And even two of those 3 legs rarely have more than 10 people on a bus or traincar.

Bicycle lanes are the lowest of the low hanging fruit for many cities. They are cheap, simple, ways to reduce traffic congestion, promote healthy and active living, and protect the lives of cyclists. It is so incredibly frustrating how much of an uphill battle it is to get them built. I think there's this enduring perception from people who exclusively drive that bike lanes are something for hobbyists rather than a way for people to get where they need to go. Every attempt to get new lanes built is met with a torrent of backlash.

Citation? Typically bike lanes in my city just end up cannibalizing real roadway and provide little, if any, protection to the few bikers who use them. "Building" bike lanes is, in my experience, a total misnomer, its just drawing extra lines. Its not like you can move the buildings 3 feet back on each side of the road.

This seems like a standard misunderstanding that may or may not be intentional by people sympathetic to LGBT causes. They think well these kids who are confused/different need a space to talk to adults. And then they need to keep it secret obviously because dad prolly isn't an "ally". But talking about sexuality and maintaining secrecy is exactly the first set of steps of the groomer playbook. So it doesn't matter what is in your heart of hearts, you are engaging in the same objective acts as a groomer, and by defending your own activities, you are providing them cover.

This is different than a soccer coach, who, I admit, many probably want to pork their players. But if the soccer coach starts talking to Johnny about tops vs. bottoms and Johnny says something to someone no one reflexively defends the soccer coach as having done the right thing. Which is why LGBT advocacy in youth populations is inherently dangerous, and I would say an evil act.

What makes you feel like he is an "actual good person?" Hes a hardcore LGBT ideologue that started a social club at his school that could easily be used as a vehicle for grooming.

Its BORING to run a boy scout camp. Why you are dealing with that boredom is probably because you love your son. But that guy who doesn't have a son at camp? Weirdo.