aurailious

NTSB is probably the best example of a safety investigation agency. Air travel in the US is extremely safe for many good reasons.

Not to mention contractors. Plus restaurants and other services near federal buildings that the workers use. If people aren't working they aren't going to dry clean suits or go to lunch for example. Those people aren't getting loans.

The difference is generally not understood on a lot people. Its freedom, not price.

> If there's always another vote, no vote needs to be implemented. What's the point of voting then?

Most democracies have regular periods where you vote. Are you suggesting that since there will be a new US Presidential election in 2020 that Trump is now no longer legitimate? How would that circumstance be any different that a referdendum?

Voting isn't wrong.

What is the implication of you trying to tie the institution of democracy to childhood antics? Are you suggesting that a vote is no different that chance? That the opinion's of people that change are no longer legitimate?

So presumbly if you keep trying to pass another referundum people will vote against it just out of spite. There is already pressure to not repeatedly do that, so its not a concern to argue slippery slope.

Replace "should" with "could" and you'd be right. Each vote would be genuine if its conudcted according to law.

> if you don't like the outcome, you can just keep campaigning and try again later.

Quite honestly, there is nothing stopping you from doing this anyways. This is the point of democracy. Nothing is ever final.

I remember when I climbed Guadalupe peak in west Texas. I got to the gate around 3:50, and 4pm is when they close new permits for camping near the summit. Well I start climbing and because I started to late the sun set before I even reached the camp site. So I set up my tent nearly in the dark as the temperatures were dropping. Well, I knew it was going to be cold, but I lived in Texas at the time and didn't really remember what to do in sub freezing temperatures overnight. Stayed up nearly the entire night shivering.

But I'll never forget the sun rise up the flat Texas horizon from the tallest peak in the state. It was so beautiful and peaceful there. Clear skies, everything was perfect. I don't really remember the night before anymore, just that I need to pack some extra layers next time.

> you'd get rid of a lot of economic inefficiencies like houses costing 40x more in Silicon Valley than Detroit.

There are many more reasons for the housing cost disparity then closeness in work spaces.

My understanding was that the exact position was known within a few hundred miles of precision using both Hubble and the NH's cameras.

JC Penny I think?

I'd guess there is very few nearby known entities and those that are in the area are too far to be precise enough.

Is education something we don't need?

> For a lot of America's history, it was not debt based.

For a lot of America's history we used horses and sailing ships to get around. Are you suggesting we should return to that too? Otherwise this argument is empty.

Using debt for homes, cars, education, and investments are generally assumed to be able to out grow the costs of that borrowing. For example, ideally a better education now means you can probably make more money over time, offsetting those costs and overall ending up much better than without borrowing. Its not stealing, to phrase like that is wrong.

If you only see these things as "nice", your should reevaluate what you value.

> Does anyone actually still believe that these debts will all someday be repayed?

I don't understand why you would ask this question. On the individual level its obvious that some debts won't be. It happens all the time for a lot of reasons. So I assume you aren't talking about the individual level.

But on the macro level zero debt is a very bad idea and unless civilization collapses there will always be debt. Debt itself is a very good thing. Too much, and too little, of a good thing is bad.

So in either case all debts being paid off will almost certainly never happen.

> Does anyone even believe that the amount of debt will go down

In absolute terms due to inflation it always goes up.

> (that allows people to have negative amounts of currency)

You say this like its a bad thing. Debt isn't a bad thing. Debt allows people to own homes and cars and pay for education and invest in business. Debt means you are optimistic about the future.

> Blue-collar minorities are less capable of knowing where/when to get a license than blue-collar whites?

But your comment wasn't suggesting this. You were suggesting that the law was explicitly discriminatory to require minorities alone to need ID and whites could vote without ID.

I was never really a fan of Ventura, but he wasn't actually terrible.

I'm pretty sure the comment didn't say that.

> Essentially this is just the city of Minneapolis making it harder for people to actually work in Minneapolis.

I'm pretty sure the idea is actually the exact opposite. Mandatory parking is expensive, this drives up the cost of housing. 2040 is about reducing the costs of housing and not making the same mistakes that San Francisco continues to make every day. 2040 is about getting ahead of NIMYism and making sure there is housing that is affordable inside the city so people don't have to drive from the suburbs.

>very few people actually live in downtown minneapolis.

This way people can live closer to work and not have to drive cars. Its more sustainable, its better for the environment, its better for people. So the idea is to change Minneapolis into a city where people do live downtown again.

> a commuter city

The result of terrible city planning starting in the mid century that is going to be expensive and difficult to undo. 2040 is a good plan that will fix this.

And the important part about orbits is that wind resistance won't slow it down significantly. At a low orbit like the ISS it touches the atmosphere ever so slightly and needs a boost every now and then.

DC and its VA suburbs also have a good tech talent pool as well. Probably doesn't pay as well as lobbyists, but it would still push the median up.

I don't think its even a part of the standard model, still just a hypothesis.

The good to hear. I was kind of skeptical at first of it, and the name doesn't really help. But I liked their stated goals for it.

Wasn't there a year recently where reliability skyrocketed? 2004 or something? I thought I heard there is a clear cutoff point where you should not consider buying a car before that date.

What kind of conspiracy nonsense is this?

We are not talking about exaggeration, we are talking about people who make actual fake news. Fake and as in completely artificial, no basis in reality, and imaginary. Its creating news that doesn't exist.

> Sun Won't Rise Tomorrow, Click Now To Find Out Who's At Fault

^ This is what is effectively going on. Its objectively false and fake news. But the problem is that people are believing this shit.

Fully automated tower farms are a dream of the future city.

SpaceX will be fine without Elon if that ever has to happen. Gwynne Shotwell is very capable of leading it.

Seems kind of hyperbolic, I very much doubt Google doesn't innovate anymore. Just Kubernetes kills that argument.

Hell, killing off apps is certainly much more about innovation that otherwise. Why would you think that supporting legacy apps means innovation? They can certainly handle it better, but Google tends to be pretty aggressive in how it develops software.