keneda7

Well they all have defensible space around their homes. It is a requirement for the only fire insurance they can get. Even the defensible space does not clear enough to get uninterrupted Starlink service.

This is largest hurdle I've seen for Starlink. I know at least 10 people in the foothills of Northern CA that are stuck with 2 choices if they want Starlink. They can either cut down several massive (100ft+) trees or they can pay someone to climb up a tree and mount the dish. The second options comes with a whole other sets of problems and typically still includes cutting some other trees down.

Not only that. The final season is already filmed!

https://www.google.com/search?q=snowpiercer+final+seaon+film...

I would totally agree. So many of them just seem to be on a power trip and moderate based on their mood. Its sad because its really killed reddit for a lot of people.

Ya I would agree the stats are probably biased based on the US border vs Canada's.

However at the same time it would not be difficult to travel from the southern US border to the US-Canada border. I would wager its easier than making the journey from south america to the Mexico-US border.

But being a better place does not always equate to more people wanting to immigrate there. If it did we would see more people coming to countries like Canada than the US. I think part of the major appeal of the US is the basically open southern boarder and very lax immigration law/policies. You have entire states that advertise they flout federal law and are a sanctuary state. That has to be a major major appeal for someone considering an illegal crossing. Basically you get to one of those states or cities and your likelihood of being deported drops significantly.

I am not super familiar with Canada's policy or system but based purely on numbers it seem like they keep a much tighter control on the number coming in.

Do you happen to any stats to support that?

I took a quick look. Canada seems to accept around 430k legal immigrants and had another 30-40k illegal crossing in 2022.

The US seems to have admitted 1 million between July 2021 and July 2022 so lets say somewhere around 1 million legal immigrants were accepted in 2022. Illegal crossing were around 2.7 million for 2022.

I take a look at these numbers I scratch my head at your statement. The US has orders of magnitude more illegal crossings. In fact the US average for 1 month is 225k which is almost 6 times as high as the YEARLY average for Canada. The numbers are pretty clear about where they are going. Nothing is stopping those entering the US illegally from entering Canada illegally too. Yet I can't seem to find any numbers that support that idea that even a fraction of the ones entering the US want/try to go to Canada.

https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/ne...

https://irb.gc.ca/en/statistics/Pages/Irregular-border-cross...

https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2022/12/net-internati....

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/migrant-border-...

I would wage a hefty sum the vast majority (>90%) are beyond thrilled to be coming to the US. They are willing and WANT to come. You make it sounds like they are being captured and transported on slave ships.

Do you think that is good for our society/economy?

In my experience pretty much anyone can be bad at a given job. Your race gender or ethnicity do not play a part in it.

Should people who are not bad at their job be fired because they are the wrong race gender or ethnicity? Should someone who is bad at their job not be fired because of their race gender or ethnicity?

In the extreme, someone who is bad at their job and screws up can cost lives. What happens if that person works as pilot or engineer at a nuclear facility, and their negligence causes a crash or meltdown?

Who is the blame? Everyone knew the employee was bad at their job and possible a hazard but the company choose to keep that employee even though it was a risk. I have a really hard time blaming the employee here.

Do you believe race, gender, ect should play a more important role than job performance in lay offs?

Most people seem to forget LA has a ton of oil wells (see quote below for the numbers). They are typically pretty well disguised so people don't notice it a lot. Last year LA finally decided to stop allowing new wells and start phasing out existing ones but over the next 20 years.

From the article I linked: In a 12-0 vote, the council on Friday approved an ordinance it began drafting earlier this year that will immediately ban new extraction and shut down existing operations within 20 years."

Same Article: "There are 26 oil and gas fields and more than 5,000 active and idle wells in LA. Wells are spread out all over the city, including Wilmington, Harbor Gateway, downtown, West LA, South LA and the northwest San Fernando Valley."

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/05/los-angeles-bans-oil-and-gas....

Do you happen to have a source on that? The last one I found that was actually linked to domestic terrorism was Feb 2022. As far as I can find, the more recent ones have not been. In fact the police had to make a release saying the media made up the link and they had no evidence of it in the recent Georgia ones. In fact they have no idea the motive at all in those ones. The ones in Washington state were so a couple people could rob stores (they have made arrests already).

I assume you are implying the right is doing the attacks here? A quick googling for attacks on infrastructure seems to mainly return cyber stuff. However most of the results on non cyber attacks are for multiple fires and train tracks that were sabotaged in past couple years in Washington state. The people that have been arrested for these attacks are not right wing, in fact for the most part they are from the left.

Ya I have a hard time believing something like this could be covered up in the case it was a hack. Way to many people are directly interacting with the issue across tons of agencies.

However our critical infrastructure needs to be secured in our country. This should be a major bipartisan issue too. Yet it seems like no one on either side of aisle is pushing for this. Just look at the recent attacks on power stations. If two people that want to rob some stores can take our power for thousands what can a foreign advisory hell bent on destroying the country do?

Yup this is a huge problem in CA. We simply have not been able to get any new meaningful reservoir projects done. Take a look at the Sites Reservoir. It is probably the closest to actually doing something.

https://sitesproject.org/sites-news/

Ya the other article I linked seems to imply there is movement on the Sites Reservoir project. In fact the article makes its seem like it is in the final planning stages. Note that the Sites location was first talked about in the 1950s so it has been a long long road.

I believe this is the official site for the project if you want to stay up to date with news.

https://sitesproject.org/sites-news/

Here is an article from 2014 that talks about it. It was recently on HN.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2014/08/31/california-drought-wh...

Here is a more recent article talking about the proposed Sites Reservoir the other article mentions.

https://www.ktvu.com/news/a-new-mega-reservoir-in-final-plan...

Here is a more recent article that talks about a new reservoir in CA. Its quoted saying the new proposed one will add up to 15% of CA's total water storage. That is a far cry from the 1% the mercury news quotes. Both articles reference the Sites Reservoir.

https://www.ktvu.com/news/a-new-mega-reservoir-in-final-plan...

Again you are moving the goal posts.

I will break it down for you. The original poster said 'most expensive' not the 'most expensive on a per-sq-ft basis'. You are arbitrarily adding the words on a per-sq-ft basis because you FEEL like its much more useful. You provide 0 evidence to support this.

For example here is evidence that most people besides you feel that total cost is a much more important and useful metric. The follow sites selling homes list total cost as the main metric NOT the price per sq foot: https://www.zillow.com/ https://www.realtor.com/ https://www.movoto.com/ https://www.redfin.com/ https://www.trulia.com/ https://www.homes.com/

Edit: Here are the top three sites on google when you search "most expensive areas to live in the us". A three seems to use median home price not median price per sq ft. https://www.rocketmortgage.com/learn/most-expensive-cities-i... https://realestate.usnews.com/places/rankings/most-expensive... https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/08091...

Again just like the other poster you are trying to move the goal posts. The comment did not say some. The comment said "the fact that America's most walkable and transit-accessible neighborhoods are also the most expensive and highest demand". I provided a single example that proves this statement is not a fact.

edit: comment not commit

But you are moving the goal posts here. The person I responded to didn't say compared to similar places without the same walkability. They said "the fact that America's most walkable and transit-accessible neighborhoods are also the most expensive and highest demand". Granite bay shows this to not be a fact.

You have evidence of that claim? I took a look around me. The most expensive and highest demand areas are actually not transit accessible at all and walking is not really feasible as the houses have lots of land and are very spread out. I am in the Sacramento area for reference.

I mean the question we are both trying to address "what alternative to globalization is there that doesn't have x and y issues but still keeps the world running" is really trillion dollar question at this point. If one of us had the answer I would hope we would out trying to implement it and not on HN.

I would argue that the slow progress on human rights/labor issues coupled with the failure of globalized supply chains during covid really point towards us needing to rethink our current system. Maybe modifying the current system will be enough, I do not know. However in my eyes our current form of globalization is problematic and that needs to be addressed.

It is not my definition. It is the definition according to webster. You and OP are using the term incorrectly and I pointed that out. You and OP can make up your own definition of it, but unless one of you tells us what definition you are working off, the rest of us just are left guessing.

I never once said the elites shut down discussion yet you ask me to provide evidence for a point I never made? Its pretty hard to have a real discussion when one person decides to make stuff up out of thin air. If you read my last commit I even mention the OPs claim of no discussion because its politically incorrect does not make sense with the linked definition. Would this not be me providing evidence against the point you are asking me to prove? It seems like we both agree the OPs statement is incorrect so why are you trying to force me onto the other side of the argument?

As for the solution, I do not know a good solution. I use to think globalization was the answer but not anymore. That is why I asked you to explain why you are okay with globalization causing these serious issues. Based on your last sentence it seems like you agree these are bad and we should do something about them. Yet you don't mention the fact we have had a WTO for almost 2 decades that could address them and not one single country has tried too. For example WTO on child labor: https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/min99_e/englis...

In my eyes when decades have passed, its a pretty clear sign the safety rails are not wanted or going to be added by those that have the power to add them.

Not the person you responded to originally. When you bring up Trump and Biden and globalization I see a pretty big difference. On one hand Trump basically never stopped running his mouth about it. He would take action then tell everyone he is taking action to bring x jobs back home. Meanwhile Biden does not do that. To me it seems if you are supported by the right, beating the "end globalization" drum is beneficial. Yet if you are supported by the left, I do not see the same benefit. In fact I would argue the left as a whole supports globalization so it may actually hurt Biden to talk about steps he is taking to end it.

Also you are saying its proven it is not politically correct because its talked about and Biden has taken action for onshore more industries yet that does not even jive with the definition of politically incorrect. I think you are just responded to the original poster saying its not being discussed because its politically incorrect but that statement in itself does not make sense either. Something is politically incorrect when someone does not avoid language or actions that may offend another group. Something can be politically incorrect and still be discussed to death.

Where I got the definition: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/politically%20inc...

As for the last part about the anti-globalization crowd has yet to make a case convincingly, the same can be said on the flip said. For example the pro globalization crowd has not made a convincingly case for why we need to use slave/child labor overseas to make Nikes and electronics. If we produced these in the US, slave/child labor is generally illegal and this would not be a problem. Another example would be the fact the pro globalization crowd has not shown a convincing case for why would should be supporting other countries that commit massive humans rights abuses. Why should we send money overseas to a country that has reeducation camps they force citizens into?

Its interesting in today world. We have had several major spying releases/scandals in the last decade and not much has really come of them (at least in the US). The last several our general population has shrugged off and went right back to using all their devices/services. It seems people just don't seem to care much about their privacy when it comes to governments spying. I don't have much faith there will be any serious consequences in Poland.

Not the person you responded to but I find it an interesting situation. I agree with you that jobs (from what I've read) seems to be awful but at the same time I don't believe theft is okay. If I pay someone to do a job and they choose not to do the job after taking my money they have stolen my money. I am not okay with that. In this case jobs invested in them. It was clearly enough money to give him power over them. He had an agenda, they decided they didn't like the agenda and weren't going to do it his way and he came in and cracked heads (in an awful way probably). They can choose not pick his way, but BEFORE they take his money. Once they take the money they are obligated to do it his way or give the money back in my opinion.

There were also a couple seats in CA the left expected to take from the right and failed to do so. The right in CA figured out they need to ballot harvest (it is legal here).

I feel like this idea of no need for responsibility is a massive trend in the US here and imo it needs to stop. You are completely blaming the us here when in fact the responsibility of this is on the parents. If the law had changed then while the child was growing up, sure say this is cruelty on the part of the US but in this case if you are going to say its cruelty then that cruelty falls on their parents who knowingly put them in this position.

If I tell you not to go to the top of mount Everest as you will die and no one will come save you, then you choose to go to the top of Everest and freeze is who is at fault? The Nepal government or you? Imo that is 100% your fault.

In my experience if the company is amazons size yes it is like that. Smaller family run companies treat their employees/prospective employees much better in my experience. It is not always the case but I from my direct experience it has been. I am so sorry this has happened to you.

I had not seen it. This comment just linked me too it. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33809968

Unfortunately in my opinion he is not a trustworthy source at all. He lies in that same interview. His own PAC is left. His mom helped found and run another left super PAC.

Seems like the family heavily supports one side. I think he has plenty of reason to lie to help out that side.

He should have receipts for those donations or at least evidence of them happening. That would at least give some credence to his claim.

Thank you very much