I tend to see it as more disruptive. Sure, the gas stations can spruce up their store, what if the local mall installs a couple hundred* chargers? What if you're trying to decide between TGIF and Ruby Tuesday, driving an EV, and know one has chargers and one doesn't?
What if department stores start putting them in?
While you're at it, to keep the drain down, install solar car shades.
*Or something along the lines of they install 10 chargers. When they notice that usage is over 75% for more than a couple hours a day(IE an EV owner going to the mall can no longer count on getting one with near certainty), they double the number.
1. Own a home with no garage? Install the charger outside. It'll cost a bit more for a weather rated one, but not that much more. 2. Landlords - as electric cars become more common, being able to rent to somebody with an electric car becomes a selling point, thus an incentive to install one. Lets you charge more rent and/or attract more/better tenants. 3. Taxpayers will pay for a little of it, it's tax deductible.
Please stop calling yourself a libertarian, because you are not.
I'm going to keep doing so because this is only ONE of my beliefs. I get going on a rant about the drug war, prostitution, property rights, and such and you'll see that I'm much closer to libertarian than progressive/liberal. There are also topics where I have a conservative streak.
For example, there's a good chance that you are a carrier of CMV or EBV. Both of those can kill others.
It's the difference between killing somebody in a car accident and killing somebody in a DUI car accident.
I restrain the 'hammer' for diseases that are 'easily preventable'. IE the ones we have long-standing vaccines of proven safety for.
That's asserting a "positive right", and it's incompatible with libertarianism. It's also morally wrong.
I'll restate my belief: Do as you will, so long as it doesn't harm none consenting parties. Besides, while a good portion of those who remain vulnerable even while vaccination is available know about it, the vaccine itself has a failure rate, thus the more protected EVERYONE is the more people have been vaccinated. Indeed, as an absolute number, until recently these unknowing vulnerable people outnumbered the knowingly unvaccinated, medical issues or not.
If you get the first symptoms of the flu, do you isolate yourself to prevent its transmission to others until you're sure it's not the flu?
Actually, yeah, I do. If I have to go out, I wear a mask. They're more effective at catching the infectious droplets that cause infection when worn by the infected person anyways, and even if it's not the flu it's something I don't want to be passing around.
I also get the flu shot, and at least for me, it's worked.
Huh, according the Numbeo, Boston isn't 3, it's closer to 7. Not quite the difference there, especially when compared to Geneva, which would indicate that it's much more economical to rent until you're going to be living there for most of your life.
If you think people should go to prison for failing to vaccinate, you are not a "moderate libertarian".
No, they go to jail for harming others. They only go to jail if: 1. They fail to vaccinate 2. They also fail to take alternative prevention techniques(that work) 3. They become infected and: 4. Spread that to somebody else 5. Said somebody else suffers a harm that cannot be compensated for financially. IE death.
HOW they stop from being disease vectors is up to them. If that means that they can't go out because they don't want to vaccinate, that's on them.
Your right to throw your fist stops at my nose. Personally, I include easily preventable diseases in that.
Well, I'm a *moderate* libertarian, but I believe you to be incorrect.
The worst part is that if your type of Libertarian causes the death of a person who cannot be vaccinated for a number of medically legitimate reasons, it could never be reasonably proven in court, so that the basic judicial action that your kind of Libertarian always proclaims as the legitimate way for citizens who have been harmed could not be used.
Your premise is false. We find 'patient 0' all the time through investigation, and if you're a carrier of the disease and are one of the ones who exposed the person who died from the disease to it, when vaccination allows you to stop yourself from being a carrier relatively easily and safely, we darn well CAN prove, if not 'beyond a reasonable doubt', at least 'preponderance of the evidence' which means you're paying $$$ at a minimum, and at a maximum you're in jail/prison for negligent homicide.
If there was half a dozen of you, treat it as a conspiracy, jail for everyone.
Not disputing your choice, but for a given value of 'deal' you can hire your yard work done easily enough in most areas.
But, as I understand it, owning a condo is a bit like averaging renting an apartment and buying a home. Cost savings because you don't have the real-estate and infrastructure associated with a single family dwelling, but the more efficient larger ones.
You still have, as you say, partial ownership, so you get to vote on what happens. Which is more than an apartment dweller, less than a home-owner.
It is supposed to take that person out of society because society doesn't want them. Letting them back in through social media defeats the purpose.
The issue is quite a bit more complex than that. For example, there are THREE primary goals/duties for prisons: 1. Punish, as you said. 2. Warehouse - prevent more crime by isolating the individual from the rest of us 3. Reform - because they most likely get out sometime, we need to fix whatever causes them to be criminal in the first place, if possible.
You have to balance the three duties, and I'd argue that the US system needs to add a hefty dose of #3, and social media, communication can help *a lot* with this. The vast majority of prisoners are NOT drug kingpins who will order hits from prison if they're allowed to communicate with the outside.
Probably not. It seems that he was talking in generals, not going for a sarcastic implication that the guards are incompetent.
Besides corrupt and incompetent guards you also have inmates and outside conspirators who get incredibly creative in their efforts to smuggle stuff into prisons.
Prisoner anuses is only one of many vectors. In one case they had a cat trained to travel between the outside and inside with the contraband tied to her collar. She got food on both ends. A CAT!!! They trained a bloody CAT to run stuff!
They've also found devices being floated by balloon, launched by catapult and pneumatic launchers, trawled up backwards through the sewer system, etc...
Imagine that you're trying to keep several hundred bored engineering college students from doing something. How well is that going to work? The average inmate intelligence might be less, but you do have quite a few intelligent ones in there, and really, what else are they going to do?
The catch for the homes is that people tend to be much more mobile in the USA, and Birmingham and NJ are currently 'suffering'. Ergo, more people leaving, and what people are there tend to be in worse financial straights, not secure, and thus not buying.
In most areas of the country the break-even tends to hover around 3-4 years for buying vs renting an equivalent place. Generally you can make that take 'longer' to pay back if you're not really comparing the same thing - a studio apartment vs a 3 bedroom house, for example. Not really equivalent, but a 3 bedroom is the smallest common house you can find. Once you get above 5 bedrooms, finding rental properties becomes difficult.
Anyways, in areas with large amounts of transient population - college, areas around military bases, etc... You can see distortions in the market. My experience is military. With several thousand people rotating every 2 years, they aren't purchasing, yet want to live in nice places. So they rent. This has the effect of raising rent prices in the local area, but depressing purchase prices(relative to norm). It makes it pay off to buy quicker.
What I'm getting at is: how many people live right next to such a plant?
How many people live next door to coal plants? Car manufacturing plants?
A nuclear plant is still a big industrial facility located within an industrial zone. That alone will tend to keep housing out of the area.
Am I likely to live next to a nuclear plant, especially 'right next'? Very likely no. Is proximity to a nuclear plant going to be a decision in my purchasing plans? Nope.
nuclear is a terrible form of energy...but it's better than most alternatives.
democracy is a terrible form of government, but it's better than all the other ones we've tried...;)
Personally I like nuclear as part of our mix because it's capable of baseload while being far, far, cleaner(and safer) than coal and other carbon based sources.
That being said, my 'carbon neutral' mix in terms of electricity(not energy!) production is approximately: 40% nuclear(double current, replacing coal's spot) 20% solar (matches increased daytime load, which I've read is 50% higher than night) 20% wind (replacing current nuclear) 20% 'other', including hydro(effectively maxed out in the USA), geothermal, biomass, etc... Most of our 'peaking' power is here.
This gives us a good mix and not too much dependence upon any one source. Too many advocates fall for the 'one true power' trap, IE the replacement has to be superior for ALL uses.
Actually "cold" storage for cooling has been in usage for decades.
Centuries. Look up 'ice houses'. You'd cut a lot of ice in the winter and store it to provide cooling all year long. Too expensive for use on cooling personal spaces though - it was industrial and food preservation only.
And metal-air batteries are light years ahead of Tesla's
Did you miss that they're also primary cells, not rechargeable secondary cells? Run out of energy with a metal-air battery and you're replacing it. Lithium-Ion can be recharged hundreds to thousands of times.
A Libertarian like myself would point out, the government has no business banning drugs, because a free citizen ought to remain free to kill/harm himself in any fashion he chooses.
I'm quite sure that there were numerous reasons to prosecute 'El Chapo' for things other than illegal drug dealing. Browsing the wiki page we have murder, torture, bribery, and everything else you'd expect from a drug cartel leader.
Measles outbreak is almost entirely tied to either people who just got Vaccinated (read the literature on it, it causes Measles), and people coming in from out of the country (undocumented, illegally). BUT you're too fucking PC to actually acknowledge the problem.
Citation on that literature? I just visited the CDC and 'measles' is not listed as a side effect of the MMR vaccine.
And Autism is linked to Vaccinations (See Italy's court rulings),
After seeing Italy's rulings over the Knox case, I trust them less than the US. Besides, plenty of studies over in Europe disproving the Autism thing. You do realize that it was proven that the doctor fabricated his findings in order to further a lawsuit hoping for a payout from the vaccine makers, right?
i just dont see the issue. I think parents SHOULD have some input on what is put into their kids bodies, dont you?
A kid has diabetes. But because his parents have recently converted to Christian Science, they insist that PRAYOR!!! will work better than insulin, and if it doesn't it means that God wanted to take the child into his embrace.
Military grade body armor with ceramic plates may provide single-hit protection against such a round, with emphasis on "may."
Nitpick: My plates were certified against three 7.62x51 AP rounds. Actual AP.
Still, the plates were only big enough to protect 'most' of the chest, pretty much the heart/lungs from a shot coming from directly in front or behind me.
Oh, and Senator Kennedy went on the record as wanting to ban ALL rounds capable of penetrating body armor, including rifle rounds. He mentioned.30-30 by name.
Here's a question: Why are police not calling back the houses in question to ascertain if there's actually an incident occurring? I'd think this would be standard procedure by now, with all the swatting that's happened.
1. Said 'pranksters' generally phrase things in such a way that the police and 911 operator are afraid that calling back will get somebody killed. Reminds me of a preview I saw where a girl's hiding under something while the serial killer is looking for her, she's on 911 with the operator when signal is lost. The operator hits callback, and the phone ringing points the killer straight to the girl, and he kills her while thanking the 911 operator for helping him locate her. 2. They also make it sound like a high-urgency situation, IE 'somebody's dying if we don't bust in NOW!!!' 3. They don't have the house's number, they actually have a VOIP number that's faked as coming from that house. IE the house's number might be 555-1234, but the prankster is calling from 555-4321, but the database they use for locations still gives the home's address.
Gunshots are no joke. One to to your leg can cause lifelong disability. Or how about to one's face? Ouch. I would never want to rush an armed opponent in the hope that his shots will only hit my body armor.
No kidding. Public media tends to overstate the effectiveness of body armor.
Little primer people, and yes, I've worn body armor before, the lvl IV military stuff with plates.
1. Over half of police killed by firearms WERE wearing body armor. It's not like the ancient stuff that provides whole body protection, you have a front piece and a back piece that protects your chest. A hit to the head, or in from the side, and you're still possibly dead. 2. Police body armor is drastically lighter than the stuff I wore. A rifle round will generally go right through them, as will a shotgun slug* at close enough range. 3. Part of being lighter, even being shot with a handgun will result in injuries, and they'll probably want to get you checked out in a hospital. But said shot can disable you and make you less able to fight back until the attacker manages to line up a shot to the head, neck(from which you'll bleed out or suffocate), or bypass the armor from the side. 4. Are there other civilians around? if you have a perp that you're afraid is going to start shooting, the officer is more protected than the others still around. They used to call them 'second chances' - you already lost your first chance(don't get shot), they provide a 'second chance' at stopping the round from killing you.
*results WILL vary depending on numerous factors that I won't get into here.
Slashdot Mirror
You aren't limited to the old model.
I tend to see it as more disruptive. Sure, the gas stations can spruce up their store, what if the local mall installs a couple hundred* chargers? What if you're trying to decide between TGIF and Ruby Tuesday, driving an EV, and know one has chargers and one doesn't?
What if department stores start putting them in?
While you're at it, to keep the drain down, install solar car shades.
*Or something along the lines of they install 10 chargers. When they notice that usage is over 75% for more than a couple hours a day(IE an EV owner going to the mall can no longer count on getting one with near certainty), they double the number.
1. Own a home with no garage? Install the charger outside. It'll cost a bit more for a weather rated one, but not that much more.
2. Landlords - as electric cars become more common, being able to rent to somebody with an electric car becomes a selling point, thus an incentive to install one. Lets you charge more rent and/or attract more/better tenants.
3. Taxpayers will pay for a little of it, it's tax deductible.
Please stop calling yourself a libertarian, because you are not.
I'm going to keep doing so because this is only ONE of my beliefs. I get going on a rant about the drug war, prostitution, property rights, and such and you'll see that I'm much closer to libertarian than progressive/liberal. There are also topics where I have a conservative streak.
In short, no one party fits me particularly well.
For example, there's a good chance that you are a carrier of CMV or EBV. Both of those can kill others.
It's the difference between killing somebody in a car accident and killing somebody in a DUI car accident.
I restrain the 'hammer' for diseases that are 'easily preventable'. IE the ones we have long-standing vaccines of proven safety for.
That's asserting a "positive right", and it's incompatible with libertarianism. It's also morally wrong.
I'll restate my belief: Do as you will, so long as it doesn't harm none consenting parties. Besides, while a good portion of those who remain vulnerable even while vaccination is available know about it, the vaccine itself has a failure rate, thus the more protected EVERYONE is the more people have been vaccinated. Indeed, as an absolute number, until recently these unknowing vulnerable people outnumbered the knowingly unvaccinated, medical issues or not.
If you get the first symptoms of the flu, do you isolate yourself to prevent its transmission to others until you're sure it's not the flu?
Actually, yeah, I do. If I have to go out, I wear a mask. They're more effective at catching the infectious droplets that cause infection when worn by the infected person anyways, and even if it's not the flu it's something I don't want to be passing around.
I also get the flu shot, and at least for me, it's worked.
Huh, according the Numbeo, Boston isn't 3, it's closer to 7. Not quite the difference there, especially when compared to Geneva, which would indicate that it's much more economical to rent until you're going to be living there for most of your life.
If you think people should go to prison for failing to vaccinate, you are not a "moderate libertarian".
No, they go to jail for harming others. They only go to jail if:
1. They fail to vaccinate
2. They also fail to take alternative prevention techniques(that work)
3. They become infected and:
4. Spread that to somebody else
5. Said somebody else suffers a harm that cannot be compensated for financially. IE death.
HOW they stop from being disease vectors is up to them. If that means that they can't go out because they don't want to vaccinate, that's on them.
Your right to throw your fist stops at my nose. Personally, I include easily preventable diseases in that.
Well, I'm a *moderate* libertarian, but I believe you to be incorrect.
The worst part is that if your type of Libertarian causes the death of a person who cannot be vaccinated for a number of medically legitimate reasons, it could never be reasonably proven in court, so that the basic judicial action that your kind of Libertarian always proclaims as the legitimate way for citizens who have been harmed could not be used.
Your premise is false. We find 'patient 0' all the time through investigation, and if you're a carrier of the disease and are one of the ones who exposed the person who died from the disease to it, when vaccination allows you to stop yourself from being a carrier relatively easily and safely, we darn well CAN prove, if not 'beyond a reasonable doubt', at least 'preponderance of the evidence' which means you're paying $$$ at a minimum, and at a maximum you're in jail/prison for negligent homicide.
If there was half a dozen of you, treat it as a conspiracy, jail for everyone.
Not disputing your choice, but for a given value of 'deal' you can hire your yard work done easily enough in most areas.
But, as I understand it, owning a condo is a bit like averaging renting an apartment and buying a home. Cost savings because you don't have the real-estate and infrastructure associated with a single family dwelling, but the more efficient larger ones.
You still have, as you say, partial ownership, so you get to vote on what happens. Which is more than an apartment dweller, less than a home-owner.
It is supposed to take that person out of society because society doesn't want them. Letting them back in through social media defeats the purpose.
The issue is quite a bit more complex than that. For example, there are THREE primary goals/duties for prisons:
1. Punish, as you said.
2. Warehouse - prevent more crime by isolating the individual from the rest of us
3. Reform - because they most likely get out sometime, we need to fix whatever causes them to be criminal in the first place, if possible.
You have to balance the three duties, and I'd argue that the US system needs to add a hefty dose of #3, and social media, communication can help *a lot* with this. The vast majority of prisoners are NOT drug kingpins who will order hits from prison if they're allowed to communicate with the outside.
Probably not. It seems that he was talking in generals, not going for a sarcastic implication that the guards are incompetent.
Besides corrupt and incompetent guards you also have inmates and outside conspirators who get incredibly creative in their efforts to smuggle stuff into prisons.
Prisoner anuses is only one of many vectors. In one case they had a cat trained to travel between the outside and inside with the contraband tied to her collar. She got food on both ends. A CAT!!! They trained a bloody CAT to run stuff!
They've also found devices being floated by balloon, launched by catapult and pneumatic launchers, trawled up backwards through the sewer system, etc...
Imagine that you're trying to keep several hundred bored engineering college students from doing something. How well is that going to work? The average inmate intelligence might be less, but you do have quite a few intelligent ones in there, and really, what else are they going to do?
The catch for the homes is that people tend to be much more mobile in the USA, and Birmingham and NJ are currently 'suffering'. Ergo, more people leaving, and what people are there tend to be in worse financial straights, not secure, and thus not buying.
In most areas of the country the break-even tends to hover around 3-4 years for buying vs renting an equivalent place. Generally you can make that take 'longer' to pay back if you're not really comparing the same thing - a studio apartment vs a 3 bedroom house, for example. Not really equivalent, but a 3 bedroom is the smallest common house you can find. Once you get above 5 bedrooms, finding rental properties becomes difficult.
Anyways, in areas with large amounts of transient population - college, areas around military bases, etc... You can see distortions in the market. My experience is military. With several thousand people rotating every 2 years, they aren't purchasing, yet want to live in nice places. So they rent. This has the effect of raising rent prices in the local area, but depressing purchase prices(relative to norm). It makes it pay off to buy quicker.
the buy/rent ratio in Seattle is 10
I went to Numbeo, what indexes are you comparing? Is that percentages, prices, what?
What I'm getting at is: how many people live right next to such a plant?
How many people live next door to coal plants? Car manufacturing plants?
A nuclear plant is still a big industrial facility located within an industrial zone. That alone will tend to keep housing out of the area.
Am I likely to live next to a nuclear plant, especially 'right next'? Very likely no. Is proximity to a nuclear plant going to be a decision in my purchasing plans? Nope.
nuclear is a terrible form of energy...but it's better than most alternatives.
democracy is a terrible form of government, but it's better than all the other ones we've tried... ;)
Personally I like nuclear as part of our mix because it's capable of baseload while being far, far, cleaner(and safer) than coal and other carbon based sources.
That being said, my 'carbon neutral' mix in terms of electricity(not energy!) production is approximately:
40% nuclear(double current, replacing coal's spot)
20% solar (matches increased daytime load, which I've read is 50% higher than night)
20% wind (replacing current nuclear)
20% 'other', including hydro(effectively maxed out in the USA), geothermal, biomass, etc... Most of our 'peaking' power is here.
This gives us a good mix and not too much dependence upon any one source. Too many advocates fall for the 'one true power' trap, IE the replacement has to be superior for ALL uses.
Actually "cold" storage for cooling has been in usage for decades.
Centuries. Look up 'ice houses'. You'd cut a lot of ice in the winter and store it to provide cooling all year long. Too expensive for use on cooling personal spaces though - it was industrial and food preservation only.
And metal-air batteries are light years ahead of Tesla's
Did you miss that they're also primary cells, not rechargeable secondary cells?
Run out of energy with a metal-air battery and you're replacing it. Lithium-Ion can be recharged hundreds to thousands of times.
A Libertarian like myself would point out, the government has no business banning drugs, because a free citizen ought to remain free to kill/harm himself in any fashion he chooses.
I'm quite sure that there were numerous reasons to prosecute 'El Chapo' for things other than illegal drug dealing. Browsing the wiki page we have murder, torture, bribery, and everything else you'd expect from a drug cartel leader.
Measles outbreak is almost entirely tied to either people who just got Vaccinated (read the literature on it, it causes Measles), and people coming in from out of the country (undocumented, illegally). BUT you're too fucking PC to actually acknowledge the problem.
Citation on that literature? I just visited the CDC and 'measles' is not listed as a side effect of the MMR vaccine.
And Autism is linked to Vaccinations (See Italy's court rulings),
After seeing Italy's rulings over the Knox case, I trust them less than the US. Besides, plenty of studies over in Europe disproving the Autism thing. You do realize that it was proven that the doctor fabricated his findings in order to further a lawsuit hoping for a payout from the vaccine makers, right?
i just dont see the issue. I think parents SHOULD have some input on what is put into their kids bodies, dont you?
A kid has diabetes. But because his parents have recently converted to Christian Science, they insist that PRAYOR!!! will work better than insulin, and if it doesn't it means that God wanted to take the child into his embrace.
Do you let them say no to the insulin?
What's a "preview"? A movie trailer?
Yes. Can't even remember what movie it was for, whether it was released on time, etc...
I'm sure I could find it looking through recent(ish) releases and such, but I don't have the time.
When I was in the Army in the '90's we were told our body armor was really only effective against shrapnel. Don't get hit by that big 7.62 AK round!
Having worn those as well, they're called 'flak vests' for a reason - they were only intended to be effective against shrapnel.
Something that can stand up to rifle fire is much, much heavier.
Military grade body armor with ceramic plates may provide single-hit protection against such a round, with emphasis on "may."
Nitpick: My plates were certified against three 7.62x51 AP rounds. Actual AP.
Still, the plates were only big enough to protect 'most' of the chest, pretty much the heart/lungs from a shot coming from directly in front or behind me.
Oh, and Senator Kennedy went on the record as wanting to ban ALL rounds capable of penetrating body armor, including rifle rounds. He mentioned .30-30 by name.
Yeah, that's part 3: "even being shot with a handgun will result in injuries"
I've heard it being described as 'being punched once, full force, in the chest by Mike Tyson"
Here's a question: Why are police not calling back the houses in question to ascertain if there's actually an incident occurring? I'd think this would be standard procedure by now, with all the swatting that's happened.
1. Said 'pranksters' generally phrase things in such a way that the police and 911 operator are afraid that calling back will get somebody killed. Reminds me of a preview I saw where a girl's hiding under something while the serial killer is looking for her, she's on 911 with the operator when signal is lost. The operator hits callback, and the phone ringing points the killer straight to the girl, and he kills her while thanking the 911 operator for helping him locate her.
2. They also make it sound like a high-urgency situation, IE 'somebody's dying if we don't bust in NOW!!!'
3. They don't have the house's number, they actually have a VOIP number that's faked as coming from that house. IE the house's number might be 555-1234, but the prankster is calling from 555-4321, but the database they use for locations still gives the home's address.
Gunshots are no joke. One to to your leg can cause lifelong disability. Or how about to one's face? Ouch. I would never want to rush an armed opponent in the hope that his shots will only hit my body armor.
No kidding. Public media tends to overstate the effectiveness of body armor.
Little primer people, and yes, I've worn body armor before, the lvl IV military stuff with plates.
1. Over half of police killed by firearms WERE wearing body armor. It's not like the ancient stuff that provides whole body protection, you have a front piece and a back piece that protects your chest. A hit to the head, or in from the side, and you're still possibly dead.
2. Police body armor is drastically lighter than the stuff I wore. A rifle round will generally go right through them, as will a shotgun slug* at close enough range.
3. Part of being lighter, even being shot with a handgun will result in injuries, and they'll probably want to get you checked out in a hospital. But said shot can disable you and make you less able to fight back until the attacker manages to line up a shot to the head, neck(from which you'll bleed out or suffocate), or bypass the armor from the side.
4. Are there other civilians around? if you have a perp that you're afraid is going to start shooting, the officer is more protected than the others still around.
They used to call them 'second chances' - you already lost your first chance(don't get shot), they provide a 'second chance' at stopping the round from killing you.
*results WILL vary depending on numerous factors that I won't get into here.