SllX

14 ms·

271.
by SllX 1y ago
To be fair, the ICC isn’t a European court, at least on paper.
272.
by SllX 1y ago
> The ICC is incredibly important, incredibly young and global . Shifting this to europe would not solve the problem. Well it’s incredibly young, but it is neither incredibly important seeing as how the premise of the court is suspect n
273.
by SllX 1y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_Cuauht%C3%A9moc_(BE01) Looks like it. It’s a sail training ship, but it has an engine looking at the infobox, presumably so it’s not relying on the sails for tours such as this, and ma
274.
by SllX 1y ago
Ah, so the referendum isn’t then scheduled for a date in short order if the requisite signatures are collected but held at the next regularly scheduled election? Fair enough. I like the sound of the upside a lot though.
275.
by SllX 1y ago
> Sturgeon's Law applied then as it does now; 90% of everything is crud. Go back 20-30 years, and the shows you remember as great are only a tiny fraction of the total output. Some (like Monty Python or Brass Eye) were extreme outli
276.
by SllX 1y ago
> After the government passes a new law, opponents have 100 days to collect 50000 signatures. If they manage, the law will not take force until it's approved by a vote by the populace. I generally hate ballot propositions within the
277.
by SllX 1y ago
I like where your head is at on a lot of this and there's a ton of waste to cut within the military itself, but we don't want to scale it down that far. It's still good to be able to effectively put boots on the ground in o
278.
by SllX 1y ago
> For ages, BART crowed about how it got like 80->95% of its operating expenses from rider fares. BART has had a long history. If you want to see for yourself, here's their most recent budget, page 25 is what you want: https:&#x2
279.
by SllX 1y ago
> Sure. And you can do that with taxes, rather than charging at point-of-use. Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should. As I addressed way above this comment chain: > 1) it’s a funding source for transit agencies whic
280.
by SllX 1y ago
> Contrary to the popular belief, more ridership makes it more safe and less dangerous. Pretending that a fee excludes the less desirable is laughable. Plenty of people that you describe, ride the trains even now, they just don’t pay the
281.
by SllX 1y ago
> These demographics have no issue jumping the gates/going through with someone else, are already present, and will be whether the ride is $1 or $1000. You're just excluding the honest people who can't afford it. I also do
282.
by SllX 1y ago
> Public transit should be free (Or very inexpensive) to anyone who wants to use it. It's better for the environment, people's wallets, and the transit system itself if it was disconnected from ticket revenue. BART can certainl
283.
by SllX 1y ago
I answered more thoroughly in response to your sibling comment.
284.
by SllX 1y ago
1) it’s a funding source for transit agencies which are already facing shortfalls and at the mercy of voters for any tax increases or bonds. 2) we want public transit to be exclusionary on a fee-basis to exclude people who generally will no
285.
by SllX 1y ago
BART has several discounts: https://www.bart.gov/tickets/discounts Discounts are fine. Free riding isn’t.
286.
by SllX 1y ago
> when it SHOULD just be free for bay area residents. Absolutely not .
287.
by SllX 1y ago
That’s a check
288.
by SllX 1y ago
The motivations and rhetoric are before my time. What’s leftover is just this stupid counterproductive set of laws undermining the legislature’s ability to legislate.
289.
by SllX 1y ago
Correct. What is the point of having a representative government with a legislature if you just forcibly remove the lynchpin of power for that type of government?
290.
by SllX 1y ago
I justify it by having less Disney/Hulu/Max and I’ve just cut down on entertainment related subscriptions in general, although you can pry YouTube Premium from my cold dead hands.
291.
by SllX 1y ago
Same shit. Different State. Maybe a little extra compared to a Red State or a smaller State, and on a larger scale. You can dig into it here: https://ebudget.ca.gov/
292.
by SllX 1y ago
Tax increases and bond measures have to go through the voters. The alternative is to get enough of the legislature, including probably some in Central Valley, to agree to cut a bunch of other more popular programs in order to fund it out of
293.
by SllX 1y ago
Hakuna matata.
294.
by SllX 1y ago
I know, but that was outside the specific scope of HSR so I excluded that to keep the discussion focused.
295.
by SllX 1y ago
If you’re going to do HSR you have to think smaller than coast-to-coast. Think of that as the final stretch goal from a well laid out network spanning the places that it makes sense because past a certain distance you’re never going to outc
296.
by SllX 1y ago
Sounds like the dream. All I want is a more frequent police presence in and around the station infrastructure and on the trains for both BART and MUNI. Like why is that a different era? Why can’t that be the current era?
297.
by SllX 1y ago
Fair enough. So in that way the EU does have an antimonopoly law, it’s just covered by a broader category that happens to encompass monopolies.
298.
by SllX 1y ago
I am aware of it and have been for more than a decade but… I only ever remember sometime after it’s passed. Every year. I’ll spot the leftover merch at my preferred bookstore the next time I’m there and go “Oh, right.”
299.
by SllX 1y ago
Setting aside the DMA and DSA entirely as I already explained to someone else earlier why the DMA wasn’t an antimonopoly law and I don’t want these newer laws to get in the way of my questions: put another way, the EU does not have an antim
300.
by SllX 1y ago
Please note not only what I wrote but what I was directly responding to when I wrote it. > It's a complex thing in practice, don't take the linguistic definition of the word itself as the sole interpretation of the law. I am aw

More ›