amrocha

89 ms·

691.
by amrocha 3y ago
So you better turn off the engine and then hope the other drivers turns theirs off too. In what world is doing nothing the right choice?
692.
by amrocha 3y ago
The government is literally doing that by funding research. The government can fund literally anything it wants to. Private investment is literally never necessary.
693.
by amrocha 3y ago
Not even our children. We will deal with it in 5 years. We're past the fucking around phase, now it's time to find out in increasingly large amounts every year.
694.
by amrocha 3y ago
>What if you are disabled and have no train connectivity? Ok, then you can have a car. Everyone else still can't. >What about workers who need to travel by car to build trains? What about support workers who help those workers? A
695.
by amrocha 3y ago
Doesn't matter how big it is, nobody lives in "Oregon" the same way nobody lives in "The UK". People live in communities, cities, towns. You can build a human scale town in Oregon just as well as you can in the UK.
696.
by amrocha 3y ago
Dude, work on your reading comprehension. Hyperbole is a literary device.
697.
by amrocha 3y ago
Why do you think people have to die? Keep the strictly necessary things, get rid of the superfluous. Doesn't seem too difficult to me.
698.
by amrocha 3y ago
Sure, he's made mistakes, that doesn't make his cooking "unclean". Unless people are getting sick from it (and they're not), his cooking is fine. And I'm not taking it personally btw, I just think it's sil
699.
by amrocha 3y ago
The guy is a professional chef that has run multiple restaurants and teaches people how to cook. Your standards for cleanliness might be unnecessarily higher, but don't you think it's a bit disingenuous to call his cooking "u
700.
by amrocha 3y ago
That's post facto logic. Obviously you and your ancestors have overcome those things, because the millions that didn't are dead. Statistically someone was going to survive, you're lucky it was your ancestors, but it doesn&#x2
701.
by amrocha 3y ago
Absolutely not true, the way they flaunt it is just different. Instead of clothes it's donations and foundations.
702.
by amrocha 3y ago
Not really, the degree of flaunting just changes. People with a little bit of money have Nikes, people with a bit more have designer clothing, people with a lot more have lavish houses and yachts, and the people with the most have "fou
703.
by amrocha 3y ago
Or just tax the shit out of the rich until they can't afford to flaunt their wealth as status
704.
by amrocha 3y ago
What changed is that people post their content on platforms now, instead of on the open web.
705.
by amrocha 3y ago
Sounds like you change opinions to match whatever argument you want to support. No flame intended, that's just what it sounds like.
706.
by amrocha 3y ago
I know, but I feel like the community sentiment is fairly consistent on these topics. I could be wrong though. Also, restaurant owners are not much different from middle managers in terms of scale of responsibility.
707.
by amrocha 3y ago
Not everyone lives in the US
708.
by amrocha 3y ago
I love that when it comes to tech companies, managers are all bumbling idiots and should all be fired to allow the workers to get the job done. But as soon as a working class business tries that, it apparently doesn't work in the long
709.
by amrocha 3y ago
Because of opportunity cost relative to other housing options. Right now you're only allowed to build SFHs, and the market will only bear a price of 2-3M before most people are priced out, so that's what they cost. If instead of o
710.
by amrocha 3y ago
The sprawl is real but large swathes of cities zoned exclusively for SFHs is also real. Vancouver is 80% SFHs because of zoning. Recently the government allowed multiplexes in SFH zones, and suddenly every new construction is a multiplex, a
711.
by amrocha 3y ago
So your issue is that walking around in the rain is unpleasant and you'd rather drive?
712.
by amrocha 3y ago
And it will be a very small amount of people because if SFHs were priced appropriately they would be unaffordably expensive or incredibly remote. At the end of the day people don't want just the SFH, they want the location too.
713.
by amrocha 3y ago
I see where you're coming from, you want the scientists to get paid rather than just whatever large corp manufactures the compound. And I don't disagree with you, I think the scientists should get rewarded too. I just don't w
714.
by amrocha 3y ago
Yeah, we should fix that
715.
by amrocha 3y ago
This isn't right. 10 miles is a fine distance. I met up with friends 13 miles away today. As long as there's good public transport it's not a big deal.
716.
by amrocha 3y ago
A lot of people replied to you and stuff, but I don't agree with them all so I want to answer you personally. I live in Tokyo. As I'm replying to you, I'm coming back from meeting my friends that live 13 miles away. This isn&
717.
by amrocha 3y ago
You're wrong. Covax is a bandaid. If I cut your arm off, and then offer to pay for half the price of the treatment, that doesn't absolve me of guilt. And you're wrong about the vaccines too. They were mostly developed with pu
718.
by amrocha 3y ago
Never said it was the only issue. Reading comprehension.
719.
by amrocha 3y ago
Meat != nice food Cars != all weather mobility And if you really want a car get ready to pay 4x current prices because that's what they actually cost without subsidies and free externalities
720.
by amrocha 3y ago
Yes, I do think that, because that is literally what has happened before. Companies price their offerings so that the global north will buy it, and the global south will have to pay proportionately extortionate amounts, with no relation wha

More ›