New York has a bi-partisan redistricting commission. made up of 5 Ds and 5 Rs. Because they couldn't reach an agreement it defaulted to the D controlled assembly that gerrymandered the new map. This begs the question, why did they bother having a commission in the first place? The incentive of those in control would be NOT to reach an agreement so they could do what they wanted in the end, making zero concessions.
If you can't recognize how electric - from how it is powered (including the infrastructure that requires) to how vehicles are sold) - is disruptive technology, there is no point in engaging. As for driverless, it actually *is* here. It's just very early days.If you don't want to consider the possibilities and implications, of what it will mean in 10 years and the 10 years after that, you're free to ignore it. But insisting that neither is disruptive is pretty silly.
Listen, I love trains too. In college I interned at the B&O Railroad Museum in Baltimore. It was fascinating. But guess what? You know what I learned there? It's not the future. It was a museum for a reason.
Outside of subways and commuter rails, Americans have been rejecting longer distance trail travel for several decades. It's not coming back, no matter how many minutes you manage to shave off your trip to St Louis from Kansas City.
Rail is still just 19th technology and it's never going to get much better in this country. And it's definitely not going to solve the problems discussed in the article above.
The train cultists sound a lot like socialists to me. You know, "we never attempted true train travel. This time it will be different!"
Both result in very expensive experiments that always fail.
Although Republicans went into the redistricting cycle with control over drawing more districts, it is actually Democrats who have gained ground from the process at this point. So far, redistricting has created 11 more Democratic-leaning seats nationally, three fewer Republican-leaning seats and eight fewer highly competitive seats. This is due to aggressive map-drawing by Democrats in states such as New York as well as court decisions overturning Republican gerrymanders in Ohio and North Carolina.
You're not sure why electric/driverless vehicles would be lumped together? You don't think it has to do with the fact that they are two technologies advancing in tandem that are completely disrupting ground transportation? I'm not sure if you were being intentionally pedantic, but the PROMISE I was speaking of was about the driverless future. With widespread adoption, we have the possibility of greater highway speed and efficiency, and ideally fewer vehicles per family.
I think that in 20-30 years, we will be a lot closer to that sort of reality than you think. Nuclear fusion wishes it was on the same sort of pace.
I'm all for making "in the meantime" improvements to existing rail infrastructure but it doesn't change the fact that it is ridiculously expensive and only of value to a limited number of people.
To put my "damn weird assumption" another way: If you don't have to actually drive your car to go anywhere you want to on the continent, why would you ever consider taking a train instead?
Musk is playing 3D chess and here I am playing 2D checkers!
That said, I think we will see people zipping around in pilotless passenger drones before a Hyperlink is transporting the general public between City A and City B.
I think people, techies included, often have propensity to default to a 1950s version of the future. I laughed when the iWatch came out. iPhones killed the wrist watch and Apple thought they could bring them back? Because why? Nostalgia for Dick Tracy?
The one that kills me is Elon Musk's Hyperloop. The man is at the forefront of electric/driverless and he thinks shooting people through a pneumatic tube is going to be a thing? I have trouble believing he believes that. I think he is doing it because it's cool and he can afford it and/or has gullible investors.
If you believe the promise of driverless, electric technology will be realized, what's the point of making massive investments in rail infrastructure for the purpose of moving people long distances?
Personal transport and mass transit won't need to be tethered to fixed rails. And it's a hell of a lot easier and cheaper to build new roads than to build something as silly as this: https://hsr.ca.gov/high-speed-rail-in-california/
I still don't see the point of the relative strength or weakness of unions being a factor as it relates to wages keeping up with rapid inflation that occurs in a short timeframe. Even if a quarter of the workforce was union, it only helps 25% of the employed public (not retirees) and would only provide them in an incremental salary increase when the time comes to negotiate a new contract - whenever that might be.
I hear you, but on this particular issue (the economy), I'm not sure what Bazooka model can thwart rising prices. That's really all that matters.
George HW went from a historically high approval rating to out of office in a year because of the economy. Sure, it took a 3rd party candidate, but "it's the economy, stupid" is an expression for good reason. Perot wouldn't have been a thing if the economy didn't take a downturn.
Rightly or wrongly, as long as the Democrats are viewed as the party of spending and printing, they are going to wear inflation to their midterm funeral. No new messaging is going to change that if inflation continues through November.
IIRC, much of it was about how informed consent in medicine has gone out the window because it and any other critique is viewed as causing vaccine hesitancy. He thinks side effects are underreported and explains why he believes that. He spoke about the decision to go all in on the vax solution, while not aggressively pursuing early treatment and some of the reasons that may have happened.
I'd actually be interested in hearing your take. If you listened to it, you'd likely be only the 2nd person commenting in this thread to do so, and as an added bonus, you'd have fodder for your next article!
What's worse is that these people spinning off the planet about a 3 hour conversation between Rogan and someone like Dr Robert Malone are responding to what other people say they said during it. They want to shut down anything that falls slightly outside the bounds of regime approved acceptable speech. Even if if they don't know what was actually discussed.
I wasn't suggesting he would become a principal owner of an NFL franchise. More likely be part of a group that buys a team.
Of course, there is the long running conspiracy theory that the reason Brady played for the Patriots on such a team friendly deal was because he had a shady, post-career equity arrangement with Robert Kraft.
I don't think it's that TB isn't capable of being a good coach, but more about what is required to become one (some of the reasons you mention). You have to really want it. And be willing to put in even more hours than the players do. If Brady wanted to spend that kind of time in football, he'd just keep playing.
And while I agree that the most gifted athletes are generally not good at coaching, I don't think Brady fits that description. He was drafted in the 6th round by the Patriots and was never a full time starter at Michigan. What makes Brady's story remarkable is that it was his determination to succeed.
On “Supreme Court Allows Alabama Redistricting Plan, Overturns Lower Court 5-4”
I like the coin flip idea.
That, or you lock them in a room and don't let them leave until they work out a deal.
"
New York has a bi-partisan redistricting commission. made up of 5 Ds and 5 Rs. Because they couldn't reach an agreement it defaulted to the D controlled assembly that gerrymandered the new map. This begs the question, why did they bother having a commission in the first place? The incentive of those in control would be NOT to reach an agreement so they could do what they wanted in the end, making zero concessions.
On “To Break Our Addiction To Oil”
Take a breath, David. You seem upset.
If you can't recognize how electric - from how it is powered (including the infrastructure that requires) to how vehicles are sold) - is disruptive technology, there is no point in engaging. As for driverless, it actually *is* here. It's just very early days.If you don't want to consider the possibilities and implications, of what it will mean in 10 years and the 10 years after that, you're free to ignore it. But insisting that neither is disruptive is pretty silly.
Listen, I love trains too. In college I interned at the B&O Railroad Museum in Baltimore. It was fascinating. But guess what? You know what I learned there? It's not the future. It was a museum for a reason.
Outside of subways and commuter rails, Americans have been rejecting longer distance trail travel for several decades. It's not coming back, no matter how many minutes you manage to shave off your trip to St Louis from Kansas City.
Rail is still just 19th technology and it's never going to get much better in this country. And it's definitely not going to solve the problems discussed in the article above.
The train cultists sound a lot like socialists to me. You know, "we never attempted true train travel. This time it will be different!"
Both result in very expensive experiments that always fail.
Talk about weird.
On “Supreme Court Allows Alabama Redistricting Plan, Overturns Lower Court 5-4”
According to 538:
Although Republicans went into the redistricting cycle with control over drawing more districts, it is actually Democrats who have gained ground from the process at this point. So far, redistricting has created 11 more Democratic-leaning seats nationally, three fewer Republican-leaning seats and eight fewer highly competitive seats. This is due to aggressive map-drawing by Democrats in states such as New York as well as court decisions overturning Republican gerrymanders in Ohio and North Carolina.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/
"
Get Out The Vote can wait. The Democrats are getting about the business of gerrymandering as well.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/03/politics/new-york-congressional-redistricting-democratic-seats/index.html
On “To Break Our Addiction To Oil”
Maybe the train lovers will take solace in having the inside of their SUV look like a Pullman.
"
You're not sure why electric/driverless vehicles would be lumped together? You don't think it has to do with the fact that they are two technologies advancing in tandem that are completely disrupting ground transportation? I'm not sure if you were being intentionally pedantic, but the PROMISE I was speaking of was about the driverless future. With widespread adoption, we have the possibility of greater highway speed and efficiency, and ideally fewer vehicles per family.
I think that in 20-30 years, we will be a lot closer to that sort of reality than you think. Nuclear fusion wishes it was on the same sort of pace.
I'm all for making "in the meantime" improvements to existing rail infrastructure but it doesn't change the fact that it is ridiculously expensive and only of value to a limited number of people.
To put my "damn weird assumption" another way: If you don't have to actually drive your car to go anywhere you want to on the continent, why would you ever consider taking a train instead?
On “Mississippi Legalizes Medical Marijuana, Will The Feds Finally Do So As Well?”
My understanding is that the biggest challenge to federal legalization is how it would impact our international treaties around drug trafficking.
On “To Break Our Addiction To Oil”
Musk is playing 3D chess and here I am playing 2D checkers!
That said, I think we will see people zipping around in pilotless passenger drones before a Hyperlink is transporting the general public between City A and City B.
"
I think people, techies included, often have propensity to default to a 1950s version of the future. I laughed when the iWatch came out. iPhones killed the wrist watch and Apple thought they could bring them back? Because why? Nostalgia for Dick Tracy?
The one that kills me is Elon Musk's Hyperloop. The man is at the forefront of electric/driverless and he thinks shooting people through a pneumatic tube is going to be a thing? I have trouble believing he believes that. I think he is doing it because it's cool and he can afford it and/or has gullible investors.
"
If you believe the promise of driverless, electric technology will be realized, what's the point of making massive investments in rail infrastructure for the purpose of moving people long distances?
Personal transport and mass transit won't need to be tethered to fixed rails. And it's a hell of a lot easier and cheaper to build new roads than to build something as silly as this: https://hsr.ca.gov/high-speed-rail-in-california/
On “Inflation and the Historical Challenge”
I still don't see the point of the relative strength or weakness of unions being a factor as it relates to wages keeping up with rapid inflation that occurs in a short timeframe. Even if a quarter of the workforce was union, it only helps 25% of the employed public (not retirees) and would only provide them in an incremental salary increase when the time comes to negotiate a new contract - whenever that might be.
"
I hear you, but on this particular issue (the economy), I'm not sure what Bazooka model can thwart rising prices. That's really all that matters.
George HW went from a historically high approval rating to out of office in a year because of the economy. Sure, it took a 3rd party candidate, but "it's the economy, stupid" is an expression for good reason. Perot wouldn't have been a thing if the economy didn't take a downturn.
"
I totally agree with you. The Republicans only become fiscally "prudent" when it's politically advantageous to appear so.
But it doesn't matter when you are playing political hot potato with the economy.
"
Rightly or wrongly, as long as the Democrats are viewed as the party of spending and printing, they are going to wear inflation to their midterm funeral. No new messaging is going to change that if inflation continues through November.
"
Also, what percentage of the U.S. workforce is actually in a union? 10%?
On “From The Independent: White House urges Spotify to take further action on Joe Rogan: ‘More can be done’”
IIRC, much of it was about how informed consent in medicine has gone out the window because it and any other critique is viewed as causing vaccine hesitancy. He thinks side effects are underreported and explains why he believes that. He spoke about the decision to go all in on the vax solution, while not aggressively pursuing early treatment and some of the reasons that may have happened.
I'd actually be interested in hearing your take. If you listened to it, you'd likely be only the 2nd person commenting in this thread to do so, and as an added bonus, you'd have fodder for your next article!
"
What's worse is that these people spinning off the planet about a 3 hour conversation between Rogan and someone like Dr Robert Malone are responding to what other people say they said during it. They want to shut down anything that falls slightly outside the bounds of regime approved acceptable speech. Even if if they don't know what was actually discussed.
But don't call them authoritarian.
On “The GOAT Retires: Tom Brady Calls It A Career”
He was probably paid in Bitcoin. ... offshore accounts are so 2008.
"
They just bought a property outside Miami near Ivanka and Jared - so there's THAT.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10465505/Tom-Bradys-retirement-mansion-revealed-Eco-estate-Miamis-Indian-Creek-Island.html
"
LOL. I'm not sure the redundancy is enough to capture the magnitude of despair, loathing and disappointment.
"
I wasn't suggesting he would become a principal owner of an NFL franchise. More likely be part of a group that buys a team.
Of course, there is the long running conspiracy theory that the reason Brady played for the Patriots on such a team friendly deal was because he had a shady, post-career equity arrangement with Robert Kraft.
"
I don't think it's that TB isn't capable of being a good coach, but more about what is required to become one (some of the reasons you mention). You have to really want it. And be willing to put in even more hours than the players do. If Brady wanted to spend that kind of time in football, he'd just keep playing.
And while I agree that the most gifted athletes are generally not good at coaching, I don't think Brady fits that description. He was drafted in the 6th round by the Patriots and was never a full time starter at Michigan. What makes Brady's story remarkable is that it was his determination to succeed.
"
You're going to really hate it when he is elected to the U.S. Senate as a Republican.
"
The bigger question, to me at least, is what does Brady do next?
He is too driven an individual to not have a second act.
He could go the Derek Jeter route. Ownership stake and maybe president of football operations, if he wants to get that involved.
He could go the Roger Staubach route. Captain of industry type. TB12 and other ventures.
He could go the Bill Bradley route. Get elected to higher office.
I could see a combination of all three over the next 10-15 years.