I'll direct you to another of my posts rather than having two going.
Knightfox
joined 2 years ago
Infrastructure can apply to different things, you can have great infrastructure for cars, but not trains. You can have well maintained power lines, but poor internet connectivity. You can have a robust water utility, but a mixed storm and sewer system.
If you're gonna point out one bad part of infrastructure and say all of it's bad then idk what to say for you.
You can go from London to Edinburgh by car (412 miles) in 7.5 hrs or by train in 5.5 hrs.
You can go from Richmond to Charleston by car (432 miles) in 6 hours or by train in 13.25 hrs.
It is to a point, but when you reach that point it's just not feasible to have public transportation. The city I work in has a light rail train, it has a robust busing system, but people also travel from 20+ different small towns around this one and at a certain point that system breaks down. If I were to take the bus I would still need a car to get to the next small town where the bus stop into the large town is.
The fact is that the most of the US isn't designed like old world cities which were built with public transportation and foot traffic in mind.
Not really, the images and travel descriptions you're reading here are the exception, not the rule. The US has great infrastructure, just not for public transportation as there isn't enough centralized usage and the locations are far apart. It would take me 4 hours to go to work by bus, but it takes me 25 min by car.
I've said this before and I'll say it again, but Elon really isn't that smart and he certainly isn't a genius. Elon has a BA in Physics from a school known for business degrees. He also got a BS in Business, but UPenn and Wharton are known more for how hard it is to get in than how hard the classes are.
The website CollegeVine says UPenn is known as the "Social Ivy" and "UPennβs admissions is highly-selective, but students applying to the UPenn College of Arts & Science (CAS) will find it less academically competitive than schools like Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford (although exceptional academics are still a must)."
By the way, he started college in 1990, transferred to UPenn in 1992, and states he graduated in 1995, but UPenn refutes that saying he graduated in 1997. This is a school where 96% of those who are accepted graduate within 150% of the degree time (4 year degree within 6 years) (https://www.collegetuitioncompare.com/edu/215062/university-of-pennsylvania/graduation/).
Musk of course says he completed the courses in 1995, but there was some sort of mixup with an English and History credit that delayed the degree by 2 years.
I'm typically not one to judge what degrees someone pursues or how long they take to finish those degrees, but when people start calling someone who loses $40 billion a genius the gloves come off.
Maybe it's a USA thing, but they typically are insulated conservative people who have disposable income. The clothing style is a stereotype of a specific group of women which just so happens to also be conservative/religious. Women outside of this group might still dress this way, but most that I've met thought that the style was cute, but over used and also didn't like the stereotype that comes with that style.
It's so pronounced a stereotype that you can go to some events and find >50% of the women wearing the same brands of the same clothes with maybe some difference in color selection.
The left was so successful that this is Little Rock Arkansas.
They are typically Christian but this is the first time I've seen it use with this stereotype
I certainly agree with the reasons why people don't seek help, but it should be acknowledged that they are turning away assistance which makes it difficult to help them fix their problems. Some of these reasons to turn away help are also more addressable than others. If someone is just mentally impaired (mental illness or mentally handicapped) we can't just force them to accept help.
The guy at the gas station was a part of my community and people knew him well. He wasn't a typical beggar and he was super honest. He would flat out tell you, "Hey I need some money for smokes or food." I'd rather give money to him than the 2 guys who stand at the intersection with signs everyday.
Unmitigated access probably would be the most successful solution, but if we follow the real world logical steps we also know that that wouldn't work either. Whether in major high density apartments or in single family houses funding for these properties has to come from somewhere, likely the government. The government is never going to pass legislation which just gives out homes to the homeless, they probably wouldn't even do it for low income workers who might be viewed as a better investment.
If we imagined that the government would do such a thing there are problems like maintenance costs, de facto ghettos, de facto red lining, and social discrimination. Sure, the government could address these things as well, but if we have to move to theory just to reach this point we know that's not going to happen. At a certain point the argument just moves to, "Well ________ country does xyz," without addressing the social and political differences from wherever that place is. To make these things possible in this way would require a completely different government and thus a completely different social disposition.
I'm all for social change and ending homelessness, but I think it's a waste of time pretending that the unrealistic is a solution. Saying just build and give away homes to end homelessness without the social disposition for that to happen is as naive as the right saying to just build a wall to stop illegal immigration.
No, that's not a thing