Recent comments in /f/vermont

Such-Evidence-4745 t1_j6ojwm6 wrote

A lot of high efficiency stuff seems like that. Looks good on paper but the more complex design seems to break more often and there don't seem to be any techs who know how they work. My parents had a high end boiler installed and it took them along time to find some one who could actually service it instead of just randomly swapping parts. And the thing had issues like 2 years after they got it. Who cares how efficient something is if its broken all the time?

Didn't know that heat pumps were the same deal though, sounds worse to be honest.

2

TheTowerBard t1_j6oi1md wrote

You clearly didn’t look at the laws that I linked you to though. California knife laws are not an issue for anyone. They are very reasonable.

Also, since you brought up the issue with homelessness, the crisis in California is a national issue, not a local California issue. Homeless folks from all over the country flock to California and to Florida and to other southern states. Homeless issues in those places are very much a national issue. I guarantee you there are former Vermonters in those places that are living there homeless. Actually, I know for a fact there are because I have done homeless outreach in these places.

The reason I’m assuming you’re a right-winger, is because you’re using all of their fear mongering talking points when you’re discussing these other places. It’s actually slightly embarrassing if you aren’t a right winger my dude. Please get out and visit some of these places. They aren’t nearly as bad as the angry man on TV makes them out to be.

0

Kurigana t1_j6oha4b wrote

Nationalism? Are you stupid? That's how every fucking judicial system works in the world.

You want to give 30 years of prison to someone for killing a random beggar and, then, the same 30 years for killing the fucking President, who's way more important to the country socially and objectively. You want to give a guy 30 years of prison for killing a random kid and, then, the same 30 years of prison to a guy who killed a random kid while the kid was with a bazooka trying to explode his house. EVERY, I repeat, EVERY judicial system will take the context and social relevance of someone into account.

And is every living organism of the same importance? So go to jail, because you've killed probably three trillions of bacteries by now. Why wouldn't they be relevant? This is nationalism! Stop being nationalist! LMAO.

1

friendofmany t1_j6ofmcp wrote

Not sure Fidium is in Montpelier, but I know Consolidated Communications offers fiber. I only know a couple of people using it and it seems fine. Comcast offers similar speeds over cable too I think.

1

DrToadley OP t1_j6oe8nh wrote

Whoa there. My advocacy for scary things like bike lanes and improved bus service does not imply turning Vermont into Amsterdam overnight and forcing everyone to throw their cars out. I just think that providing people with more options, including a modestly improved rail system that doesn't only go to Burlington from New York City, some more bike lanes in town centers, and better-advertised buses would be worth looking into.

1

HeadPen5724 t1_j6o8e01 wrote

At least if voters started grouping people it would mean they actually learned about the candidates and didn’t just look for the letter next to their name, that would be an improvement, but I doubt that would actually happen realistically.

We don’t have FPTP voting, so I’m not sure the relevance of that. You can’t win with a plurality (see Shumlin v Milne 2014) or any traditional runoff really.

In VT IRV would actually likely lead to 1 party rule. The GOP would stop being a viable party. Progressives would pick up some of the democrats, but democrats would pick up almost all of the independents/centrists AND conservative voters who no longer have a viable candidate. One party rule is even worse than 2.

It really doesn’t save enough money to warrant a change, mail out balloting negates the “saves time” benefit, and it won’t disrupt the 2 party system (which isn’t really the problem, rather the party system as whole is).

I’ll finish here with my original comment, IRV is a solution looking for a problem.

I appreciate the conversation though and I’m glad we continued it through. I’ve given IRV more thought that I otherwise would have and that’s a positive. I’ll look forward to more dialogues in the future. Thanks.

0