5teerPike

5teerPike t1_j24ifdk wrote

>flatlanders that keep trying to make Vermont more like wherever they came from

In my case, this is apparently why we can't have sidewalks (this was also why it took forever to pass recreational cannabis sales & open shops). Crazy that nimbys don't consider public safety when you have kids walking home from school on the side of the road.

Vermont is in America and Nimbyism sucks.

Edit: when changes are discussed in your locale more people need to ask themselves what really makes Vermont, Vermont; and we should then ask if the changes proposed actually threaten that, because most of the time it doesn't. Some people believe no gay marriage allowed makes Vermont, Vermont (hence the take back Vermont bs). At one point there used to be more cows than people, and a lot of the forests we have now are because Vermont used to have a lot more farm land that has since grown over. Should we clear cut the trees to make Vermont, Vermont again by bringing the sheep farms back too?

Vermont was also the first to abolish slavery, shall we exile everyone who flies confederate flags here, or ban the flag itself, since Vermont was never a part of it and was openly against slavery before emancipation?

Because Vermont is a seedbed of change, and sometimes it's even ahead of the game! Americans traveling from other American states to this state in America are not trying to make it Boston part 2. You can catch up to this century and still preserve it. I think a lot of people confuse preservation with never changing anything. But if your house is already rotting now, you're not doing anyone a favor by leaving it dilapidated for the next generation. . .

15

5teerPike t1_j21311m wrote

Well they are just selfish then. That's not an issue of "if that happened, Vermont wouldn't be Vermont". I don't care if they're afraid of change.

We should make sure to plant seeds for trees that we wont be able to enjoy the shade under in our lifetime, and they won't be remembered fondly for doing the opposite.

1

5teerPike t1_j1zslu0 wrote

Conservative fiscal policy is a driving force behind the social unrest you claim to care to change. Fiscal and social policy are not in separate vacuums lmfao

I don't like Phil Scott either, seeing as he won't raise the state minimum wage and decided to lift mask mandates, which is causing a lot of our labor shortages now.

"Former 2000s democrat" is confusing phrasing you should change by the way.

3

5teerPike t1_j1zqlle wrote

I remember trump having a lot more to do with that than the average republican would care to acknowledge. And I never ran out of any of those things in Vermont. Which, let's face it, only did so well because of the low population density, and that we actually made people wear masks at all. Drop the masking and what? We're shocked it's back and causing problems? Sure. Ok /s.

Also, does this mean you voted for Bush?

4

5teerPike t1_j1zjivr wrote

I'm arguing that this entire time the minimum wage has not budged, and even if someone at McDs was making 16 and hour, that's still not enough for a 1br anywhere in the country.

I WISH I was making 50-80k with my business. I've never made more than 25k a year, and when that happened half of my income was tips which are not actually a sustainable source of income.

You're just staying a different iteration of "The frycook is making more than the EMT"

To which I say, that's not the frycooks fault and the EMT should be paid more. Worker solidarity & all that jazz.

4

5teerPike t1_j1zhz9w wrote

Yeah notice how all of that happened without wages keeping up.

Businesses need to stop depending on underpaying labor, with no benefits like paid sick leave, for profit. This model is not sustainable, and nothing can function if most people barely have enough to even cover rent. How is it bad for businesses if more people have more money to spend?

4

5teerPike t1_j1jywwm wrote

When that golf tournament came to Brookline it really gunked up the traffic so tbh I'm fine with huge sporting events like that not being in direct vicinity to or right within the city

1