>The city of Boston gives away most of their taxes to the rest of the state via state income tax. If it weren’t for Boston, the rest of the state would be in much worse shape.

I see, if everything is exactly as you say then why would they need the state's help to provide funding for their subway system CommonNotCommons?

While MA is at $2.4B the rest of the state is at $10.4B. So they're generating about 23% of the state income, but that's just income tax. There's nothing stopping Boston from creating another tax just to fund the trains, or issuing bonds, considering it primarily effects Boston and is a Boston issue. Someone in Springfield or a small town shouldn't have an extra tax levied to pay for some form of grift happening here, that should be on us.

Judging by a couple of apartments I saw last year, we'll not only color over the walls in crayons and tear up the yard we'll do even worse.

With how the system is run, and how messed up the current state is, it'd feel kind of wrong for the rest of the state to have to bear the burden of pumping more money into it for no real benefit to them. If a working train system is something Boston wants, then Boston is going to have to figure it out. Right now the city is being strangled and tripped up from within.

> (and I'm sorry you're getting downvoted for it).

That stuff doesn't matter, plenty of fake internet points to go around.

>But I feel that some things cry out to be addressed if they're included

Again do they need to be to tell a good story, and specifically the story the author wants to tell? Additionally, the absence of consideration can be a trait, point or setting in and of itself. If everyone is genetically modifying or casting spells on their offspring in a novel, past the YA audience do you need a character to stop and pontificate about the nature and dangers of what they're doing or do you follow one character's story and mindset living in that world?

>I think you misunderstand me.

Respectfully, I don't think I do at all but I don't think you're getting what i'm laying down. I hate to quote you this much, but it's pretty apparent:

>On the surface, this may seem all well and good, but when read in light of Frankenstein, it all becomes rather disturbing.What gives anyone the right to create a new life-form? Shai is effectively playing God... She decides to make the titular emperor a better person, but who is she to say what’s better? She is accountable to no-one and nothing but herself. Even if she’s justified in trying to make him better than the original, the question remains whether she’s justified in creating a new mind at all. How would this new person, inhabiting the body of a similar but not mentally-identical person, react if he knew...What if there’s some unintended consequence, and he turns out to be a worse person... In light of all this, isn’t it incredibly prideful to view this project as a form of artistic expression, with little concern for the deeper metaphysical implications? Isn’t it, in fact, strikingly reminiscent of Dr. Frankenstein’s attitude at the beginning of his tale?These are all important questions that are not nitpicks or minor incidental details. They are implicit in the very premise of the story, and to gloss over them is to share in the blind hubris of Dr. Frankenstein-—the hubris that’s lead our species to seriously endanger itself countless times, especially in the past couple of centuries, by valuing technical achievement over morality. “Just because you can doesn’t mean you should,” as another similarly-themed story can tell you. If you’re going to play God, you’d damned well better think long and carefully about it first.Sanderson’s chosen theme of exploring the nature of artistry is a fine one, but he should have chosen a less-fraught premise to explore it with unless he was prepared to simultaneously explore at least some of the questions Mary Shelley raised two hundred years ago

You have a worldview about technology and it's advancement rooted in fear, and the premise spawned all these questions you wanted answers to. Frankenstein was a cautionary tale (amongst other things) and due to the premise, you were primed and had questions that weren't answered.

The question is do those questions need answers to tell the story Sanderson wanted to tell? I could write volumes about how the printing press changed the world for both good and ill (mostly good) and all the inherent challenges within it, or I can write a story about a person writing a novel. If the scope is large it enough it might include those things if they affect the story, but perhaps that they aren't in the story is telling you something about how she and others are approaching things.

You are bringing your own morality and worldview to the story being told (I don't think you realize how much of your post comes across as moralizing), and want to be told X is wrong or Y is dangerous. You seem fine reading about the weirdly ethical things but want someone sitting down saying X is bad, you want her wrestling with it, you want the structure of the black and white. And when you aren't getting it, you're slamming the book for it.

Again, I have no issue if you said you didn't find the protagonists story compelling compared to the world built and questions raised, it's simply in how your'e approaching these things. I don't get it.

>Imagine if Moby Dick ended with Ahab killing the whale and going home in triumph--it would be kind of like that.

I can imagine it, and I could see how that could be an awesome if disturbing story on obsession having an end result that makes you think and question, like the film Whiplash which I'd highly recommend.

I'm going to set aside your valid complaints and only focus on the idea that the book disturbed you after reading Frankenstein -- you had issues with the ethical issues it's raising. I don't get it, it's like someone reading Moby Dick and giving it a negative review because obsession is unhealthy and it bothered them to read about. I don't know how this mindset has gotten formed or why it's become more common in some, but I'd argue books are stories not a product to consume to have your feelings and worldview validated.

As a caveat, those studies are:

• Are about outcomes for the addicted, less so the quality of life for others in the community

• Not as effective as you'd hope. You can find metrics that improve, so you can technically say it's more effective, but not in dramatic ways

>Posturing about being tough on drugs has been a complete waste of money

Have to define posturing, it's one thing for someone to shoot up or rock a pipe in their own home , it's another for kids to get on the bus or train and learn meth smells like cat pee.

Yes I have some Sudafed, ginger tea and expired famatodine if you'd like to swap.

>In Germany, the president of the German Medical Association went so far as to call for the creation of informal "flea markets" for medicines, where people could give their unused drugs to patients who needed them. And in France and Germany, pharmacists have started producing their own medicines — though this is unlikely to make a big difference, given the extent of the shortfall.

I love how the article then says "some think it's not so bad" andncallinfnan and calling an emegency isnt necessary but they're handing out single pills, suggesting people getting together and swapping medication like Pokemon and now have guys who aren't trained for it breaking bad in their basements. It's not like this is about sending tanks to Ukraine, time to get proactive.

Which one is the kangaroo

How dumb would a Russian soldier have to be to think they'd actually get paid this bounty. I'm sure they'll eventually take out some tanks or and get some photos, but a higher up would pay will pay it to a friendly subordinate who'll kick back the majority.

Untrustworthy poptart

Yeah, the chinese new year happened and some tourist areas saw a boost but covid is really just at the flexing and cracking-its-knuckles stage. Death is coming to chew gum and fill crematoriums, and it's all out of gum.

14 baby Groots died during filming of Guardians of the Galaxy 2, if you dig you can identify which one by the toe tag.

>I don't really follow your last point. Because it was psychosis and not psychopathy, that makes her less of a murderer?

It was a response to the comment that someone can be sick but still a killer. That person isn't that person, they're the illness -- and post partum psychosis is usually treatable and not permanent. It's akin to blaming you for a dream you had.

>I just get the sense that if this wasn't a wealthy white family there wouldn't be as many heart emojis floating around the internet for someone who violently murdered three babies.

That sounds like you are projecting your own baggage onto the situation? I can't speak to the heart emojis you are seeing somewhere, but when these cases come up (and if you search you'll find them) the response is generally shock and that it's a horrible tragedy.

You see the exact opposite for something like Munchausen by proxy cases, or the rare cases where a mother actually is a killer and something happens to a child so she can be with another man etc.

>Am I cold, or are the social media posts going around about this story unnervingly sympathetic to her? Yes, postpartum psychosis is terrible.

You're being cold, though admittedly I've seen severe PPD up close (but not pp psychosis) and a psychotic break of an acquaintance completely out of the blue that ended with them stopping their car and trying to break into the nearest home. With a lot of illnesses, how you react to it can be influenced by how much exposure you have to it in general.

Everyone likely knows someone who has had kids and struggled mentally with some form of PPD, they likely know someone who has struggled severely though not to this degree (post partum psychosis is very rare). It isn't someone with severe mental issues having children, it isn't someone developing them and it being clear what should be done -- it's people imagining they have a kid and it happens to them because it really can happen to anyone.

Who do you get angry at here? It's hard to be angry at the mother, she threw herself out a window and if she's able to become lucid her life is a horror film now that no one would wish on them. She was seeking treatment. The father, who called it in? Perhaps he was irresponsible, or maybe he had to pee for a moment and no one knew how severe things were -- either way his life is a nightmare and we just don't know. Perhaps the treatment professionals, but this is rare and these things can take a sharp left turn quickly -- you're often looking at involuntary hospitalizations that can be difficult. What you're left with is tragedy, and a "therebut for the grace of god go I."

If more info come out and there was severe negligence that'll be another story, but right now based on what we know who do we get angry at?

>But she can simultaneously be a sick person who is also a killer.

That doesn't really track, we aren't talking about anti-social personality disorder, we're talking about postpartum/perpetual/postnatal psychosis. Maybe you are confusing psychosis and psychopathy?

This is psychosis, and hence aren't viewing reality like we are, and aren't really "them." Their judgement is impaired, and it often combines hallucinations and false beliefs/delusions -- the entire idea of psychosis is you aren't experiencing reality properly. It isn't really them.

if you're near Somerville in the spring & summer you can drop them off at Davis Square for the orgies

Eh, medicine isn't under sanctions. I'm not sure what the alternative would be or you're hoping or, and I say that as someone who has hated how Europe half-halfheartedly went into sanctions with all kinds of exemptions most weren't aware of. The west aren't ogres, and we aren't targeting civilians.

There are still children in Russia that are undergoing surgeries and need medications, the fact that Russia is bombing hospitals doesn't mean we should target them as well. Sanctions should be even harder, we had governments saying they wouldn't pay in rubles publicly while telling their banks to go ahead privately -- but in this case the Swiss simply exported pharma more than they did other things, so they're fairing better than others that exported rifle scopes.

>But I'm also curious where you're from that a broker's fee is such a completely alien concept?

I agree with the rest what you're saying, but be aware broker fees are a real rarity elsewhere and aren't as entrenched as they are in the Boston area. You might see them in NYC if you are struggling to find a place, but rarely elsewhere unless you specifically go to a broker agency (and even then they're often hired by the landlords rather than the renter).

...there's nothing to turn around, and you're being disingenuous funwithtentacles. Germany was incredibly clear going back to April of 2022 it wouldn't allow German heavy armor to be used in Ukraine.

This whole "well they never actually sent a written request" is broken thinking when there were talks private and public leading to Germany coming up with the plan to agree to backstop those who only sent soviet era armor because they wouldn't allow German armor. To anyone paying actual attention what you're saying is just nonsense.

...we just going to ignore the tax being suspended leading up to midterms so people aren't seeing the consequences of their votes when making them? We are voting in these choices, and there's no free lunch. When we sign emissions treaties, kill pipelines to lessen usage (eg, more expensive) and have to upgrade the grid for solar while killing development of denser housing you get New England prices.

are you implying comics picking on CT is like picking on the kid riding the shortbus licking the window

This isn't really genuine, it was PR. Poland and the USA have been asking for armor and tanks sincr the start of the war, which Germany denied. They eventually capitulated and said "ok instead of German tanks, send older Soviet stock and we will reimburse you with German tanks, but none will go to Ukraine." They didn't follow through.

Then when Poland and the USA and others (the USA and dutch split the costs to send 90 refurbed tanks, etc) pushed the issue Germany starts acting like it was all a misunderstanding because some paperwork wasn't filed. It's egregious and transparent, it would be like your bank manager telling you they coukdnt possibly gove you a loan, then when asked by the media saying they hadn't actually applied for the loan. Germany was clear publicly and again, even setup an entire program to avoid it.

When the European parliament told them to send the heavy armor, and France, they told the press it was the first they'd heard of it. LoL

>Germany has repeatedly said they would give permission, Poland just hasn't actually bothered to ask for permission yet...

No, they haven't funwithtentacles. They've said the exact opposite. Please provide one link that isn't from the last day or so where Germany has said it is OK with anyone sending German tanks into Ukraine. One link. It should be easy, except you won't be able to because it is a lie.

>The simple truth is that Poland hasn't even asked for export permissions yet,

Because Germany has been extremely clear it wouldn't give permission. It even started a whole program where member countries could send older Soviet tanks in exchange for German tanks, but would not allow German tanks into Ukraine. This only started after public pressure to send tanks couldn't be ignored.

This fell apart when Germany wasn't following through, and Poland finally said they'd setup a coalition of willing partners to send in tanks, get Ukraine training and the supplies and repairs/maintenance they would need. The USA said they'd send Abrams tanks to countries that sent their leopards, because Germany is unwilling and unable. This isn't ideal as the continent and Ukraine are not setup for leopards, but Germany isn't giving a lot of choice and many, many Ukranians will die without them.

> and Germany has repeatedly stated that would give permission..

This isn't true funwithtentacles. Please provide some links that aren't from the last day or so? You won't be able to, because Germany has been extremely clear they wouldn't allow it.

I don't understand the German attempts to blatantly lie and rewrite history about these things, as history is not going to be any kinder to their role in this unless there are serioys changes.

You don't give any indication as to size, but id it's on separate heat it's likely at least 2br. It won't be $600 every month, but when it's very cold if you like a warmer temp it'll be very, very expensive. A lot of the oil heat apartments are older without great windows and other things. We've had a really mild winter, but yes budget as if it could be even higher than $600/month for a few of them.