Agreed

I think this is fine, but once you get past a line of cars and there's no one to your right, you're at fault for not pulling over and letting them pass.

Seconded. And this doesn't mean you have to leave the passing lane. If you're actively passing people in the second lane, you can be in the passing lane as long as you want. If someone tries to go around you on the right, they're the asshole. However, if there's no one to your right and someone catches up behind you in the passing lane, move the fuck over (though again, if you catch up to someone, give them a second to do so). It's basic fucking courtesy.

>I think it sounds like a good idea that everyone should have housing. It just appears unrealistic. Real world conditions complicate a scenario where society makes that idea a reality. For instance, Is there a law that guarantees it? Who foots the bill?

The bill would be footed by taxpayer dollars. The accommodations would be the bare minimum (shared rooms, hallway bathrooms, etc. Think of a college dorm). There is no law, but there should be. They should be available to everyone, no matter their means.

In the modern US we have more than enough tech and wealth to do this bare minimum. Along with free healthcare and education. And if we can get people into jobs where they're needed in the process then the system may just end up paying for itself.

>Respect is earned.

True, but there is also a baseline amount of respect that all people deserve from the start. When you start off your comment by stating that you have no empathy for the homeless, you have already shown yourself to be disrespectful and have waived your right to respectful discourse in the process. Think for it this way: replace 'the homeless' with 'disabled veterans' and tell me you don't sound like kind of a jerk in your first comment (keep in mind, vets chose to join the military).

I think a lot of it is the harassment some have faced from some homeless people here and there making them look bad as well as the false notion that they're all just lazy and refuse to work. The thing is, that's not entirely untrue. I know some people who complain about the cost of housing yet refuse to consider living with a roommate or simply living outside of the city.

None of this excuses a lack of empathy or the kind of hatred and vitriol directed at the homeless population in this state. Instead, I think a good solution would be to find out which towns need extra help with work and create homeless shelters to give free or extremely cheap housing to people where they're needed (as well as free transit). It wouldn't fix everything, but it could help out a lot of people.

To a degree I agree. I think states should identify which towns are in need of workers and set up homeless shelters there along with free transport. Everyone is entitled to housing in the modern world, but you are not entitled to decide where that housing will be. You can choose to be homeless in the city or go where you're needed. Yes, housing is expensive, but many (not most) people who complain about high rent refuse to live with roommates or think they need to live in the city.

That said, this should still be done with empathy. Not everyone who's out on the streets made poor choices and many are just unlucky. Some came from nothing and never got an opportunity to move up. Some made a single major mistake and can't recover from it. None of these scenarios change that people should be treated with decency and respect.

There really should be a law that mandates the govt pay anyone market value (x1.25-1.5 for convenience) for any goods made illegal without a grandfather clause. Absolutely ridiculous otherwise.

The problem is that the old bracket won't come out, so I'd need to buy another $25 bracket and hope I don't fuck up the bolt in the process.

It appears that have a fundamental misunderstanding of both green energy and the English language.

Thanks for the advice. Last thing I want is to fail inspection after working on this massive thing!

This is sarcasm, right?

If only we were on a completely US-based system where we got power for the cost of maintenance alone. Something like getting power from natural resources like the sun or the water without needing to work with foreign powers. That would mean fluctuations in the global market wouldn't affect energy prices in the US! And since we wouldn't be using a depletable amount of energy we could call it something like... Renewable energy! Yeah, if only there were a party championing the switch over to that kind of system.

Oh wait...

> We all know who the best candidate was

I have no idea who they are- they either didn't run or didn't win their primary. Seth was certainly the better of the two main options though.

Congrats on proving another flaw with conservative strategy- bringing up math without understanding how statistics works. Most cities in the US are blue, which means it's not surprising that cities with high homicide rates are run by democrat mayors, since most mayors of big cities are democrats. This is like saying "The most common letter in cans of alphabet soup purchased by customers at this store is O" without factoring in that the store had a sale on SpaghettiOs.

What's even dumber is that the article is trying to claim that this is due to 'defunding the police' when the cities with the highest number of cops per capita are NYC, Chicago, Philly, D.C., etc. Have you ever stopped to think before posting propaganda?

Twin Oaks is properly rated. It's overrated by the old, underrated by the young. Not as good as it used to be, but a decent dinner out.

That's what I was thinking. Thanks!

This is exactly what I was hoping. I'll call the permitting office today to make sure there's no fuckery with the inspection, but this is great info for which material to get, thanks!

I've added a picture for more info. My only concern with using a wood shim is the potential instability. Wouldn't in be likely for the shim to degrade over time and leave the gap in place?

Just added.

Go fuck yourself.

Nami if you have the budget (super expensive).

The "Don't tread on me" flag has been coopted by the libertarian party, so no, it shouldn't be flown on a government building. A gay pride flag is apolitical, and therefore acceptable. A back the blue flag is stupid, but outside of my personal distaste I don't see why it wouldn't be allowed to be flown. Hope that clears things up.

The language wasn't just lacking empathy, it was clearly trying to send the message that gay=bad. Additionally, they equated more LGBT staff in schools to more sex education, which they clearly dislike (more idiocy). Tangentially, though not directly, this ties into the conspiracy theory that LGBT people are more likely to be predators, which is only the case among clergy as far as I can tell.

How exactly did the Dems ruin this state? Not the individuals, but rather democrat policies. And which Republican policies would make the state a better place to live? Any party can have corrupt politicians, but the policies pushed by the Dems almost always lead to progress instead of stagnation.

Did you just make this entire story up so you could get a dig at the cops?