Are you envisioning the government being a major landlord, like in Singapore? It seems to work really well for that country, but Americans seem uncomfortable with the idea of government housing.
Lyrl
joined 2 years ago
A responsible landlord is "doing" arrangements for property maintenance and handling all tax and other legal requirements, and my hard feelings are towards slumlords who let dwellings become unsafe, or property flippers who kick all the renters out and build new dwellings to sell to more wealthy buyers.
But also, isn't the hate for landlords equally applicable to banks and other financial institutions that hold mortgages? They really are earning money by no other responsibility than having the capital available at the start.
We're all operating on the same human operating system, yes. Would be nice if we could figure out how to sand down some of the sharp corners, though.
It got through in Maine and Alaska. I am very disappointed on the loss in Nevada, but hopeful the current two-state foothold gets people more comfortable with the idea enough to support it, or at least not spend energy fighting it, in their state.
Australia has had ranked choice voting for decades. Wikipedia describes their system as a "mild" two-party system. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_Australia
I don't see any reason the US would have a different outcome. But I believe transitioning from our current "hard" two-party system to a "mild" one would be a huge positive.
Thanks for the article link. The additional drama around the "popculture" sub subreddit just adds to the absurdity of the situation.
Worked at the United States Digital Service (USDS) before it was renamed doge and had its priorities completely rewritten. Maybe half were laid off, and then 21 resigned in protest. So 45-ish people left from the agency's previous incarnation.
Susan W near the bottom is also "who". She is White House Chief of Staff, so maybe that indicates White House employees differently from doge-specific employees.
I think no more than two parties would dominate, even in a ranked choice system. But they would evolve more representatively: party platforms are shaped by issue polling, with the ballot box being both the ultimate poll but also obscure on what exactly the detailed driving issues are.
Ranked choice voting would give single-issue parties a real seat at the ballot box, and enable the two big parties to more accurately adjust their platforms to target voters who first-choiced a little party and second-choiced one of the big ones.
Both Roberts and Barrett joined the liberal block on this vote, and as a 5-4 ruling both of them were required to get to a majority. That only Barrett is getting social media energy over it says something.
My understanding is the most benefit is to children whose teeth are still growing, then secondarily to adults who have substandard dental hygiene. An otherwise healthy adult with good dental care routines is the least impactful case.
Going off on the tangent of distilled water: distilled water can reduce overall minerals in the diet. From WebMD https://www.webmd.com/diet/distilled-water-overview
Distilled water lacks even electrolytes like potassium and other minerals your body needs. So you may miss out on a bit of these micronutrients if you drink only the distilled stuff. Some studies have found a link between drinking water low in calcium and magnesium and tiredness, muscle cramps, weakness, and heart disease
It would require a lot of housing density for everyone to own four dwellings (and would kill rent demand well and good), but I wouldn't call it infeasible. For everyone to have a quarter acre lawn and a 2,000 square foot house that shares no walls with neighbors? With those additional requirements having everyone own four is infeasible, sure, but a belief that's the only dwelling worth owning is how we have throttled our housing supply in the first place.