the problem seems to be when people take "apartment life isn't for me" and then go to the conclusion of "they shouldn't build apartments for anybody"
you don't have to live in one. just let people build them. only allowing single family homes doesn't make single family homes more accessible for anybody, it just makes land more scarce and housing less affordable all around.
the government's argument in implementing the link tax was that facebook doesn't provide any value, they just take news for free and make a profit off it.
so facebook stopped linking to news. and now they're complaining because facebook isn't providing the valuable service that they used to. so does facebook provide value by linking to news, or not?
i'm not saying "don't put money into savings", i'm saying every now and then, people should make a decision that benefits the world as a whole rather than just their personal financial situation.
boomers didn't sacrifice their own spending to build their net worth, they sacrificed *public* spending to do it. and not just public spending, but things that are literally free. like, deciding nobody should ever be allowed to build more housing anywhere ever, because that makes their real estate investment go up.
alternate phrasing: boomers stuffed all their money in their bank accounts instead of building a world their kids could afford to live in.
how exactly does chrome not respect my privacy?
and i don't just mean "because it's google and google is an ad company". what specifically is it sending to some internet server that firefox doesn't? both the firefox and address bars send what you type into them to a search provider. as near as i can tell, firefox's committment to privacy is to say "we protect your privacy" while doing all the same stuff that chrome does.
people really hate being warned about the consequences of their actions.
"you can do whatever you want, and we'll tell you it’ll be ok" will never not win votes.