@ActuallyATleilaxuGhola's banner p

ActuallyATleilaxuGhola

Axolotl Tank Class of '24

1 follower   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 08 09:59:22 UTC

				

User ID: 1012

ActuallyATleilaxuGhola

Axolotl Tank Class of '24

1 follower   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 08 09:59:22 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 1012

Re. 2, how do you recommend planning for it? Do you have an example?

Re. 3, we have four kids and may have more. Our thinking is:

  • 1 master bedroom
  • 1 home office (wife and I are WFH)
  • 1 older boys' room
  • 1 older girls' room
  • 1 younger kids' room
  • Guest bedroom somewhere, maybe? The design we're looking at is 3,300 sqft. Do you think it would be possible to get away with less house? I'd actually prefer not to have to clean, cool, and maintain a huge house.

Ah yeah, good call. I am 100% sure I'll get Ethernet everywhere but I hadn't thought about installing conduit just in case.

Since this is the stupid question thread -- what should I hope to learn from those books? They appear to be reference books about regulations. Should I study them so I can keep my GC honest or double check his work?

Does this add a significant amount of cost?

Re. 2, how did you draw up your own plans?

We're still at the very beginning, so my answers aren't very interesting, but:

  1. Working off a loan, but we also have enough investment money that we could make more aggressive payments if needed.
  2. We've picked a plan off of a builder's site that we liked. We're not really "dream house" people, we're pretty practical. We've actually like most rentals we've lived in that were just cookie cutter designs. The only times we were unhappy was when we lived in a place with poorly sealed windows overlooking a street (lots of traffic noise) and when we lived in a house with poor insulation in a place where the temps varied between 15F and 95F over the year. That said, I'm still thinking about getting an architect and doing a custom build.
  3. A few years ago, I picked out a great lot in the heart of a small, fast-growing middle class town on the outskirts of a larger city. The neighborhood is perfect and everything is walkable. Tradeoff is that we have to build now.
  4. It will probably end up being 4-5 years.
  5. TBD, but it doesn't seem like there's much in that area.
  6. I have family in the area, and I was very careful to avoid flood zones and flood zones adjacent properties.

Homeowners of The Motte -- what would you differently if you could do it all over again?

I plan on building a house in the next 12 months on a lot about an hour away from the Gulf of Mexico America. It's going to be a two-story 5BR house with porches on the front and the back, built in a traditional Southern style.

I'm a bit overwhelmed as I don't even know what I don't know about building, and I want to avoid making costly mistakes that I'll have to pay to renovate later (or worse, be unable to fix at all). Happy to hear both from people who built and people who bought.

I tried the dark theme at one point, but it's not as good as TheMotte theme with DarkReader, so I just use that.

win98 is pretty cool though.

I'd subscribe.

Brother, you do not interfere in the affairs of a neighboring tribe unless you want to start a blood feud. It's a shame for the boy, but the world is full of such evils, and there is no state powerful enough to root them all out. That tribe has their customs, we have ours. They have their rituals, we have ours. They have their god, and we have ours. The best course of action is to interact with them as little as possible, only to trade goods and reach agreements about territory. With the passage of time, we will see whose tribe flourishes and whose tribe withers.

You have my vote, brother.

Nitpick, but Darwin was worse, it was always hard to tell whether he was sincere, or at least he always had at least some plausible deniability, whereas this guy clearly has an axe to grind which makes it easier to just ignore the low effort snark.

They've never been super high quality IMHO but recently they seem like almost pure shitflinging.

Second, the exact population is irrelevant compared to things like geography, technological levels, military strength and enlistment numbers, and so on.

The implication is that if he doesn't even ballpark know how many people live in Iran, there's no way he knows any of that other stuff. And if he did, he could have said something like "well they are enlisting X people per year, and American enlists 2X, so probably roughly half of the American population" and at that point if Tucker said "um ackchually it's not 160 million it's 90 million" people would just think Tucker was being pedantic and wouldn't care. But Cruz didn't try to switch to a statistic that he did know, he just got defensive and butthurt which makes everyone assume (IMO probably correctly) that he really knows next to nothing about Iran.

The one thing I have never grasped about Christian Zionism is implication that God is waiting for humanity to gather all 7 dragon balls before Jesus can be summoned. I'm pretty sure the Second Coming is going to happen when God plans it to, and that human efforts to bring it about are at best ridiculous and at worst extremely presumptuous. Jesus clearly says that nobody knows the hour or the day, so what's the point? I'm genuinely curious, do Christian Zionists have some theological justification or rationalization for this?

I'm just a random poster, so take this for what it's worth. But I appreciate that as an (apparent?) leftist or progressive, you still post here and help prevent The Motte from becoming a complete echo chamber. Before the last week or so, I remembering you posting interesting comments that go against the prevailing opinions here which stimulated discussion. But over the last couple of days it just seems like you're posting snarky one-liners, trying to bait people, and dunk on your enemies. I hope you don't flame out, but instead stick around and poke holes in right-wing thinking to help keep us right-wingers honest. Maybe it would be good to take some time away from this place? I know that even I have to sometimes despite agreeing with a greater proportion of the posters here.

I understand the covenant as God having had a relationship with the righteous Hebrew nation. He did not have a covenant with those outside the righteous nation. Not with gentiles, obviously. But also not with Hebrews (= pre 70 AD descendants of Abraham) who abandoned the Law and adopt gentile worship and customs. If having the tiniest shred of Abraham's DNA made you one of the Chosen, there should be more consternation in the Bible about the Babylonian captivity or the children of kidnapped Hebrew women, but those people are just treated as gentiles AFAIK.

I think God probably gave the Hebrews living after 33AD a grace period, but the He really underlined His point in 70AD, after which AIUI it was no longer possible to continue the traditional Hebrew religion as commanded by God. So, after a brief period, the Hebrew diaspora (=Jews) created a new tradition partially rooted in the pre-70AD religion. I don't think God recognizes this new tradition as legitimate, and the NT says that the Christian church is the new Israel. There's the question of the 144,000 in Revelation, but I don't really know what to make of that, maybe some special mercy for descendants of Abraham of good conscience. Or some people say it means Christians. I don't know.

Edit: IIRC God promised the Hebrews: land, descendants, a relationship (one god/one people), and a messiah through the line of David. The land is now the whole Earth (evangelization), the Hebrews have myriad spiritual descendants, the God/people relationship remains intact, and the Messiah is Christ.

I've heard some Christians explain this away by saying that "nah, doesn't matter because Jesus, new covenant, we're all God's chosen, etc. etc." but I don't think that holds out when you read through the Bible.

Why doesn't it hold, in your opinion?

Why?

I had also heard that and believed it, but recently I heard a different story. I wish I could remember the source. I want to say it was Substack essay from about 1-2 years ago. I'll see if I can find it.

Remember ~nobody relevant believed in Communism in the USSR in the eighties either

Interestingly, I've read recently that this common perception was actually the opposite of the truth -- the rabble and many of the mid and low level bureaucrats (i.e. people who were not fully insulated from the real world) no longer believed, but the relevant people in the upper echelons of power still mostly believed, and some quite fervently. Gorby himself did not plan to abandon Communism, he just wanted to release enough pressure to right the ship.

I had to Google the bonesaw reference. The Khashoggi(?) guy, right? Didn't that blow up just because he was a WaPo writer and because he crossed state lines got chopped up in an embassy? That was one of my earliest noticings about "current thing" programming. Suddenly 10,000,000 reddit threads about some literal who nobody cared about the day before.

But it's cruise control for cool.

I will concede that very dense places are different.

Bikes are less predictable. They can weave, turn, and change speeds much more suddenly than a car. When I'm walking and I hear a car coming behind me, I glance back once to see its trajectory and adjust my path accordingly. When I hear a bike coming quickly towards me, I usually glance back several times to track it since I can't fully tell where the cyclists plans to go.