VoxelVexillologist
Multidimensional Radical Centrist
No bio...
User ID: 64
Even that straightforward approach has some interesting questions to handle about rounding. In this case, 1/3 of 6 seats works out, but it's not hard to look at other states and imagine "24.9 percent of two seats" or things like that.
Most opinions get issued over the summer, so that seems pretty typical. Although IIRC this one was argued last year too, so it's a bit of an odd duck.
total upending of the VRA house of cards, but this is the consequence of previous pragmatisms from SCOTUS.
IIRC most of the legislation in question from the 60s is, as-written, race-neutral. Those laws generally say "on the basis of race", not "against Black people". In practice there was an agreed-upon direction, and nobody until fairly recently (if now) has gotten much push-back on discrimination against white people, especially those in the South ("segregation" always brings to mind George Wallace, and never redlining in Detroit or Chicago --- not endorsing, just observing), and most of the interpretation of the text of the law by the judicial branch has been heavily-colored by this expectation.
But it is an interesting set of questions about how existing norms adopted against an era of bipolar segregation apply to a modern multi-polar racial society. Maybe there are some echoes of how some world leaders (Putin comes to mind) are attempting to claim a multi-polar world. Once we start considering, I dunno, French-speaking Cajuns, it isn't clear that our ideal districts can be planar. And what we'd do if we "ended segregation" and lived in homogenized neighborhoods (IIRC Singapore does this by fiat), how would we achieve what Gingles asks if the other reasons for the decision were still present?
That said, I think the easiest fix to gerrymandering is to move away from geographic districting, probably to a slate-of-candidates system.
The nannies are not breastfeeding in crucial early life years
A brief search suggests wet nursing still exists as a practice in the US, but isn't terribly common. Maybe that'd see a resurgence, but honestly formula babies seen to turn out mostly okay too.
Canada, the UK, or China also have decent universities, and at least the first two are much less likely to cancel my visa over political views expressed online.
Note that Canada is changing policies to reduce the number of student visas issued going forward, and the UK is considering some similar changes.
Most people are racist, but very few Americans publicly gloss their racism as racism.
I'm sad Avenue Q doesn't seem to have any productions going around anymore. There is a high school adaptation, but I feel like that wouldn't be quite the same.
Maybe we could start a left-wing group chat called "The Young Turks", named in honor of the group behind the Armenian genocide. Nah, that'd be too obviously bait.
/s
This reads a lot like the "50 Stalins" dialog, and I at least see a plausible reading where "That would be Hitler" is rhetorically "No, 50 Stalins!" in a way that is pointing out the extremism of one's own side.
I guess it depends on how earnestly "Hitler" is supposed to be taken here, or if it's a clearly-over-the-top suggestion. Still relatively unprofessional for such an organizational forum, though.
I think this is a different argument from the typical "words are violence". This seems to come from the libertarian view that "government is [a monopoly on] violence", and ultimately that all laws the legislators craft are enforced at the threat of violence. You do something that sounds banal like banning the sale of "loosie" individual cigarettes to enforce tax laws and maybe wave hands about "public health", and ultimately if some of the populace resists this seemingly-nonviolent policy, your enforcers will end up killing them. I doubt there's a single law of the state for which sufficiently determined noncompliance won't end with physical violence.
That said, while I think the libertarians have a mostly-self-coherent ethical view (which is more than many can say), I think some level of civilization is worth the trade off in terms of absolute freedoms.
I don't think you're being crazy here: there have been a number of announced foiled plots to attack EU arms manufacturers.
But it's not inconceivable that it was a garden-variety industrial accident, which do happen from time to time. PEPCON in 1988 in Nevada has some loose ends, but I haven't seen foreign sabotage seriously suggested even though the company was supplying solid rocket fuel for both the Space Shuttle and ICBMs. The USCSB series of videos on chemical plant accidents is sobering, if nothing else.
On the gripping hand, telling the public even if there were evidence of malfeasance inherently would raise the stakes towards calls for open warfare, and I can see an argument for responding in a subtle, yet clear-to-the-counterparty way under the table.
Seems like one of those pervasive labeling problems: the Mormons in question label themselves as "Christian", which I think makes the use of it in this context within the realm of reasonable takes, even if the Pope, or maybe even the majority of self-identified Christendom don't accept that label.
Analogously, I don't think "Islamic fundamentalism" as defined from the outside in the West needs to take into detailed account which groups think of each other as infidels. "Actually Hamas aren't Islamic Fundamentalists because Ali was the rightful heir to the throne" is, uh, a take.
I haven't gotten around to reading it yet, but I believe this (maybe less on the specifics of "heresy") is part of Tom Holland's thesis in Dominion. And I think it is true that Social Justice does hew closely to some teachings ("blessed are the poor", "and the last shall be first") which were first popularized by Christianity in a world where vae victus was much closer to the norm.
dunce tutoring
I assume this is a typo for "dance", but I find it rather amusing.
ETA: This dumb brought to you by not being fully awake.
Thanks for looking at the numbers. I guess I was extrapolating from Zimbabwe, which actually did see like 90% of the white population emigrate. Although the most recent stats I've seen actually show growth within the last couple years.
In the long term, is that distinct from (2)? IIRC South Africa has had long-term white emigration that at some point starts to look like the "suitcase" option there, or sometimes worse. There was even that drama earlier this year when the current US administration looked to consider it as ethnic-cleansing-adjacent.
How do those countries handle cases of "odd jobs" and stuff like that? If you're a farmer that makes money by, I dunno, selling grain, how does the government know how much was sold? Or if you sell goods/services direct to consumers? I suppose the tip income is somewhat US-specific and doesn't matter quite as much any more, but there are a bunch of less-easily-trackable income sources that would seem to make this a bit hard in the general case.
I've heard some anecdotes at times describing Manhattan positively this way. Sometimes Boston or SF, too. If you can afford rent downtown, some blue places can be like this. But for some reason in the nicer places the rent is really high...
You can reduce the number/duration of total car trips if you manage to densify the other infrastructure too: if your towering apartments are walking distance (within a block or two?) of the grocery store, bar, gym, or employer. Probably not to zero, but it'd help.
While Houston's lax (lacks?) zoning laws have arguably been successful at keeping the rent reasonable, it does get lots of criticism for its urban design and walkability. Amusingly, people do cite its (non-housing price) approach to homelessness as working better than most.
After the LeMond-Fignon battle there hasn't been a French winner of the TDF.
They didn't schedule the final stage as a time trial again until 2024, which I was honestly a bit surprised at.
Downtown courthouses often don't have good parking options, especially short-term. If you live (and maybe even work) in the 'burbs, when you have to show up downtown for one day, or maybe a week, the bus or train isn't a terrible option. For me, the most convenient option is to park at the office and take the bus directly downtown from there.
I could take the bus (directly!) to work, but it's 3x the time commitment as driving, and there isn't any shelter from sun/rain at the stops at either end. So I drive. On nice days I'll bike.
I haven't taken the bus literally anywhere else in the city I live in.
This might work, but I doubt stores that close together can match the selection of the one I have to drive five minutes to. It probably takes a minute or more just to walk across the store. Some of it is duplicative (multiple brands of milk), but you'd still lose selection pretty fast.
Great question!
This is a tic that makes me think LLM these days. Not necessarily accusing you of using one here, more commenting on the sad closing of the linguistic frontier as various phrasings become associated with "artificial" text.
barriers to entry which effectively exclude the lowest-quality providers(and lots of others, it needs to be acknowledged
The extent to which 20th century unions were also racial/ethnic spoils systems is, IMO, underappreciated for political reasons. Not saying it always worked that way, but there isn't a shortage of "and then they hired/imported (across state or sometimes country borders) minority scabs workers to break the strike" tales. But it's inconvenient to observe this because "union labor" and minority workers are supposed to be part of the same big tent.
Maybe people will start noticing more if union labor keeps swinging right.

Without drastically changing how representatives work, Montana's one house seat isn't going to reflect its entire populace. By some definitions, single-seat states are the most gerrymandered (slaps roof "this district can fit so many minorities without giving any of them representation!"), although clearly not so by local legislative intent.
More options
Context Copy link