I’ve come to learn that if a couple people are wrong, it’s on them, but if it’s a lot of people, it’s the system.
They could have taken advantage of this and run a paid shuttle or guided hikes or sold timed tickets to limit the number of people per hour, etc. Maybe only charge people who live outside the region, or offer tickets for a suggested donation.
I’m not saying it needs to be merchandised with a gift shop. The point is, there’re a ton of creative ways to limit the number of tourists in that spot at one time with a side effect of revenue to pay for the extra load on public services. But instead they just throw up their hands?
Sounds like a missed opportunity. There are a ton of way dumber things people flock to see. I would think public interest in forest art installations is something that should be encouraged.
I agreed with you before reading the article, but it turns out it’s on private property. So no transport infrastructure, and the property owners would have had to shell out a while bunch from their own pockets to do anything.
They also tried putting up signs and hoping visitors would self regulate, but that obviously didn’t work out. Hard to blame anybody except selfish assholes in this case.
Will only happend if Las Vegas runs out of water and lose population. Then they’ll want the related jobs, income, and tax revenue. Until LV dies, it’ll never happen.
If it’s any consolation, Nevada and a lot of the landlocked states are probably gonna get teabagged by climate change anyways, haha. Arizona is running out of water. My city in Montana nearly ran out of water a handful years ago, the largest one in the state. Like, out out. The river was only six feet deep and very narrow.
We nearly ran out of water again this past year when all the snow melted at once due to an early heatwave and cause the river to jump over 16 feet, which destroyed the water treatment facility and destroyed entire towns and national parks along with it. I moved to a different state after that. Somewhere less volatile.
The police murder innocent people, lie to us about it, and get away with it entirely without punishment. They are a street gang that operates without regard to the law.
I wish a prosecutor somewhere would look at the pervasive pattern of this behavior and bring a Rico case against police departments and union leaders engaging in coverups. Sadly if one did they would probably turn up dead shortly afterwards.
The way people treat school buses on the road is despicable. Every illegal pass of a stopped school bus should be punished far more harshly, if someone can’t stop for a bus filled with kids they don’t deserve to be on the road at all.
I’m a school bus driver and last year someone drove around my bus on the left while my 8-ways were on and the stop sign was out and hit a student who was crossing the street after exiting the bus, bumping her in the shoulder and running over her foot. I got the plate number but the cops did nothing with it. Passing the bus in the opposite direction is something I even expect these days (although it’s still illegal of course) since people are too busy looking at their phones to pay attention, but going around a lit-up bus in the same direction means seeing a stopped school bus and then consciously deciding “fuck them kids”.
Fortunately, the girl was not hurt somehow, but it still made me want to fuck that driver up bad.
Horrible to hear about the incident and the fact that the police did not care. In my mind school buses should be the most protected vehicles on the road, treated the same way as first responders.
They said that with only the plate number and not a sighting of who was driving, they couldn’t charge anybody. I talked to the girl who was run over and she said she saw the driver very clearly. I relayed this to the police and they still did nothing.
If these drugs help people then fantastic, but I find it infuriating how little press the dangers of sugar gets.
We are finally waking up to the fact that fat in foods was never the cause of people getting fat. Terrible studies decades ago created a whole generation that shunned (or at least tried to shun) fatty foods, but never looked at the danger that sugar and carbs are to our health. Billions were wasted on chemicals and drugs that reduced the fat in processed foods that ultimately did very little in helping folks lose weight. Sugar, which is seemingly in everything we eat, on the other hand, has rarely been accused to being the cause for people’s weight problems. At least until fairly recently. Now the tide is turning and there are certain diets (such as keto) which finally show that cutting carbs and sugar can get results.
If these new drugs listed in the article can produce similar or better results with little consequences then fantastic. But sometimes cutting something out, it better than adding more drugs into one’s diet.
Yes, but nutrition has always been a battlefield and will continue to be one, because it is the contact point between health, personal choice, belief, economics, marketing, self-control, there are always new fad diets and controversies that get pumped by tension between researchers and manufacturers e.g. fat, sugar, gluten, vitamins, antioxidants, wheat, aspartame, salt, cholesterol in eggs, hydrogenated fat, and this will go on.
About the personal part, I’ve got a very good friend who is a super grounded, mild-manered and knowledgeable retired schoolteacher who turns crazy when anyone mentions nutrition and diets, not because she hates the concept, but because she has this set of rules to combine foods to stay healthy, like it’s her religion. She’s also clearly overweight 😑. It’s about the need/illusion of self-control and the industry taking advantage of that to sell shit.
No, that’s what’s so surprising. She seems to be extremely rational, empathetic and understanding until you casually mention the word “diet”, then all hell breaks loose about “matching foods or else they rot in your stomach to produce infection and…wa wa wo wa wa wo wa …” :shrug:
This is what happens when people have just enough knowledge (especially scientific knowledge) to be dangerous but not enough to actually fully understand what they are talking about. Like they watched a couple of YT videos or read a couple of articles (but not research papers) and now think they know everything about a topic.
but I find it infuriating how little press the dangers of sugar gets.
I think this there is part of the problem though. Even when we accept that the last thing that was bad for you, isn’t actually as bad for you as we thought, we fail to learn the lesson in favour of pouncing on the next food that’s bad for you.
Moderation is the name of the game. And I don’t even really mean in terms of how much you eat, though obviously that matters. But more so in terms of what and how much, as a combination.
Like… the amount of sugar in commercial bread is nuts and really isn’t required, but it’s being added in the process because lollies sell better, so to speak. But you could comfortably remove most, if not all of it, and still have perfectly delicious bread.
So, don’t cut stuff out, but do think about how and how much you use.
Yeah, but it’s marketing jargon to make it seem like less of a deal. When someone says “over half” do you immediately assume they’re talking in the 90% range, or closer to 60%?
But is that fair? Shouldn’t prisons be places you can have all of the amenities you enjoyed in life before you broke the law? What are our taxes being spent on if not fiber internet and Netflix in every cell? Signed, SBFaltaccountNERDSlol
You go to jail to be held before trial. He isn’t even guilty yet even tho we know he is.
We all know he broke the law but it hasn’t been proven yet. So I guess the question is, is this how all people deserve to be treated before it’s been demonstrated through due processing that you are guilty?
What happened to innocent before proven guilty?
Don’t get me wrong this guy sucks but there’s something to be said about the fact that he’s in JAIL and not prison.
But I can’t be the only one who thinks these people defending him are extremely sus. They were in other threads too, like the one about the baby-killing nurse; they were in there defending her, making similar arguments to the ones found in here, and brigading and downvoting anybody who disagreed with them. I think it might be connected. Could they be from some kind of trolling group, I wonder?
It’s really not fair to reduce a philosophy like veganism to “choices for stuff” and denying your right to follow it, which is legally protected where I’m from at least, to “get reduced”. It’s not like he’s complaining that he can’t change the channel on the radio.
Not to question msnbc or anything, but these stats seem like utter bullshit. Only 10% of offerings are remote? They must be including fast food and manufacturing jobs in their data, because when I look at LinkedIn it’s like 70%.
Unfortunately for LinkedIn I found out a lot are fake and they dont actually hire you remote, and they tell you straight up at the first interview… They’re basically doing it as SEO and wasting everybody’s time
There is an enormous difference between “clocking” hours and “working” those hours. I’ve known some of those types with ridiculous amounts of overtime hours for municipalities and I don’t believe for a second they aren’t just stealing from tax payers.
It’s absolutely just stealing from tax payers at that level. 7 years of 95-100 hour weeks would kill you if you actually worked those hours, even as a cop.
Waa this a pre-written article? Some of them smiled, some didn’t. Some people smile for mugshots. If no one smiled the article would have been about that.
news
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.