WTVF - NewsChannel5 - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for WTVF - NewsChannel5:
> MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
Internet Archive - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Internet Archive:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
I’m glad she is suing him. It was insane how he doubled down on his actions. There are too many Judges who either racist or insane assholes without any empathy.
Associated Press - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Associated Press:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
Internet Archive - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Internet Archive:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
Nix was arrested last week on federal charges after Tischauser shared the results of his investigation with the U.S. Army.
An Army spokesperson says Nix has now been booted from the service.
“It’s a problem when we have avowed white supremacists with access to the training provided by the U.S. Army, getting weapons put into his hands and then moonlighting as a recruiter for a white-supremacist organization,” Tischauser noted.
I guarantee you he’s a drop in the bucket in terms of white supremacy in the U.S. military. They need to go through their ranks with a fucking scouring pad.
The commander in charge of investigating the matter did not believe disciplinary action was needed.
Jesus fucking Christ. Those people, at the very minimum, should get a dishonorable discharge. Really, they should be in Leavenworth for that. The Nazis may be gone, but they’re still promoting an enemy of the U.S.
I want to know what kind of discharge he got, especially since it was so quick: was it sufficiently dishonerable, or did some sympathizer sneak him out with a “general” before they had a chance to properly court-martial him and send him to Leavenworth?
Nevertheless, a nationwide housing drive risks stoking homeowners’ ire in a country where the middle class derives most of its wealth from real estate and two-thirds of dwellings are occupied by their owners.
That’s the thing that nobody wants to talk about. I’m constantly hearing people saying that “NIMBYs” are the cause of the housing crisis, which isn’t untrue, but it doesn’t really get to the heart of the issue. Why do NIMBYs exist? I think the prevailing assumption is that they’re just greedy, miserly boomers who love money and hate young people, but I think the problem is systemic, not simply caused by some individuals who happen to have character flaws.
It’s easy to call these property owners greedy, because it’s not your wealth. If it were your wealth, I bet many of you would be NIMBYs too. Because, again, it’s not just a matter of you having better moral character than them, it’s about the incentives, and how people with opposing financial interests have different incentives. People with wealth have an incentive to protect their wealth, and people without wealth have an incentive to try and acquire wealth.
This is why I’m a critic of capitalism, and why I want to move toward something that could be called socialism (although, not necessarily a Marxist or Marxist-Leninist conception of socialism). I think capitalism creates too many oppositional relationships. It causes people to have opposing interests. Owners and workers, companies and consumers, home buyers and home owners. I think it would be better to try and build a system around our shared interests, around the things we have in common, as opposed to one where we are constantly in opposition to one another.
We all need housing. It is a universal human need. So why have a system that incentivizes some to restrict other’s access to it? Why have a system that creates an adversarial relationship between those who have a home (and the wealth associated with it) and those who don’t?
All of these oppositional, adversarial relationships cause conflict and division.
I live in a rural area and I’m sort of a NIMBY. I live in my area because there are forests and fields and nature. I didn’t build a house, I bought one built in the 1970s. I don’t think everything needs to be growing all the time, new houses are being built on every road around here and what was a nice rural area is gradually becoming the same Walmart and McDonalds suburbs as you see all across the USA. If I wanted to live in suburbs it would have been easy to move to suburbs.
The board of supervisors here is always saying “We need more jobs and we need more growth.” Ironic because the majority of them are developers, and my property taxes have gone up over 12% each of the past 3 years.
I don’t think the housing crisis is being caused by people who live in rural areas and don’t want there to be endless urban and suburban sprawl. Most people want to live in urban areas, because those areas are where the jobs, shops, and infrastructure are. Sprawl is expensive, inefficient, and bad for the environment. It should be prevented as much as possible. But, the only way to prevent it is to make housing in urban areas, the area where people want to live because it’s where everything is, more affordable, and that means building more, dense housing in those areas. The real NIMBYs are people who own low density, single family homes in urban areas and don’t want higher density housing to be built in that area because it would bring down their property values.
like thedemonbuer said many folk would love to live in the city and many live further due to cost. I live in the suburbs of a city because of cost but I would absolutely love to be in a condo in the city proper and estatic to live in a highrise downtown. Theoretically these should be some of the cheapest per square foot given the efficiency with building.
This is why I’m a critic of capitalism, and why I want to move toward something that could be called socialism (although, not necessarily a Marxist or Marxist-Leninist conception of socialism).
Other nations like Canada, the UK and Australia operate under a social democracy, where the gov’t “seeks to reform capitalism through policies such as progressive taxation, universal healthcare, and workers’ rights, while still maintaining a market economy.” Source
While our issues (in Canada) can sometimes mirror that of America, we have programs like universal healthcare that blunt capitalism’s brute force.
That said we still face the encroachment of neo-liberalist ideologies that have warped our social structure into something more like what America is, ie: far too many former public institutions have been privatized (which happened after Reagan/Thatcher’s trickle down economic force had its way).
Imo we’re gonna need a big bonfire to move the needle back to a social-based structure, if for no other reason than the rich will absolutely stonewall any regulation or limitation on their wealth-hoarding.
“Taking on critics might be an exciting and cathartic marketing tactic, but I suspect Megalopolis will need critics championing it when it actually comes out,” Ebiri writes. “And making up fake quotes from our heroes is probably not the best way to get us on your side."
Certainly true of some critics, but a lot of them are so devoted to giving their authoritative opinion on a movie that they would never take money to change it unless you’re talking a shitload. There are also some, fewer all the time I admit, with integrity. Roger Ebert would never have taken a bribe for a good review. I doubt Leonard Maltin would.
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.