Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)NE
Posts
32
Comments
381
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • They get paid 274k...DC is expensive, but anyone that can't live very comfortably on that is awful with money. Being awful with money will lose you a TS clearance because it makes you susceptible to bribery by spies. I would think it would also be a disqualifier for a SCOTUS judge for the same reason.

    I think maintaining a TS clearance should be a requirement for all positions above a certain level in the federal government. Not because they need access to TS information, but to ensure they are at a lower risk of bribery, adversarial interests, and criminal activity. Getting a TS clearance isn't terribly hard. Just generally have your act together. As long as you aren't a train wreck, a drug addict, a criminal, an untrustworthy asshat, or have connections to adversaries, you will pass adjudication. TLDR: A TS clearance would ensure high level government employees are minimumly functional humans.

  • Another area where electric wins is smoking. My electric smoker is much easier to use and produces superior results to using charcoal. A really nice electric smoker can be purchased for a few hundred dollars. The electricity it uses is cheaper than charcoal too.

    I know how a lot of people here feel about eating meat at all, but considering the current situation, anything that is better buys time to make even bigger cuts.

    Beef is a big culprit with emissions, and I'll tell you what, a well smoked humble and cheap chicken drumstick will taste amazing.

    ETA: It isn't just the emissions from burning the charcoal that are saved. It is also the emissions producing and transporting the charcoal to their usage point. High voltage AC is pretty hard to beat in efficient transport of energy.

  • Believe it or not, the woke backlash thing seems to be false:

    https://www.truthorfiction.com/pink-floyds-woke-50th-anniversary-rainbow-controversy/

    Anybody that is a fan or even old enough to know who Pink Floyd has seen that 50 year old album cover.

    Anyone following them where they would see that post is going to be aware of this.

    As much as I hate the anti-woke stuff from the right, it appears this is pure sensationalism.

    This means two things. One, they (the right in the US) go on about it so much, people don't bother fact checking. Two, the left isn't immune to BS.

  • You don't get a tax break for personal vehicles. If you use it for business purposes for a business you operate (i.e. own), you can claim it as a business expense.

    Cars are subsided by our zoning, minimum parking requirements, and car centric transport infrastructure.

  • In the US, the majority live in a place where having a car is all but mandatory. People don't know any different and are sold propaganda that anything else is of the boogeyman of the day. So when people want bike infrastructure, transit, zoning changes, etc, they freak out.

  • Why would an autistic person need an anti psychotic? I'm not an MD, but that just doesn't make much sense? Also, in this case, making it worse, I would think this reaction would be in his medical records that they should have reviewed...

  • Maybe, maybe not. You get what you measure. Bad incentives are a major contributor to the corruption that ultimately led to the downfall of the USSR.

    Good policy and incentives make the difference. Capitalism and communism aren't all that different. In practice, they are still largely hierarchical with a few controlling things.

  • Maybe. It really depends on your location. Biking on the only road out of my neighborhood would be all but suicide because there is no shoulder, it is high traffic, and places without enough forward visibility for cars to react in some places. It isn't due to lack of demand. I see plenty of people on bicycles in areas where it is reasonably safe to do som In other places I have lived, I agree with you.

    I really hate blanket generalizations like:

    There is risk, but it's still a lot lower than the risk associated with inactivity.

    That also assumes that the person is inactive otherwise. Some people make an effort to exercise, others have physically demanding jobs. It also assumes the level of risk where it will vary quite a bit depending on location.

  • TCNs, or third country nationals. People from neither the US or locals.

    From my understanding the reason why is the almighty dollar. They don't get paid nearly as much as our troops and contractors, but still a lot more than they would make at home. There is quite a bit of info about it if you do a quick search.

  • Also a cinnabon. And a coffee shop called green bean. And a pizza shop. And much more. Sometimes DFACs 1 and 4 gets old.

    This is serious. If the USAF sets up shop anywhere we plan on having a presence for a while, there will be some amenities. Even if the base is bombed on a regular basis.