Absolutely, I live a metro area with about 5 million people, it’s not an international hub of anything. It’s big enough to offer most of what you get in a big city aside from public transport, since our population density is wayyyyy lower.
Is it really worth it for your back yard to be 3 feet of sidewalk and a 3ft^2 patch of unruly grass? Why is that grass even there? Feels like an insult to me. Just draw a frowny face on a block of concrete. People aren’t meant to live like that.
deleted by creator
Amazing what passes for a “decent back garden” in the UK. My “back garden” is a 1/4 acre (1000m^2 ) on a property worth $140k USD including the 1200ft^2 (120m^2 ) house.
On the downside my exterior walls are made of glue and sawdust, and my interior walls are made of paper and powdered gypsum.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Enjoy eating rocks, I guess?
They can open every piece of mail and read the contents.
Pretty sure they can. It’s how a lot of private equity firms finance their purchases. Also the reason that Toys R Us went under. They were doing fine except the massive loan payments they had to pay. Those loans financed the companies’ buyout.
Ah yes! That way my kid can definitely die of hyperthermia in my arms walking 5 miles to the grocery in 100°F instead of almost certainly not dying in my car.
Controls on coordination are a complete joke, though. I’m pretty sure she could literally publicly release a script with directors notes and say “I want this PAC to make this commercial and air it in these markets and timeslots” and it would be legal.
There IS a law stipulating the number of justices. The number is not set by the constitution, which I think is where you got the idea. Changing the law that sets the number would require an act of Congress, which means a 2/3rds majority in the Senate because of the filibuster rule. 50% could overturn the filibuster rule and then stack the court, but 2 right leaning Democrats from Republican states refuse to overturn the filibuster rule, so it’s just not possible unless more progressives are in the Senate.
Getting a more progressive Senate is hard because it’s not proportional representation. North Dakota with a population under 1 million gets the same number of Senators as California with 40 million. Rural voters are wildly over-represented in the Senate.
On that last part, you’re not understanding the full awfulness of the ruling. The court ruled that the court decides what is and is not an official act. Biden has no immunity because this supreme court will 100% rule that anything Biden does is not an “official act”.
Biden doesn’t. Trump does. The court ruled that the court decides what is and is not an official act. The court will rule that nothing Biden does is an official act, while Trump could literally murder random people on 34th st, and it would be an official act.
What would that have solved exactly? Those seats wouldn’t have been won by anyone further left anyway. The problem is that North Dakota and California get the same number of Senators, despite the former having literally 50x more people.
Which is why keeping the filibuster has generally been in the best interest of the left, even if it’s not ideal right now. I think the Democrats are absolutely fooling themselves if they think the R’s will respect the filibuster if it’s in their way at this point though.
Requires an act of congress and elimination of the filibuster. Not possible with the current makeup of the Senate. Need more blue senators, which is hard because California gets the same number of Senators as North Dakota, which has the same population as a small apartment complex in LA.
So we need record turnout for that. Vote.
He’s not a dictator. Most of those would never pass in the Senate.
And then got virtually all of their demands pushed through?
I saw the Grumman LLV mail truck in the thumbnail and just assumed US. I had no idea you guys used them too. Neat!