In what way was he better on spending? He managed to increase the deficit every single year, even before COVID.

> He might speak like a crazy person.

He does speak like a crazy person. He advocates for crazy policies. People from his administration are crazy people and advocate for crazy policies.

Travel budgets are also non-existent now.

All in all, it's still a good job. But it is significantly worse that before, and the trajectory does not seem great.

Kids are a normal part of our society. We were all kids at one point. Our lives were all made better by reasonable accomodations that others made for our safety and wellbeing. If the outside world is only designed for adults, then there is an impossible burden on parents to raise children.

I think we can and often do make reasonable accomodations for kids. Like checking IDs at the bar or checking heights before letting people on a rollercoaster.

What that level of responsibility is for websites, I'm not sure. But it's not zero.

That and, the whole thing will ultimately have to be a grift, right? How are they going to monetize their new city? Even with the best aspirations, this still becomes a corporate town centered around helping some oligarchs make their money back.

So what happens instead? Each company comes up with their own detailed, up-to-date, heavily skewed set of rules. And we agree to use their private court system or go to another company that does the same thing but slightly different.

I feel I have a right to make my decisions based on such information also.

That doesn't mean the publisher shouldn't have liability here also. They are damaging someone's reputation, and should be held responsible if the claims are untrue.

But if the claims are true, then the damaged reputation is warranted. That's one of the consequences of doing something bad. You only have a right to have a good reputation if you don't do anything bad.

Personally, I have a problem with the viewpoint that democratic governments are some sort of adversary when in actuality, private businesses are the entities that have no accountability and we have zero direct control over. I agree there should be independent criticism of government, but IMO state media from a democratic government is naturally going to be better overall than only having private media.

Personally, I think money is power, and I want to know about power disparities to better protect myself. But I understand there are factors to consider.

I would go further and actually argue that you need more road and sewer capacity because someone inserted a blank patch of land between dense areas.

The tax is an incentive to develop when the land's value is high. The city is basically saying that you have an obligation to build something useful or sell the land to someone who will.

I'm interested to see what happens. I'm hopeful that it will be good for urbanization.

Surrounding towns will probably not do LVT, which will also be interesting.

Consider a world with zero ads. There wouldn't be annoying interruptions. But we also wouldn't ever learn which new movies are playing, which political candidates are running, etc, except from 2nd and 3rd hand sources with several layers of spin (and misunderstanding/misinformation) on the information.

I personally hate the current state of direct advertising. There seems to be zero prevention of fraud and zero work towards making ads less annoying. I wish that consensual forms of media could convey all that information instead, in an unbiased, informed, and timely manner. Unfortunately that isn't currently happening for several reasons (media underfunding, editorial conflicts of interest, personalized content streams that preclude any sort of unexpected news).

I'm not sure what the solution is overall. I think if every company didn't deliver absolute buckets of trash to their own email marketing lists, then we wouldn't block them and they wouldn't have to pay to ruin our other media.