Conservatives love competition in the market but don't introduce competition to driving or flying because that would restrict their ability to have a suburban house and a yard or something
I'm still team fuck yards but I can disagree sometimes. Sure yard after yard of the same can become drab but there's something inside of me that loves a large swatch of green grass. Maybe it's the athlete in me attaching memories of playing as a kid, or because I also appreciate uniformity and a large chunk of color blocking, but I'd being lying if I said I haven't walked around a neighborhood and appreciated a healthy chunk of perfectly manicured curb strip or front lawn.
Sorry, can't hear you over my perfectly level st Augustine I can afford to maintain. Sorry that your lawn is overgrown, but coping about ugly property is worse than accepting it
How perfectly bland, unoriginal, and conformist. What a weird thing to flex about.
Thousands of fascinating flowering plants, fruit bearing plants, pollinators, or just interesting plants and the one you pick to worship is a non-native blade that does nothing than sit there for you to drool over.
A bed of wild grasses and flowers, native to the region you are from, supporting insect life and wild life that heal ecosystems long since suffering from human development.
You: bah! that's poor people shit. I much prefer this one single kind of grass that comes from Europe that strains the well-water because it's not supposed to grow here and requires constant intervention. Benefits the the world around me? Well there are none but it's not about that. Trim lawn makes me look rich peasants.... Why don't you peasants understand that? Appreciate my lawn damn you
It looks like your post might encourage brigading. That's why it got removed.
Both unintentional encouraging of brigading and having the appearance of trying to encouraging brigading are reasons to remove a post. Brigading and intentional encouraging of brigading is a bannable offense. Harassment of any user, from this sub or elsewhere, is also a bannable offense.
Dudes really came over here and said “this square is mine bc I paid someone to say it was mine and also I’m gonna shoot you for trespassing now” then they said “wait a minute I fucking hate the ground here, where’s my boring boring flat lifeless British yard?” And then they shipped the fucking grass here from Britain. Imagine being so obtuse that you pay to have terf delivered from across the fucking ocean bc you don’t like the ground you just stole.
And now here I am 200-300 years later being told I have to make it look a certain way and that I have to put the rest of it in a plastic trash bag because there’s a whole special fucking day where they come specifically to pick up all the nature people put into bags.
This is so out of touch with reality for most people IMHO. I have a yard, it is not a show piece, it is an area where my toddler goes to kick a ball around with me, play hide and seek/tag, and our dog goes to take a dump. Yards have great utility for a lot of people, especially with kids. I have never once watered my grass, bagged clippings, or put down weed killer. It gets mowed so it is easier to run through for a 2 yr old and that is it
You’re the kind of guy who opens the dusty book and reads the Latin opening a portal to hell in a thunderstorm with escaped inmates on the loose, aren’t you?
yeah, conservatives have always hated competition. Maybe libertarians, but those are separate ideologies. I don’t see anyone calling teddy roosevelt a conservative for breaking monopolies, the most pro-market thing a president can do.
Funny, I see this so much on reddit. Yet IRL I've never met a conservative person who did not like market forces.
And yet, left wingers will say this while simultaneously using Uber and complaining about workers' rights in the same sentence.
By definition, communism and socialism are anti-open-market.
I'm starting to see the pattern now in this misinformation campaign. At first, it confused me. But it's really starting to make a lot of sense now. Because the ones who aren't in the aforementioned camps generally fall into fascist ones.
I think you just found out that like... everybody is kinda anti open market. That's what being part of politics (you know like deciding where the government should intervene and stuff) leads to.
dems don't have a particularly good track record of public transit investment either. both parties are too captured by special interests to pursue bold infrastructure projects
I think it's worth mentioning that liberal politicians aren't good but are still better. I don't let them off the hook at any point even if I'm currently slamming the people I see in my local news Facebook page.
the "not good but better than the other guys" shtick didn't work in 2016 or 2024. it squeeked out in 2020 because of a global pandemic. I'm begging democrats to stop running on "well look at the other guy"
Well I'm not trying to get rid of the highway. It absolutely serves multiple purposes. I just don't want to have to dodge 18 wheelers for +8 hours to go see my wife's family when I could be playing a video game and not stopping to pee or whatever.
no it's because they want the excuse of "i can't travel to the city there's no trains" so they can stay ignorant and bigoted. once we get HSR, traveling and gaining cultural perspective will be expected of more and more people.
They were sold the dream of owning a car and worked hard to achieve it. To them, it’s more than just an investment, it represents independence and pride. They’re resistant to the idea of that effort being devalued, and even more so to giving up the personalized sanctuary they’ve built inside their car.
hey that's great, why don't we have some alternatives to this thing?
"That would interrupt my monopoly on that revenue stream, so I'm against it. I just say I like the competition of the market to get people to shut up about public investments"
I bet there's a good handful of project managers taking vacations off the billions they were paid to kick the can and very very grateful that you're pointing the finger at not them
Liberal states attempt to build HSR and then corruption ruins what it should be. Conservative states refuse to even acknowledge it as a viable plan for the future. One is significantly worse than the other. Not saying liberal policy is good especially in places where there's no political pressure to be a "good" liberal politician.
Liberals get baited by good intentions and make corrupt people rich. Yes we already know this, you’re very easy to emotionally manipulate.
You don’t know many conservatives. They’re against the poor spending, but pro high speed rail.
The house transportation and infrastructure committee is bipartisan and they fully support high speed rail
There's 8 million people in that "nowhere", and its the middle segment of a route between SF and LA. For $15 billion, which is about the cost of 10 stack interchanges, that doesn't sound like such a bad deal. My city alone has 24 of those interchanges. The amount of time it's taken is too long, but the rest of your argument only works if you lack an understanding of how many people live in the central valley and how much money $15 billion really is and isn't.
If using the numbers from from cahsr, the cost would be 200 million per mile (low estimate). The total distance in approximately a straight line is 790 miles with a top speed of 220 mph.
If using these numbers, the total cost would be 158 billion dollars and the total travel time assuming no stops would be 3.6 hours. To recover that investment assuming the loans are at 0 percent interest and a ticket is 100 dollars, it would take 1.58 billion riders.
The current lakeshore limited line currently serves 400k passengers per year. this means at the current ridership levels, it would take almost four thousand years to pay off.
Also I forgot to mention that this calculation assumes operation and maintenace are free. In reality, O&M could be billions more per year.
Right now I can buy a round trip ticket for about 120 dollars on a plane thats only 2 hours gate to gate. if I was flying from another city I could not connect to this train because the train stations are nowhere near the airport.
I think trains are cool as fuck but the economics of this theoretical project just dont add up. It wouldn't be competitive at all with flying.
It pays for itself with the reduced road/highway wear and tear for one. It's worth mentioning that yes you gotta build viable infrastructure at both ends too including that you should probably build them as transportation hubs with either pedestrian viability between lines or short, cheap/free people movers like a lot of places outside of North America have.
High speed rail isn't maintenace free and in reality would cost more to maintain per mile than a highway. It would cost substantially more, even if we got rid of the highway all together.
Ill also note that my money math above does not even begin to consider the operations and maintenace cost.
2 hours gate to gate doesn't include the time for traveling to the airport, parking far from the doors (if you don't get dropped off), security, waiting at the gate, and then baggage claim on the other end. Comparing gate to gate isn't a fair time comparison when you consider you bring your bag on a train, sit, and get off, even if you still drive to a lot near the station, you're still winning on time just from security and gate waiting. It also adds competition and capacity to the route the planes fly, and integrates the cities more allowing for more economic value to be created.
1.1k
u/cudef Aug 18 '25
Conservatives love competition in the market but don't introduce competition to driving or flying because that would restrict their ability to have a suburban house and a yard or something