u/AA5B

They’re not ruining their economy by fighting what makes them great or their people healthy. They have their grift and corruption more under control. They’re not cutting back on investments for their future in favor of investments for their past. They have the attention span to commit to a plan for more than four years at a time.

Altitude of 300m …. This is older than 8 years, this corresponds to the first SpaceX tests …. I don’t see that level of historical detail, but Wikipedia lists a milestone of a recovered falcon 9 after launch to orbit. Hondas technology is somewhere over 15 years old …. And the article doesn’t say whether it’s comparable size or power, so no.

But was it in the beginning? I’m not old enough to remember what it was like when it started but clearly there was a lot of propaganda. The unpopularity seemed to manifest over time, as there was no goal and people dying over something most americans didn’t care about.

Or at least that’s my impression.

And human rights. Due process. Rule of law and respect the constitution. Less inflation. More progress on our environment. Rebuild some infrastructure. Invest in some technologies of the future rather than the past. Leadership that understands basic economics and actually the art of the deal

The problem is we’re over-consuming now, over-populating now, but will feel the effects of lower birth rates in 50+ years. There’s extremely delayed feedback on population trends, but that doesn’t make it untrue.

Even conservatives sometime start from a point of truth. The problem is their solution is to turn back rights for women, opportunities for women. Technically correct, if you have no morals or empathy.

For the rest of us concerned about this possibility, society needs to change _a lot_ to remove obstacles from people who do choose to have children. And this would take a couple generations to take effect so we need to start now, to stabilize the dropping population in 50-100 years

US has the cheap solution: higher immigration than most developed countries. I’m sure we’re going to encourage that while we try to figure out how to make having children more appealing. No one would mess that up, right?

I look at long term trends where the global population peaks in a few decades then heads down all too quickly, and find it important to act to stabilize that at a level a bit below here we are now

Yeah, what are those damn commies going to demand next, human rights?

It will be interesting to learn the exact conditions for each of the tipping points, if only it wasn’t our environment. Tipping

Once jellyfish become the only remaining sea creature, just eat those

Even if he weren’t a Russian simp, why would Ukraine tell _anyone_? An 18 month long attack is just tooo much invested to risk losing the surprise

This is why we can never have good things. There’s always someone who doesn’t care about their fellow human beings, doesn’t care about acting shitty, doesn’t care that their choices impact others. Run into enough anti-social people who will not cooperate with society and the natural reaction is to establish a rule.

I would much prefer we have a civilized society where people care about their impact on others and equally care that others have a right to their preferences and we can all figure out how to live with each other. But people suck. Or too many people do

And yes, people do complain about excessive perfume, body odor, and flatulence. I personally would not legislate these because it’s a lot less frequent, a lot less potential lung damage to bystanders and people show shame. If I complain about someone having too much perfume or it triggers a perfectly normal allergic reaction reaction, you can bet they’ll be embarrassed and likely to try not to reoffend. If I complaint about smokers too close to an entrance stinking up my clothes, making me inhale their ashes, ruining my dining experience, do you really think they’ll be as accommodating?

If you’re a smoker you may be surprised at the distance your smoke impacts other people. The smell, the cloud, The ash extends far beyond a mere ten feet. Where I live the law is 20 feet from an entrance and that’s just not enough.

The problem is you can’t change your path from an entrance because you may have to enter and exit. The problem is further that multiple smokers tend to congregate at the mandated distance so the smoke is much worse. It needs to be significantly farther.

But then it’s worse again in a city area, where the sidewalks are also a bottleneck. I can’t always cross the street to avoid smokers but frequently have to pass right next to them. And I’d like to point out they are the ones inflicting their vice/addiction on others. It should not be my responsibility to get out of the way of their bad habit when their reasonable accommodation would not inflict it on others

Yeah, on the one hand I don’t like vapes as an enabler of bad habits, especially as edibles are so much more available now. Anything you breathe in is going to have a negative impact on your long term health. However vaping means you’re not inflicting your vice on anyone else and you’re avoiding most of the long term health impact of breathing in burnt leaves and chemicals. Vapes still stink but so much less and I can’t really claim second hand smoke danger

But so much the better that you show that courtesy to your fellow humans. Thank you

Just because it doesn’t solve the whole problem, doesn’t mean it’s not a good step forward.

I’m really encouraged that except for regressives in the us, the world seems to finally be turning toward renewable energy, EVs, high speed rail. Even in the US, cities are starting to build transit! There’s a couple more big steps. If we keep taking steps it will turn into moving forward!

Sure, as long as you’re not inflicting it on people trying to get in and out of the building.

Be aware that smoking has a very strong smell that you may not be entirely aware of since you’re around it all the time, plus you’re (hopefully) not asthmatic. You may be surprised how far away that should be

Nice. I think our only real outdoor restriction is “within 20’ of an entrance”. But it’s not enough.

That reminds me I need to complain to one of my favorite restaurants. They have an ash tray outside so people are less likely to litter and it is more than 20’ from the entrance. However it’s too close. When the patio is open, the smokers are just across the sidewalk and it ruins the meal

They’re free to smoke when and where they’re not harming anyone.

Yes, we need to ban cars as well, pretty much all internal combustion. Unfortunately there are technical reasons that will take a while, but we’re making progress. Even worse my country has turned it political with regressives gleefully trying to turn back what progress we’ve made

It works in this case. I believe developing lungs are more susceptible to damage plus children have more life ahead of them to live with damaged lungs. Most importantly we want them to have the opportunity to live without the lung damage we already have.

And of course the practical reason is they already can’t smoke. You’re not taking anything away from them