They pollute more than you think, and using concrete is very rare in certain parts of the world. Outside of elevated roads I’ve never seen in used in my area or any part of the northern US.

I must say, you’re the first person I’ve seen to cite ChatGPT as a source.

I literally just told you two things that make them more dangerous, what makes them safer?

I don’t fully understand why SUVs are more profitable. What makes them worth more than a minivan or wagon for instance. I know premium versions of both those vehicle types exist (actually I’m pretty sure some of the only new wagons you can buy today are from premium German brands.)

We would also have to get rid of tires to do that, tires pollute a lot. And roads too, heavier vehicles wear out roads faster, and asphalt requires petroleum products to produce.

I’d wager most people have been in one considering how common they are, doesn’t make them any less terrible. Size is definitely a problem, they are very space inefficient, and quite dangerous. The center of gravity is very high, and because the front end is high up, anyone hit by it is more likely to end up under the vehicle. The solution is to lower them down to make them safer, and replace them with safer and more efficient vehicles like station wagons and minivans.

If you live in a place where this is becoming the norm, that’s exactly what you do.

A far more above board and less vibes-based way to pay.

It’s important to require disclosure of the service fee. In my experience usually listed at the bottom of the menu. I know at least in some instances there are crowdsourced master lists of restaurants with hidden fees, and enforcement of disclosure requirements seems to have stepped up.

I actually support phasing tips out for service fees, less dodgy and less influenced by cognitive biases from customers toward certain genders or ethnicities of staff.

One of my favorite things about Reddit was that whenever two Germans found each other in a comment section they would always start a long reply chain in German. I always thought it was cute.

I have my own cart that I walk to the store with, I never have much trouble with it, and it’s super useful when I need to get heavy things like milk. I’ve never brought it on the metro as I’ve never had any reason to, but it would not be too difficult to do so. It’s no more difficult than carrying a suitcase or two to the airport.

I’m not vegetarian, but I will stand by peanut butter being the best sandwich filling for packing lunch. Nothing compares to its ability to keep well in a room temperature ziploc bag.

All the stories in this thread are ridiculous, not untrue, but very weird.

Product loss is a problem, and can threaten a store’s ability to operate, especially in disadvantaged communities where there aren’t many options for shopping. That said, what the fuck is everyone thinking? Why do people care about like one guy not scanning or accidentally taking one item, you’re wasting more resources dealing with it then if you just ignored it.

The actual solution? Exit gates that open when you scan your receipt, maybe combined with some system that weighs the whole order to make sure it makes sense. Completely automated, no shouting, easy to implement because the technology already exists on transit systems and many other things.

I don’t get why this is a problem, though I’ve never seen anything like this at any nearby grocery store.

Me who exclusively uses self checkout and never does this (in no small part due to the no button being bright red.)

Back in the day it did because people could keep their lights off for longer. But now they need to keep their AC on more.

True, I’d expect pretty wild conspiracies like flat earth and chemtrails to be laughed at here, but a disturbing number of lemmings and even progressives in general follow a set of less outlandish - but more insidious - conspiracies that usually fall into the “collusion and malice” type. I could say that General Motors et al. killed most of the US passenger rail and streetcar systems, and most people here would accept that as a fact. Case closed, capitalism is evil and should be abolished, every bad thing is cause by someone with I’ll intentions making it worse.

I, however, tend to be suspicious of those sorts of takes in general. Returning to the alleged “streetcar conspiracy”I’ve actually done quite a lot of research into this and can decidedly say that the primary cause of the decline of mass transit in the US was… There were at least 5 primary causes, none of which were shadowy groups deliberately working to destroy it. Rather it was killed by a changing urban environment, failures to adapt to modal shifts, legacy streetcar systems just generally sucking, and local governments taking transit for granted and assuming that they can hold streetcar companies to exacting standards while expecting them to remain solvent, all while not considering it their problem.

I could go on, and can send some sources and references (maybe not direct links though) if you’d like to learn more. But my main point is that far too many people assume there’s a nefarious actor pulling the strings the whole time when it’s usually several factors lining up all the holes in the Swiss cheese and creating a negative externality we still talk about to this day.

There (usually) isn’t a conspiracy, and if there is it’s unlikely to be anywhere near as all-encompassing as you think. People say there is because it gives them someone to blame, helps channel their anger at something tangible, and just makes a good story.

I exist in several categories of people who’s right to exist have been threatened many, many times throughout history, I agree that everything is political, or rather, that politics encompasses everything.

However, not every discussion should become politically oriented, as it’s not particularly the most productive in many cases. This is most prominent on the internet, where nuance, which is ESSENTIAL for productive political discourse, is often absent. I find much political discussion. This is especially true in dialogues where it is either discussed on a broad scale, or where it is discussed in a reactionary manner. When my answers to political topics are so often “it depends”, this stuff tends to be quite straining, especially when my attempts to create dialogue are shot down.

In short “not everything is political” exists because you’re either detailing a discussion to talk about how horrible everything is, or you’re on the internet and internet politics just suck.

Friendly reminder that rowhouses exist and essentially break reality with how they provide the best of both worlds.

I, for one, think that it is rather mentally healthy to engage in the occasional constructive debate with those whom I disagree.

My latter comment has more to do with my belief that this community is not necessarily the best place for such content or discussion to be hosted.

That might technically work, but in the real world, it wouldn’t make much sense. Sure you could set something on fire to commit a robbery nearby, but that’s a lot of effort to do what you were already doing.

Regarding OPs argument, it doesn’t strike me as making that much sense, and considering the lack of evidence, Hanlon’s Razor dictates that it’s unlikely.