Older brother wrapped up his old dirty shoes for me for Christmas.

He thought it was hilarious.

Crazy, they’re basically saying, ‘we know this is impossible so just do your best, as long as you remit everything you collect then it doesn’t really matter what/how you collect’.

This is very unfair to the small business because inevitably there will be some customers who will be pissed off when the store doesn’t collect properly, and small business won’t even come close to doing it correctly.

Making temporary short term massive changes to taxation is a very dumb idea. Canada must be drinking uncle Sam’s koolaid to be acting this foolish.

Poop schedule is directly before the morning shower - as Sarah Silverman once said, It isn’t clean unless it’s two inches deep clean.

And if it’s pretentious to brush your teeth every day then I guess I am pretentious.

Bite guard is smart, I need to use mine more.

It would cost thousands in labor to set up temporary tax rates based on alcohol content. Most systems have tax rates which apply to product categories, not alcohol content. Liquor store pos systems in the US, at least in my state, typically don’t even store the abv in the price book, which would make this taxation virtually impossible to comply with.

Minimum twice a day my friend, personal hygiene is the best thing you can do for yourself. Once you establish the habit you won’t even think about it.

I feel like it’s more than that…

When I switched to electric 7 or 8 years ago, I really didn’t like it. It was super uncomfortable and tickled my mouth.

I just powered through it because I was told that I would get used to it.

Indeed I did get used to it and quickly began to feel that I had never actually properly brushed my teeth before going electric.

Part of what helps is the little extra pulse every 30 seconds and auto shut off after two minutes. Really keeps you on track with 30 seconds in each quadrant of your mouth.

Two minutes is a long time so having the timer built into the toothbrush is super helpful.

Only concern to note is that applying too much pressure and/or using the maximum vibration setting can be bad for your gums and cause recession.

Be very gentle with the electric toothbrush so that you do not cause any excessive gum recession.

Once you get used to electric, a conventional toothbrush will seem archaic.

Are there any people in your family that are not obese that have chronic pain? If not then I’ll bet it’s closer to 100% due to obesity.

You only get one life to live… eat right and exercise, you can do it! I am half way to my target weight after 6 months of busting my ass and I feel a million times better.

This indeed would probably do the trick

So discussion of jury nullification is ok as a general topic. If someone mentions JN in the context of a crime that has not yet been committed then that’s not ok. If the crime has already been committed then that’s ok. If the crime is not violent in nature then we can discuss JN, and if we are just having a general conversation about JN that’s ok too.

Specifically, the concern is that talking about JN in the context of some hypothetical violent crime that has not yet been committed could be interpreted as advocating for violence.

This sounds pretty stupid so far, but my question is then, why wrap the ToS around specifically jury nullification? Why not just reiterate the ‘no advocating for violence’ policy.

If someone is advocating for violence, then adding on some point about jury nullification is irrelevant, they are already breaking the rule.

Hippie 1: Right now we’re proving we don’t need corporations. We don’t need money. This can become a commune where everyone just helps each other.

Hippie 2: Yeah, we’ll have one guy who like, who like, makes bread. A-and one guy who like, l-looks out for other people’s safety.

Kyle: You mean like a baker and a cop?

Hippie 1: No no, can’t you imagine a place where people live together and like, provide services for each other in exchange for their services?

Kyle: Yeah, it’s called a town.

Hippie 1: You kids just haven’t been to college yet. But just you wait, this thing is about to get HUGE.

Rent for single family properties is higher than the mortgage of that same property. In theory. So ideally no single family property should be rented as its purely a parasite relationship. Again, in theory.

The problem with this theory is that it’s wrong across the board.

Take a look at houses on realtor dot com or the like… they show estimated mortgage and also estimated rental value. Single family homes typically rent for far less than a new mortgage on the same property, partly because housing prices are so inflated and partly because as you pointed out, someone who got a mortgage on a property 10 years ago who is renting it out now may be renting it out based on the cost of ownership 10 years ago.

Secondly, your conclusion doesn’t follow even if your premise was correct.

Let’s pretend sfh rental prices were higher than the cost of a new mortgage on the same property. How would that then translate to ‘people who can only afford to rent shouldn’t be allowed the dignity of living in a sfh and instead should have no other option but to live in a shared housing environment… how does that follow? How could you possibly think the answer is an increased limitation on what people can rent?

The real solution is getting rid of corporate ownership of more than say maybe 20 properties at a time.

I would certainly prefer having hundreds of thousands of small time landlords with 5 or 10 properties, as opposed to dozens of billionaire corporation who each own tens of thousands of properties… be they sfh or condos or whatever is irrelevant.

There are people who do want to rent, and people whoneed to rent, but that should happen in priperly dense apartment building designed specifically for that.

Who are you to say what people should or shouldn’t rent. Should all renters be piled on top of each other in over packed buildings with 600 square feet to themselves? Why can’t I rent a 2000 square foot town home for my family so that they are safe while I save up to buy my own home?

And say I rent a townhome for 10 years, then buy my own townhome, then 10 years later I rent it out to someone else while I buy something bigger? What’s wrong with that.

I think what we all have a problem with is housing affordability and a lack of systematic focus by the government on eliminating poverty.

The issue isn’t some small time landlord with 5 condos, it’s the investment groups with 5000 condos which artificially juice the rents year after year.

It’s insulting to say that all of the poor people who cannot afford to buy a home should have to live in densely packed buildings.

Why waste time say lot word when few word do trick?