More accurately, they’re both separate descendants of ethnonationalism which was a popular ideology at that time. And still today, evidently, though it seemed to be in decline for a bit during the post-war period.

How about neither.

PTB. Not sure what is false or misleading about the fact that many European politicians support the Israeli occupation, or that some do criminalize pro-Palestinian political action.

Is silicone toxic?

What’s the legal standard in the Netherlands? Anyone know? Seems relevant here.

Won’t someone rid us of this turbulent shitstain?

I also use Reddit. My local sub can’t be replicated here, unfortunately, and it’s a very valuable resource to know what’s going on in the local community.

Maybe… I feel like they’ll just come, give the nod and keep fucking up the peasants since they both have the same job more or less.

I feel like inflation should be benchmarked against median wages or something. By itself it’s not particularly meaningful, as it’s the relationship between prices and wages that matters. Neither number alone has any real meaning.

Why though? What do you expect to happen?

Ah it’s been a while I may have misremembered the exact definition.

Caballo, yes. That’s specific to Costa Rica. I forget where I heard the goat one (cabron) but I think it was either Spain or Mexico.

In some Spanish-speaking regions, a goat is usually like a big dumb guy. And calling someone a horse is another way of saying they’re stupid.

I think you’re right and it was mainly me that was confused, so I deleted my comment. My apologies.

deleted by creator

There is a whole ass propaganda campaign that makes people think Musk is some kind of super genius. Lots of people aren’t educated enough to see through it. I consider myself pretty media literate but I was still fooled by it for a little while.

Great term, I hadn’t heard it. Thanks.

Obviously they’re different in many ways but as a society we can’t really call things an accident when they’re eminently predictable from the systems we’ve built. So while they may be accidental from the point of the individual perpetrator, both of these things are equally intentional from a public policy standpoint.

Parking is for residents. If they want more parking, they can pay for a property that has that, which will usually cost more. If not, they can pay less and go without. This is a good thing and it’s not something the government needs to involve itself in. Right now the vast majority of places (in the US at least) have a really excessive amount of parking, so it may be that segment of the market is temporarily saturated, and they’re building for a market that wants less, which has gone unserved for a long time due to these pointless laws.

Are you conflating the idea of banning parking with repealing mandatory parking? These are two very different policies. Developers will still build parking infrastructure when the market demands it and it makes sense for the neighborhood and project. They just won’t be universally required to even when literally no one wants it.