> A couple months ago it felt like people were sure that Google completely fucked it up for themselves

Hey it's me!

being, built, right, and now.

four words that do not describe CHSR

Informed is a word that doesn't describe you.

https://hsr.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/2025-Project-U...

absolutely nothing wrong with restarting a decomissioned nuke.

Thanks for pointing this out. As a follow up, if the US has a trade surplus, they seem to just slap 10% in both columns.

Hey great find man!

As with all nutrition """science""", studies should only be used to generate ideas for your own routine, not provide any conclusions.

Try it and see if it works for you. If it does - great! If it doesn't - great!

this is your brain on boomer nostalgia

jessica chastain lookalike no?

Completely agree I love the incentives this tax creates, even though it isn't the most progressive tax in the world.

City planning seems to be a particularly inflexible issue on this forum, possibly because the majority of this board are upper-middle income, urban, childless, 20-30s males.

Most in the thread seem to miss the fact that flat congestion pricing (even with the 50% reduction for those making <50K), is regressive, like a carbon tax. It's made progressive by allocating the revenues to transit upgrades, which would outsizely benefit lower income communities. But as you say, the redistributions aren't liquid, so progressive feels like a slight stretch.

Here in Canada, the carbon tax is regressive (carbon consumption is not graded as steeply as income is). However, the canada carbon rebate redistributes all revenues flatly, and makes this scheme truly progressive. Though some debate can be had about liquidity diffs of tax-at-use and rebate at end-of-year.

It is okay to admit a scheme is not progressive, and still support it!

what was the purpose of that analogy?