You don't even have to charge a lot! $1 to drive on the roads from 7-9am and 4-6pm. A huge number of people will shift their trips to different times of day. And you can use the money to provide better bus service.
I forget where it was (Virginia?), but a state expanded a freeway, then started charging drivers to make up for the construction cost. The extra fee resulted in fewer people using the road than before the expansion.
Stories like this pose real questions about how the media should handle representative anecdotes. The left was predisposed to believing the original story because it illustrated the (accurate) "________ While Black" problem.
As usual it contains an "alarming" anecdote without any context. It certainly seems like this dude was placed on leave over a silly complaint, but are leftist students the only ones lodging silly complaints? Why is this case worthy of national attention?
There's been a yearlong steelmanning effort with the beliefs of QAnon and the people pushing them. There's some economic anxiety there sure, but there's also a lot of straightforward Republican and evangelical catnip religionnews.com/2021/02/11/sur…
Like, Marjorie Taylor Greene is not mad because we don't have universal healthcare
We have no idea in what context these slides were given. "Try to be less white" could have been presented as an option and discarded. But even if it were straightforwardly presented... who cares?
It's so embarrassing. Companies regularly give anti-union trainings. Christian companies have religious content in their onboarding materials. But I'm supposed to treat this one like a national crisis?
Science contains an infinite number of unresolved questions. Plate tectonics, dark matter, what's going on at the bottom of the ocean. And yet the only "mystery" these people are interested in investigating is whether Black people are stupider than white people.
Wow the on-stage interview questions in the 1958 Miss America pageant were not fucking around
eeeeeewww this cameo
I watched the 2019 pageant last night and it's genuinely SO hard to answer one of these absurdly broad questions with poise and intelligence in just 20 seconds. I have newfound sympathy for that contestant who went viral a few years back!
The most effective way to predict how mad Bari and the other cancel culture warriors will get about the firing of a public figure is to ask, "Is this person a conservative?"
This has nothing to do with free speech or intent. They just don't like it when conservatives get fired.
Which is fine! I think progressive ideas are correct and progressives shouldn't get fired. That's very clearly the debate we're actually having with these episodes. But every time, they dress it up as something content-neutral and it's so BORING.
A much clearer hallmark of injustice is when the powerful insist that their intentions are more important than the impacts they cause. "We weren't trying to segregate schools," "We never ordered torture at Abu Ghraib, "We invaded Iraq to help its people," etc.
I haven't read these books but I would not put "indifference to intention" at the center of understanding what is harmful about repressive regimes.
Indifference to truth, indifference to harm, indifference to outcome, sure. But indifference to intent?! Huh?
I think vacancy taxes are good and cities should pass them, but they're unlikely to do much to alleviate the housing crisis.
This debate often gets folded into tropes about foreign ownership, but it doesn't actually make a lot of sense to buy an apartment in London or New York and leave it empty. Lots of investors hire property management companies and rent them out to locals.
Absurd. Conservatives are not being fired because they're coming out in favor of lower taxes or fewer regulations. They are being fired because they're expressing odious racism. nymag.com/intelligencer/…
Ummmm what if I told you that views can be widespread and ALSO wrong and bad?
This argument is so disingenuous. Carano is not being punished for *holding* conservative views. She's being punished for *expressing them publicly.* She is a famous person! Wading into politics has consequences. This has always been true.
This is asinine. Only a small number of Republicans may admit to believing in QAnon per se, but a much larger percentage believe in its constituent parts.
QAnon is not like believing the moon landing was faked. It's not a binary distinction where you either believe it or you don't. A huge number of people believe some parts (Soros controls the Democrats) while rejecting others (Hillary Clinton eats babies).
Research has been extremely consistent in finding alarming rates of conspiratorial beliefs among Republicans. This is a national crisis.
I see no contradiction between "There is no such thing as cancel culture" and "people should not be fired for harmless jokes."
Nathan is a public figure. Public figures have always been subject to professional consequences for their statements.
Before the internet, national pundits could be fired for writing a terrible column or giving a bigoted speech. Sometimes they were falsely accused and fired without just cause. None of this has anything to do with "cancel culture" writ large.
Yes! It's actually very rare for news stories to be presented to the public in straightforward chronological order. It's a huge problem for both comprehension and empathy. vulture.com/2021/02/review…
Journalists typically organize stories according to salience, the famous "inverted pyramid." The first paragraph is the most relevant information, followed by the second most and so on.
It makes sense for hard news and ongoing stories, but it also deliberately buries context. You only learn the basic facts in the last few paragraphs of the story, often out of order and separated from the rest of the information.