Bad news for crypto.
Why? Would it not be worse if the bill had not passed?
After months of delay, the House passes infrastructure bill
51–60 of 100 posts
Re: After months of delay, the House passes infrastructure bill
#52This whole time I've been confused how investing more money in roads is compatible with our climate goals. Should we not trying to decommission roads and encourage people to move to denser, walkable and cyclable city centers?
I can't find a source, but I have read that it is trucks which do the bulk of the wear and tear of roads. Making these trucks electric won't help.
I read that piece too and it is not surprising. I imagine the 18 wheelers going through cities aren’t doing a lot of good either. I drive one of those trucks and trying to get out of the cycle.
Re: After months of delay, the House passes infrastructure bill
#53Re: After months of delay, the House passes infrastructure bill
#54Ha! Just as I expected, a bill that mostly builds infrastructure that corporations/Wall Street wanted, not much for the slave class (also known as the “middle class”).
As Warren Buffet once said “there has been class warfare and my class won.”
Biden should man-up and issue executive orders to satisfy at least a few of his campaign promises to the non-elite class.
Re: After months of delay, the House passes infrastructure bill
#55For me, this article was quite confusing and hard to follow. In contrast, CNN’s article was easier for me to understand:
https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/05/politics/house-votes-infrastr...
Re: After months of delay, the House passes infrastructure bill
#56I agree. I was affected by drunken bicyclist once. They hit my stroller and injured my baby. It's high time we mandated this kind of system on all human piloted systems. Bicycles, golf carts, roller skates, etc. They should require a full breathalyzer test and full ongoing facial motion detection to ensure safe piloting of the vehicle. Safety first, always.
asshole move to mock someone’s experience with the impact of drunk driving with sarcasm. why don’t you try actually making an argument? I don’t really care about this either way, but unless you can point to statistics on deaths due to drunk bicycle riding, this is a stupid slippery slope.
People who have lived experience of rare events are the people who have the least rational outlook on said events. Someone who’s child is mauled by a dog is going to have an unreasonable opinion on dogs, letting them have a say on policy just leads to overprotective laws.
Re: After months of delay, the House passes infrastructure bill
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't forget Power Wheels.
Absolutely I don't know why power wheels would be left out. Anytime a human pilots a machine, it increases their risk of injuring another person. We need to reduce these risks for safety.
My upgraded scooter wheels on my office chair means it should probably just be illegal altogether.
Re: After months of delay, the House passes infrastructure bill
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
About your last paragraph: the goal of these measurements would of course be to prefect you from driving at all when alcohol is detected. Suggesting that the idea is that people are slowed down on a freeway because of this seems absurd.
failing to project that this would happen all day every day everywhere, is absurd
No it's not. Car manufacturers and regulators have been trying to make cars safer for decades and won't just (require to) add some feature that is as unsafe as your proposed "solution"
And the solution here is simple: do the check when the car is starting and don't drive when alcohol is detected. That's how current alcohol locks work.
Nobody is suggesting to test when the car is already driving and nobody is suggesting to slow cars down.
Re: After months of delay, the House passes infrastructure bill
#59Re: After months of delay, the House passes infrastructure bill
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
The headline price is an artifact of congressional accounting. It is an estimate of the 10-year cost. The MSM uses that number when their corporate masters want you to be against the spending. They actually explain why it is a fairly meaningless number when they want the spending.
$100bn/year is still an astronomical amount of money.
100E9/300E6~=333 that's ~2 netflix subscriptions per US citizen. Outlandish!