cyberpunk dystopia my beloved

I'm saying this in total seriousness, so I hope it doesn't come off as a joke: have you guys considered reaching out to curtis sliwa about this? he's... extremely morally questionable but he is famous for starting a vigilante group and he is really into cat rescue. I can understand if that's not someone you'd want to get involved with though.

it's just odd that your takeaway here is "naming more streets after racists doesn't matter" instead of "maybe we ought to rename Columbus circle if renaming streets is a priority"

oh I do know those things, don't worry! I just don't have trouble distinguishing between the bad stuff the us does and the good, because, again, no brain rot. and thanks for the luck, but you can save it for your mobik buddies, they need it way more than me ❤️

no thanks, my smooth brain protects it from rotting like yours has

> In February 2022, Jordan received criticism for justifying the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine by falsely claiming that the Revolution of Dignity was a coup led by the United States, European Union, and NATO.[14] She said, "In 2014, the U.S. helped overthrow Ukraine’s democratically elected leader in an illegal coup, helped install a fascist government and empowered a far right military all with the goal of destabilizing Russia."

it's amazing how easy it is to predict a politician's dipshit views on one subject just by knowing their views on an entirely unrelated subject. of course she's pro Russia.

great, let's set the precedent that neighborhoods only get the infrastructure they can directly fund, that definitely won't backfire

> Kristin Richardson Jordan, a far-left council member who represents Harlem and who proposed the street naming, called the honor “way overdue.”

> “It is actually not OK to erase black leaders who are not pleasing to white people,” she said during the vote. “I profoundly vote aye on Elijah Muhammad Way.”

of course it's her

infinite healthcare hack tbh

ah ok, been a while since I've been down there

I'm a little divided on the fearless girl one bc it sort of interferes with the preexisting bull statue in a way that seems a little unfair, but other than that yeah it's a great example. it doesn't have to be like an abstract representation of some deep tragedy to be worthwhile art. it's ok to have art that just looks cool jfc

yeah I'm definitely picking up on that elitism. there's nothing wrong with a big piece of art that just looks neat. it doesn't have to mean anything

i think the answer is that what the city has shown is that it's willing to pay for people to stay in 3 star hotels, which is not at all the same as being able to afford it

I think the actual difference, in a big picture sense, is that those countries attack these problems on a national level, which is really difficult for anything in the US by design. that other person is sort of right in that nyc offering more services/private rooms etc will not improve its situation, because this will absolutely attract more homeless people to go to nyc. the west coast and hawaii are both experiencing this effect right now.

the situation can never be resolved when every major metropolitan area is essentially in a standoff with all the others over who can be the least appealing to homeless populations. only federal intervention can fix it at this point. I don't know what the path to that is, but cities or states acting unilaterally only leads to an endlessly increasing bill for homeless services.

a lot of places essentially bus their homeless people to California, which means the west coast has been steadily taking in a higher and higher proportion of the chronically homeless as time goes on, and that group really frequently struggles w mental health and substance abuse issues.

smg suggests that because the city is doing A, they are not doing B. their use of the word "instead" establishes that they think there is some sort of connection between those things.

no they don't lmao. Europe is a whole ass continent with 700 million people, not a fantasy land where the streets are paved with social surfaces and infrastructure flows out of every fountain. grow up

yes it does? smg is saying that what they are doing is a, but that they should stop doing a and do b instead. windup is saying that there is no reason they can't do both a and b, because a has nothing to do with b. a happening does not preclude the city from doing b.

not being at war with Russia does not carry any obligation to not provide arms to Russia's opponent or to not sanction them. I have no idea what principles you think are being violated here.

it is simply your opinion that it was heavily implied. they did not state that they believe genocide is objectively wrong. without such a statement, it is senseless to try to start a debate about whether objective wrongness exists, as that isn't relevant to their point.

"violating neutrality"? what neutrality? no one has an obligation to Russia to remain neutral. there is no violation.

additionally, the first person to bring up the concept of objective vs. subjective wrongness was yourself. the person you initially replied to did not say it was objectively wrong. they simply said it was wrong. if you believe that there is no such thing as objective wrongness, then you should have no problem with their statement, as it must be their own opinion. if you believe their opinion that genocide is wrong is incorrect, argue with that, don't attempt to set up a strawman about moral objectivism

yeah, that's what I was thinking. "more comfortable" is pretty ambiguous, and could be interpreted as referring to the years of work experience

I just don't think "what if I don't have 20k" makes a lot of sense as a question if the 20k is over 20 years, especially given that as an immigrant someones financial situation would likely be changing dramatically as they progress along the path from arriving to citizenship. that person also does agree with you that it should be cheaper so it's a little odd that you're stuck on it so much. what you guys actually disagree on is whether it's ethical to break the rules if you think the cost is too high

> One trustee allegedly told him, “I probably shouldn’t say this, the vote was very very close, but some people said that they were just more comfortable with Marek [Tyszkiewicz]. They should probably do some introspection as to why that is.” 

> Chu, who is gay, said he mentioned his husband throughout the interview, and he believes that made the board members “uncomfortable.” 

this is the quote in question, I think. not really as cut and dried as it's being presented. I wonder if the deliberations were recorded?

they said the 20k was over the course of 20 years, so it's not like they're demanding it all at once. this is also not the cost of immigrating but the cost of getting citizenship which are not at all the same.

The author is trying to use the facts that the station took too long and cost too much to argue that it should never have been built at all, but that doesn't actually follow and it's really obvious to everyone who reads it. Are you the author?