hamhead

hamhead t1_j44brvq wrote

Ok a few things - even if that number is accurate, that’s all allergens, not one specific one.

The contains list isn’t a problem. That’s not what we are talking about. We are talking about changing food to accommodate, or banning certain things, or other actions of that nature. We are talking about people not wanting the ingredient in the food because too many contain it.

1

hamhead t1_j42faq3 wrote

Sort of. On an individual level you’re right. On a societal level is where the debate comes in. People can die from a lot of unique things. That doesn’t mean society “bends over” for them. In the majority of cases, they have to accommodate society rather than the other way around.

The question is where does it become societal problem - how many people does it need to impact - before that switches.

2

hamhead t1_iz0h3pv wrote

I could go for more tickets for things like red lights and double parking and such. What I don't care about is the speeding tickets everyone is always more obsessed with. To me it's more about how someone's driving than how fast someone's driving, but this are harder tickets to issue so get ignored.

−3

hamhead t1_iy6scsn wrote

>how can Constellation offer a 13 to 17 cent rate while Eversource is allowed to double its rate to 24 cents!

I'm not really sure I understand this question. It's an open market. Eversource has a somewhat higher rate than alternative suppliers because lazy and/or risk adverse people will stick with them. They maintain an X% buffer, constellation cuts it finer. That's the entire point of a [sort of] deregulated marketplace.

3

hamhead t1_ixdt5xg wrote

That’s not really relevant. Solar isn’t the only power source. But it does help reduce the need for others.

Gas isn’t going away in the foreseeable future. But other types of power production can reduce the need for it, especially at off peak times.

2