iCUman

iCUman t1_jeeh7hp wrote

Give it time. Once municipalities realize this is just a business like any other, I'm sure we'll see a reversal on moratoriums in many communities.

I wish some of these leaders would take a trip north to Great Barrington to see how this industry has reinvigorated development. I mean downtown GB has always been pretty vibrant, but the north side was plagued with a bunch of vacant commercial units for many years. Now there a bunch of upscale businesses (some cannabis-related, some not) that have opened shop, and the commercial district is always humming now.

3

iCUman t1_jeb9giz wrote

Traditional Philly cheese steak doesn't come with wiz. It's most commonly served with American or provolone cheese. But it is actually delicious, and if I find myself ordering a true Philly, I have been known to get one with wiz.

The truth is that on the very rare occasion I find myself in Philly, the pork sandwich or stromboli always wins out, because no one can even come close up here.

4

iCUman t1_jd9jutj wrote

I renewed my Real ID license online in September 2021 and got a Real ID back in the mail. Took about a week. Make sure your address and all info on file is correct before you attempt to renew - I don't believe they allow you to make any changes with the online renewal.

5

iCUman t1_j8n3ewb wrote

The main problem with this position is that it ignores the reality that many of our problems with criminals obtaining firearms derives from the ease in which they can obtain them legally in other states.

NYAG did an investigation of crime guns over a 5yr period and found that:

>...for guns with a recorded state of purchase (6,799), 75% of crime guns originated out-of-state in 2015, more than double the national average (29%) of out-of-state sources of crime guns. The difference for low time-to-crime guns is even starker: nationwide, only 17% of guns recovered within three years of purchase originated out-of-state, compared to 76% of these guns in New York in 2015.

1

iCUman t1_j6rqjit wrote

Don't discount the value in sending a simple and sincere thank you note that expresses how these folks have made a positive impact on your life. I'm sure they'd be appreciative of a gift card, but sometimes just knowing that you made a small difference in one person's life is worth more than all the gift cards in the world.

100

iCUman t1_j25r2ne wrote

A deposit is not a tax, regardless of your thoughts on the matter. You are welcome to create whatever personal justifications you'd like to alter reality to your beliefs, just remember that reality doesn't give af about what you believe.

Package stores are already obligated to take returns given that a good number of their wares are subject to deposits already. Anyone with passing knowledge is already aware of this, but given your inability to distinguish between a deposit and a tax, your ignorance is understandable. As is your willingness to trample the rights of innocent 3rd parties harmed by the antisocial and illegal behavior at the root of the issue here.

Nevertheless, it's a good thing there are white knights like you around to come to the defense of helpless souls that would be subject to great injustice if they were expected to confirm to basic societal expectations like not throwing shit out of your car window. Seems like he's in the market for a taint-licker, and boy did you come running. I wish you both a happy future.

1

iCUman t1_j23rn7c wrote

Pro-litterbug. Good for you, chief. Not often you see people defending the degenerates in our society.

I'm not advocating for a tax. I'm advocating for a deposit. But I'd also support a ban. If people are going to act like spoiled children when it comes to nips, then I'm perfectly fine with taking their toys away.

1

iCUman t1_j1zof2s wrote

It's a bit difficult to conceal winging a 5th out your window on the way to work, and a career alcoholic certainly doesn't want empties rolling around their car if they get stopped. Hence the nips; hence the litter.

I really don't give a shit why anyone buys them; I'm just tired of cleaning them off my fucking lawn. They need a deposit, and it should be sizeable to compensate those of us who have to clean up after the scumbags.

0

iCUman t1_j1z446u wrote

>Blair said the tax would increase the cost of goods the trucks transport.

>“It’s a simple business equation that will get passed along the way, eventually, to the consumers. And certainly, in a time like this, you know, consumer goods are very high in all places we shop. This is only going to make them go higher,” Blair said.

And what about the fact that tractor trailers are largely the ones responsible for the damage to our roadways? How does that cost get passed along, Mr. Blair?

https://truecostblog.com/2009/06/02/the-hidden-trucking-industry-subsidy/

1

iCUman t1_ixj0333 wrote

This isn't 60 years in the making. It's 30. When the government got out of the power business (can't say that I blame them - the legacy costs of our generation plants were being kicked down the road like everything else at the time, and without divestment, we would've faced enormous cost increases one way or another), private investment became the decider in how to deploy new generating facilities. It stands to reason that capital would chase the most economical option for power generation, and given that natural gas is essentially a byproduct of oil production, it has emerged as the "fuel of choice" for those seeking to deploy new generation.

Now, the question I have is why did ISO NE approve the development of new natural gas generation facilities knowing full well that those facilities lacked sufficient supply to generate fuel? Surely proper due diligence would have revealed that increased pressure on our supply caused by the deployment of these facilities would result in what we're facing today. So was the decision to allow the construction of these facilities done without proper due diligence, or was this result intended? Either way, it appears to me that ISO NE has violated their responsibility to New England energy consumers and those in charge should be held accountable.

8

iCUman t1_iuixxph wrote

We just had a new heat pump installed at work, and something the technician advised me on in operation is not to allow for large temperature swings. "Set it and forget it" was his recommendation, because evidently they're really efficient at maintaining a temperature, but not so much at getting up to temperature.

I am happy to report that our electric bill is significantly lower than it was with our previous unit (which was 30+ years old).

3

iCUman t1_itwi57x wrote

This isn't an either or scenario though. Building more affordable housing in places like Naugatuck and Southington doesn't preclude places like Woodbridge and Greenwich from doing the same. And if you don't want developers choosing how that takes shape, the answer isn't to waste your citizen's tax dollars hiring a crack team of lawyers that will inevitably lose the 8-30g appeal. The answer is to seriously address housing affordability in your POCD, and get your numbers over 10% so developers can't file for relief under that statute.

5

iCUman t1_itvyxpc wrote

I disagree. It's immaterial if your town is wealthy or not. The question is whether your community has varied housing stock that can accommodate its citizenry throughout their lifecycle. If young professionals or crusty old folks do not have a place in your town, if your cops and teachers and municipal maintenance workers are in-commuters, if you have a "quaint little downtown" and you simply cannot understand why there aren't more businesses in those vacant storefronts - the answer is (say it with me) affordable housing.

Literally no one who advocates for affordable housing sees "massive, unattractive affordable apartments" as the only answer. Low-density MFH, condos/townhomes, mixed use residential/commercial properties can all be leveraged to keep our communities vibrant and affordable instead of the unsustainable sprawl, traffic and expense that exclusionary SFH zoning dooms a municipality to suffer.

18