San Francisco: “Hey, housing is way too expensive. Do you think we should change our laws? Maybe keep some of the safety rules but loosen up some other regulations? Maybe we could copy the rules from some place with high safety standards but also cheap housing?”
Also San Francisco: “Pffft lol no, what kind of nerd would do that?”
London: “Hold my pint and watch this.”
Anonymous asked:
mutant-aesthetic answered:
When will we see common sense katana regulation
大日本帝国がありませんよ。
Anonymous asked:
argumate answered:
this is like a political cartoon except all the passive aggressive labels are set in a girl’s high school like a tedious anime
school aka THE LEGISLATURE
project aka PROGRESSIVE HEALTH REFORM
emily aka GRANDSTANDING REPUBLICANS
etc.
I’ve lived the Congressional Anime AU, Argumate.
You don’t want to go there. You really don’t.
If I never hear “but Ryan-sempai, we can’t!” again, it will be too soon.
Glad we got that sorted out. Now onto the next item on our discourse agenda: Ugg boots - sexist, or female empowerment?
brutally appropriated from Australian bogan culture, next question
Funny that you say that because they literally were- the original Uggs were Aussie but the patent was filed by an American who saw it and copied it. Guess who’s making all the $$$.
Hint it’s not the Aussie family business out somewhere in WA.
wait did you think I was joking
Me: I have never made a single joke in my life
Mutuals: I know yet we laugh anyway
“We don’t shitpost to lie. We shitpost because when the world itself is a joke, so is the truth.”
- Argumate, probably
“Jeremy Corbyn tried to pass through a law that would required private landlords to make their homes safe and “fit for human habitation” last year – but it was rejected by the Conservatives.
Labour proposed an amendment to the Government’s new Housing and Planning Bill – a raft of new laws aimed at reforming housing law – in January last year, but it was rejected by 312 votes to 219.
According to Parliament’s register of interests, 72 of the MPs who voted against the amendment were themselves landlords who derive an income from a property.”
Whatever you think about the man as an individual or politician, he sure is on the right side of history a lot.
More regulations driving up the cost of housing <—-> Right side of history
the regulation about not cladding the outside of high rise buildings in flammable material tho
having sufficient fire escapes
for that matter fire alarms
very poor choice of example of regulatory harm
I’m sure our dear Voxette wouldn’t mind losing the regulations in favor of requiring all landlords to carry insurance against the death or debilitating injury to occupants with a cap at $1 million per occupant, reflecting the cost to the rest of society of people dying in unsafe housing. After all, it would be terribly immoral to give the landlords a subsidy, right?
They will of course also be required to carry sufficient insurance for neighboring buildings. It wouldn’t be very fair if they got away with a huge fire burning down someone else’s property just because they were bankrupt.
Right, and the insurance company needs to prove that it can actually cover these policies, which requires them to inspect the properties and regulate their safety, such as not covering the exterior with fuckin’ inflammable cladding.
You’re going to get regulation one way or another.
Glad we got that sorted out. Now onto the next item on our discourse agenda: Ugg boots - sexist, or female empowerment?
The Internet (also known as the “Titties and Kitties” Fandom),
How much you wanna bet that silly proboscis monkey/tapir/boar you kids all love is some multimillion dollar viral marketing scheme.
surely not @owlwisdoms100!
Owls actually sinister Capitalist plot by Korean consumer electronics giant and heavy industrial conglomerate Samsung, created in very farsighted move to sell more Galaxy S9s.
@digging-holes-in-the-river reminded me of a form of sexism, or at least huge wrongness, that I sometimes suffer from, although I think I’m improving.
Logical belief: as reported by reliable statisticians, women are 52% of the population
Alief: women are a small minority, like 5% or something. They don’t really take part in society.
I think I get this from working in a very male dominated profession, and, to the extent I ever socialise, socialising with people from that profession.
I don’t often seem women complaining about this kind of view, presumably on the view it’s too ludicrous to occur to them, although I think complaints like “why are you treating all women as a uniform special case” are a sort of second-order effect.
I mean you’d feel like that in some industries, business, politics.
On the other hand: primary school teachers, nurses, dental hygienists (apparently 98% female, in Australia at least).
It’s interesting when you see a particular field pass 50% female intake because you know there’s going to be a shake up coming when all the old guys hit retirement age and society recodes whatever it is as a ‘girl thing’.
Victoria Police has got their female representation up from 8% to 26% and I’m really curious to see how people react if it ever gets to 50% or above, that’ll be totes fun.
Some Normie: as reported by reliable statisticians, women are 52% of the population
A Nerd: women are a small minority, like 5% or something. they don’t really take part in society.
Enlightened Discourse Master: there are no women, only men and traps
How the fuck does someone like me (who sometimes considers himself an alien in a human suit) have a better grasp on basic human interaction than like a good 60% of this hellsite
Blue Hellsite™ is a social experiment in selection bias and Homestuck fanart sponsored by the University of Nantong. I’m surprised you hadn’t realized that yet.
