magiccupcake

Try and flip the fantasies on their head.

Try looking for odd quirks and mannerisms that bother you and imagine how annoying it would be to be with a partner that does those things all the time.

Look for the particular ways they want to be cared for in the manner and how you would not be suitable to meet them, and that they might be happier with someone else.

Also just spend more time with them, and the infatuation will either fade or you'll realize you do really like them, which is OK, let them know, and it's OK if it's not reciprocal (though this is actually quite hard as a lot of women are conditioned to not believe men who say this).

What we need to do right now, is really start to get our handle around what happened this last election cycle. We know that we lost ground with Latino voters. We know we lost ground with women and younger voters, and, of course, working class households,” Martin said. “We don’t know the how and why at this moment, and that’s what I need to get my hands around before we can be proscriptive on a plan and a solution

Really? It's some big mystery? You catered to the right and cozied up to billionaires and got wrecked.

Trump's too busy blaming this on DEI, when the issue is clearly under staffing of ATC and the helicopter deviating from his cleared route, even after being told to follow it by ATC.

Ok so maybe a dumb question, if it's implemented in Vulcan, then would running minecraft in proton get the performance?

Ehh, kinda? I mean there is no plastic on earth that does not produce microplastics when combined with heat, but the science on how bad that is for people is very new, as plastic packaging for food is still relatively new.

We don't know how bad or not microplastics are, but everyone is being exposed to a lot.

You're not talking science, you're being nitpicky, condescending, and pedantic.

You can talk science when you bring out the math, demonstrating the scale of differences of vehicle weight on the acceleration of a pedestrian, or when you have published your own safety study.

While yes, the rich are the main problem, the bulk of resistance is the middle class. They don't want to see the value of their property go down, or see increased traffic. Even though the suggested policy changes would help them too! The brainwashing is strong among people, not just the rich.

It's also hard, because to make meaningful changes, you need progress in at least 2 of these areas at the same time, which means you need to get people and politicians to agree on how to fix the problem!

I see many people blaming corporate ownership as a problem, and in our current system is it is. But implementing my proposed changes would make it unpalatable for exploitive corporations, without needing to explicitly ban them!

I live in the United States, and as I understand it the housing crisis is caused by several factors.

1. The lowest level of zoning is typically residential single family. This means small scale owners and developers cannot increase supply by taking a house and adding to it. Either by adding extensions, subletting, or even building a mini-apartment building. To add to this, US regulations require apartment units to have access to 2 staircases, in the event of a fire. This is good for safety, but greatly restricts style of apartments to hotel styles, and increases costs, so smaller apartments don't make as much sense. This requirement should be able to be waved in the case of fire resistant building materials.

2. Speculative land owning. Some property owners simply sit on properties in developing areas, waiting for its price to increase, and since tax is based on the value of the total property (land+building), a decaying building reduces the cost of owning that land. To fix this, we should be taxing the value of the land instead, punishing speculators, while incentivising people to improve their land (by building housing).

3. Overuse of cars. Even when places want to expand housing, the complete and utter reliance on cars as transportation in the US leads to backlash for increasing housing, as the perception is that it will increase traffic. To combat this cities need to rethink their transportation strategies to radically increase things like bus and bike lanes. Even when cities do have buses, the strategy funded by the federal government is abysmal. For example instead of running buses that can hold 15 passengers and run every 15 mins, cities will instead run buses that can hold 50 people every hour, and so these buses run mostly empty with 2-3 passengers.

The main policy changes that we need are less restrictive zoning, tax speculators, and diversify urban transport. But resistance is heavy, many politicians themselves are land holders and do not want to implement these changes, or to anger those that do. Landholders generally have more political voice, power, and wealth.

As someone who is currently studying dark matter, MOND is currently disfavored in the field of cosmology. It does not as simply or effectively describe galaxies closer to home, or observations of the cosmic microwave background. These galaxies pose a challenge to lambda-CDM, but that does not prove MOND correct.

As someone who checked it out for physics here's my experience:

Anything that could easily be found and be correct that would be found on chegg, would be easily repeated by chatgpt, and with usually clearer solutions that was easier for slightly different problem prompts.

Anything that could not be well answered by chatgpt likely would not have a good solution on chegg, being either outright wrong, or extremely confusing as an answer.

Feminists are not the one aggressively turning men into this. It's toxic masculinity types like Andrew Tate, Jordan Peterson, and Joe Rogan.

My interpretation is that synthehol isn't supposed to be a copy of alcohol, it's designed to give the positive effects of alcohol without the downsides, so that taste is likely not the main consideration.