meowMix2525

lol. My bachelor of science in electrical engineering begs to differ but go off I guess.

Not to mention the massive loads they can haul which basically turn them into semi trucks, vehicles which you would in fact need a special license to operate, with worse visibility to boot. Way too many people out there hauling ridiculously large campers and sometimes even towing an extra vehicle at the end of their train with zero special training to do so.

Or you could not do that and still get where you're going, albeit slightly less fast.

At the very least you should need a special license to operate them. They're classed differently to avoid safety and emissions regulations imposed on regular cars, so its perfectly reasonable that there should be different requirements to purchase them and get behind the wheel.

I once heard a european say we eat like we have free healthcare. No we don't. We eat like we have a government with more accountability to monied interests than to our health, a food industry that profits from us being compelled to overeat cheaply produced foods, and a healthcare system that profits from chronic illness and sudden misfortune. Oh yeah, this onion's got layers, and it's rotting from the inside-out.

In fact, I think a genuine effort behind universal healthcare would involve the government suddenly caring a lot more about industry in general growing profits by running things as cheap and dirty as they have been and, in a way, passing their costs onto the general population.

Close. Cousin of dyslexia.

Oh I get it. You're trolling. Nice.

Jesus Christ dude.

First of all, I'm american, I'm a woman, and just look at our highway system. Black neighborhoods were bulldozed and paved over with highway interchanges. Cities were destroyed and continue to suffer from their existence. St. Louis, Detroit, Memphis, Cleveland, Chicago, etc., etc., didn't happen because suburbs 'won' in the free market of infrastructure or something.

Remember 8 mile, that road you don't go past in Detroit? Hmm yeah I wonder how that happened if bridges/crosswalks are such a good replacement for infrastructure that doesn't require those things in the first place. Infrastructure can facilitate national movement but it can also stand locally as an impenetrable wall. Put as many expensive "gateways" up as you want, it's still a fucking wall. There's a reason rivers are used as division lines between cities, states, and countries.

Do you really think there's going to be a perfect route through ALL of that land and that avoiding population centers wouldn't negate its usefulness?

Edit: also "underutilized" is an insane term to use for land. Just because humans aren't utilizing it, doesn't mean that land is devoid of use by other life. There is an entire ecosystem across this country that shouldn't be disturbed if we can help it, much less a river be built through it. I mean come on, we have a mass extinction event going on right now, all the way down to the fucking insects that splatter on our windshields.

Luckily this entire swath of land is completely void of human and animal life and nobody will be emminent-domained out of their homes and livelihoods with little to no reward for doing so, and bridges are notoriously so much more permeable than plain flat land. I'm such a silly goose to not have thought of those things when I wrote that very serious comment about this very serious hypothetical 🥸

Yeah I don't really care to play with strangers and none of my friends have ever asked to play so I also stick to single player games when I do play.

I could get on board with a moat around Texas and Florida

Nevermind any communities you'd separate or destroy by dropping a big ol' river through the middle of them