This concept hinges on everyone walking around with ID at all times. If you don't have it on you we'll throw you into a concrete box for 8 hours while we sort it out. Cool? Oh you were a home birth in Wisconsin you say? Sounds vaguely Canadian.
This is why the 4th amendment exists. It is my favorite amendment. I wish people would take it more seriously.
As far as I understand, people are ID'd all the time in US. If police stops you, they will ask for an identification document; if you don't have it, they will ask for your SSN and if you can't remember it, they will run your name and address until they match you with a photo id on their systems. In the meanwhile, you're detained and you're not free to leave. Immigration aside, how are they supposed to identify you?
They can't detain you forever because they can't ID you. You can't be compelled to own an ID or carry it around with you all the time. Many naturally born americans have no passport, birth certificate, or even state license.
So many homeless here have zero identification.
They are basically just going after people who are too brown and even ending up grabbing people who are just here on vacation, legally.
Wait, I agree that false positives shouldn't happen, but true positives (i.e. you are an illegal alien, ICE interacts with you, they detain you until they discover your status, then start the deportation process) are how the system is supposed to work.
This is illegal, notoriously, police can only request AND detain someone to provide ID if they are actually suspected of committing a crime. Potentially being illegal, a neighbor calling the police or stuff like that does not give them permission to detain. They can nicely ask, but that's all.
That's specific to ICE though, where they need a "warrant", not from a judge but just from some other ICE "supervisor".
I agree that in practice there is some kind of loophole: ICE gets a "warrant" for someone that by definition has no ID, so there is no point in identifying a detainee - the immigration court will do that, later. Effectively, they seem to get away with snatching people off the street that vaguely may resemble any "warrant" they have.
Typically their presence alone is enough to stop anything new from happening. In theory they would only need to use enough violence to defend themselves. That's how we got Kent State but in general Kent State was also because the guards in that situation found themselves alone and isolated with little training. In a modern context 60 national guards standing around outside of a downtown highrise with a couple Humvees is unlikely to see any escalation.
No, it's not what happened... The election was not won with 35% of the popular vote...
Again, if you insist on talking about "35% of people in the US" rather than "35% of voters", then fine, but I think it's a weird way to talk about it. We don't know what the people who didn't vote thought about the candidates. Voting is the way that we find that out!
>if you insist on talking about "35% of people in the US" rather than "35% of voters", then fine, but I think it's a weird way to talk about it.
When were talking about adhering to a dangerous status quo, the conversation makes sense. A status quo of boring beauracracy can be defendable. A status quo of fascism, much less so. Thars why conversations in 2025 are like this.
Even then:remember Trump still had a 40% approval rating after all this.
Man this is America. If people had any interest in walking, our national health picture would look very different. Even huge swathes of people voting for public transit in the US are doing so because they want everyone ELSE off the highway.
It's not just about a lack of interest in walking. If your infrastructure is extremely hostile to walking, it's outright dangerous and unreliable and force people out of it.
THe history doesn't help. LA is a huge area and California is traditionally very rocky and hilly. The great weather and modern industrialism is the reason people continued to flock here after the Gold Rush. But anyone playing Orgeon trails knows how rough getting to California was to begin with.
There's definitely amenities that can be done to make LA walkable regardless, but I understand that nature did not intent for this settlement to be human friendly.
There are walkable parts of LA, just LA itself isn't very walkable. But if you confine yourself to westwood around UCLA, you can even walk all the way to Sawtelle for Japanese food (although it isn't a very nice walk).
However I don't really like walking everywhere or taking public transportation so LA is the perfect city for me because it has many municipal places I can park my car and then walk around.
Let me explain LA to you since you clearly don't understand it.
LA is a combination of many smaller cities. Each one, on it's own is a small micro city with everything you would expect. You can live in Santa Monica, Pasadena, Burbank, Sherman oaks, West Hollywood, Ktown, Beverly Hills, Sawtelle, etc. each one of those places has a very vibrant and walkable area with cute shops and restaurants and easy public transportation. If you live in those places you don't necessarily need a car.
The problem with LA is that you might want to go from one of these places to another and the walk would take a very long time because LA county is bigger than Delaware and Rhode Island. But you can walk it if you want.
LA is currently the only city in North America building new subway lines. And is doing so rapidly.
All the extensions under construction to the Seattle‘s link light rail are grade separated and subway standard (or 3/4 if you count the Tacoma extension).
Hint: if you read the parent comment, you see that "LA" is actually a collection of many smaller cities, and that "LA" is geographically bigger than some states and so of course it is not completely walkable. LA is 44 miles long and 24 miles wide. And that's just the city of Los Angeles. The county of Los Angeles is 4000 square miles, and has over 80 cities, most of which are only separated from each other by a road. But LA Metro is the (geographically) largest public municipal public transportation system, so you can take a bus from one of of LA county to another.
Downtown is walkable. Hollywood is walkable. Echo Park is walkable. Pasadena is walkable. Santa Monica is walkable. Long Beach is walkable. Culver City is walkable. Bevery Hills is walkable. Glendale is walkable. Burbank is walkable.
> Downtown is walkable. Hollywood is walkable. Echo Park is walkable. Pasadena is walkable. Santa Monica is walkable. Long Beach is walkable. Culver City is walkable. Bevery Hills is walkable. Glendale is walkable. Burbank is walkable.
In the same way that Everest is walkable. None are walkable cities by any reasonable definition.
No matter how accessible you make it, humans in the modern era can't just walk around 15+ miles a day and do any other kind of commerce. LA is just a huge, hilly city. Even with full bipartisan support and unlimited funding, it's a fundamentally harder problem to make LA walkable compared to something like Copenhagen.
Making a walkable LA would mean making a much smaller urban area (or series of much smaller) with much higher population density and ideally rewilding most of the LA metro area. It is functionally impossible in the current political environment.
I'm out walking around LA all the time. Santa Monica alone is a beach town with an amazing ocean front. You don't need a car at all. I'm seriously sitting here doing the Obama shrug meme.
It's stupid that I even have to point out a few things. Like that I was born in Europe, have been to Germany and Japan, and lived near NYC for a time so I probably know better than some European about my own city.
Santa Monica *beachfront* is decently walkable. Santa Monica as a whole is not walkable. All the other examples (Downtown?) are also completely not walkable.
At least my definition of walkable does not mean "you can technically walk there" it means "if you live here you will not want nor need to use your car"
Of course the entire city of Los Angeles isn't walkable. It's 500 square miles, or over 10x the size of Paris (40 square miles).
But LA has a great many neighborhoods that are very walkable, and it has public transportation connecting all those walkable neighborhoods.
And in response to your spurious claims about Santa Monica: the entirety of the city of Santa Monica is just as walkable as the cities of London and Paris, and definitely more walkable than the outlying neighborhoods like Versailles.
Downtown Los Angeles is also very walkable, and there are tourists who make that walk every day.
Mostly in the 70s, sunny, sidewalks everywhere, an actual street food culture, a bus network that spans the entire county and about half a dozen rail lines. Where does the goalpost have to move for people who have clearly never spent much time in LA to see it for what it is?
Have you seen other american cities outside of NYC and Chicago? LA is walkable in a lot of places,plenty of side walks. Southern cities are particularly atrocious because even if they were walkable, the heat makes walking impractical in the summer (which can be > half of the year).
Live in Houston, and no we're not. The only break we get from punishing heat is hurricanes and floods, but that often comes with significant power loss throughout the area, making the heat even worse.
Also live in Houston; the heat is uncomfortable but is nothing that some Gatorade Zero can't fix. It's a walkable enough city if you live in the loop. Not NYC walkable but not nothing. Outside of the loop; forget about it! A small price to pay for being able to wear shorts and sandals all winter!
No, we're not. been wanting to take a walk for ~2 months now and couldn't because of the heat. Maybe in more inland cities it is nicer, but within ~200 miles from the ocean it is unbearable.
> doesn't make an objective goal for every person on earth to achieve.
The walkability of cities is linked to increased happiness in people, so there actually is merit to saying that it is objectively good. Walkability encourages you to literally walk past large amounts of people, local businesses and plenty of outdoor activities that you have the opportunity to take part in.
They hate poor people. The wealthy undocumented people are sitting at home in their legal son or daughter's house watching the kids without a care in the world. The ones getting caught up in this are the ones that can't lay low for a while.
They is doing lots and lots of heavy lifting here. At the same time things are very confusing, because it seems like your fellow American is out for blood in a manner that shows no humanity.
Your fellow American on the right is plugged into a Matrix that traffics in its own narratives and can now freely manufacture or amplify its own fringe facts and narratives.
They are actually fighting very hard for the soul of america - as they see it. Virtuous efforts to stop the villainy and stupidity of the venomous yet weak liberals, leftists and democrats.
There’s a system in place to manufacture narratives, the closest analogy would be wrestling - except the President doesn’t treat it as fiction, he acts as if it’s real.
And since you can make and sell narratives incredibly quickly, while facts and analysis are days of effort - well, you have a structural change to the market place of ideas.
It happens everywhere in democracies now. See Brexit - entirely predictable. Yet completely unable to “sell” the known and clear problems to a majority of the citizenry.
Same with tariffs.
There’s a floor to people’s capability in navigating our current information environments - and partisan groups of experts are happy to use it to their advantage.
The problem began empirically with conservative positions, but the efficacy of the technique has now created its own political force.
The wrestling analogy is exactly how I feel watching Trump since 2016. I feel like I am watching WWE wrestling, and it is obviously fake. The actors are not actually fighting. Except half the country is completely convinced that it is real. Its hard to find common ground or even explain why I think it is fake, because it feels like it would be self-evident to anyone over the age of 12.
I'd say it's more like trash reality tv. The media loves it because people watch. They can highlight/create narratives and selectively edit footage to craft the storyline. In pro wrestling, on the other hand, the heel is in on it and plays their part in service to the story. That's not the case here.
Because time slows down relative the outside observed as you get closer to the event horizon any matter falling inwards starts to compress blocking the matter above it until eventually that matter is compressed to an extreme against the event horizon. The photons that get fired off from that interaction away from the black hole are able to escape and that's why we can see some black holes as being extremely bright. However matter that is spiraling inwards will be blasted by hundreds of years worth of photons from every direction while inside this matter and energy goop and all sorts of other particles in a matter of moments relative to how it is experiencing time.
Ah, I gotcha, thanks for explaining. Yeah the 'accretion disk' are what this is normally called. Lots of matter is getting smashed right outside the EH, creating heat energy, and like you said it's able to blast out photons.
That's right, but why make rooting almost Impossible? Why they are fighting rooting at all? They could make rooting easier, for example in the hidden developer menu.
I recently was looking at a 4 speaker switch on monoprice. It was $20 two months ago. Now it's $40. It occurred to me that the parts in this speaker switch amounted to be $2 of raw parts. The simplest of plastic pieces with basic copper wires and metal screws. Yet they were shipping it here and forcing American consumers to pay $20 in taxes instead of possibly claiming an almost $36 profit margin by paying $2 of taxes on raw parts and assembling it here. Now I know it hasn't been long enough but these are the types of opportunities that are now available in the economy. If an assembling plant is there then that creates opportunities downstream to in-source even the raw parts too. Anyway that's just been where my mind goes about these things recently. I generally support free markets.
1) Labor will be a lot more expensive if assembly is done in the US, and since parts are cheap, labor will likely be the biggest expense.
2) Working at assemblying cheap shit is bottom of the barrel work that people only do when they are desperate. It's either work or starve. It's why those jobs are outsourced to where labor is extremely cheap.
I am not from the US, but I read these posts with some mild amusement, because there is poetry that I am unable to capture.
Like, the goal of most countries is escaping the middle income trap and becoming advanced economies, and now people in the richest, most advanced economy there is want a regression to have assembly sweatshops instead of an advanced economy based on services and finance.
The funny part is that people that advocate for that wouldn't want in a million years to work in an assembly sweatshop. They count that someone else will do the job. Maybe immigrants, before they are deported to some concentration camp in Central America.
On the other hand we always rail against exploitative overseas labor practices here. Maybe this is actually a very progressive policy. We can all spend one day a week assembling electronics like Marx would have wanted.
How much more do you think it will cost for Americans to assemble? (at least double but more likely 5 times considering other factors like healthcare, environmental and safety regulations)
What do you think happens when China and other countries lose manufacturing capacity to US re-shoring... they will seek to regain elsewhere. Guess where most of the raw materials for electronics come from... it's not the US. This can't be redistributed.
Manufacturing reshoring is not an answer, it's a delay. You spend tons of capital getting it back and then it dies in 10 years anyway.
Simultaneously, everyone in charge thinks the US population needs to increase. It doesn't math out.
US manufacturers response to 25% tariffs on washing machines was to raise their prices by exactly 25%. $80 million was collected in tariffs, $2 billion was paid by US consumers in increased prices. Increased prices caused a reduction in units sold. US manufacturers increased profits on reduced sales led them to close plants, lay people off and fund share buybacks. Chinese manufacturers avoided the tariffs by moving production to Vietnam and increasing US prices. Net result, higher prices and reduced employment.
> Yet they were shipping it here and forcing American consumers to pay $20 in taxes instead of possibly claiming an almost $36 profit margin by paying $2 of taxes on raw parts and assembling it here
You assume that salary of people involved in putting the speaker together (or more likely robotic automatization) would amount to 2$ per speaker?
Are you going to make an investment to seize that opportunity when you don't know if your $2 in parts might become $50 overnight because the President woke up with economics on his mind?
This is why the 4th amendment exists. It is my favorite amendment. I wish people would take it more seriously.