What’s your argument?
Streets in Europe are (with few exceptions) narrower than in the US. Is there a natural consequence for speed limits? Does it take some kind of special mental capacity to follow legal speed limits in streets that perceivably could be traversed faster?
Bad faith argument much?
Loudly and visibly changing the rules doesn’t “create offenders”. Offenders aren’t victims of changed rules.
It has been shown time and again that lowering speed limits in cities reduces traffic accidents and emissions at close to no costs to the flow of traffic.
My own city (in Germany, so it really was a heavily-criticized decision) lowered the speed limit on one of the major arterial roads to 30 kph. It is one I have to use regularly, and oh boy, let me tell you: I was soooo opposed to the change. Yet, it really only changed how fast you arrive at the next red light. There is literally no discernable change in how long it takes to pass that street, especially during rush hour. Traffic just got a little more fluid.
It is, however, the street with the most speeding tickets in town. I regularly see one or two mobile speed cameras along the way. And I’ve never been fined. You got to wonder…
This.
Religious studies is a mandatory subject in school, so I’m baffled that there’s still such an egregious gap in Islam lessons taught by state-approved, scientifically educated Islam teachers sworn to the German constitution. Because, for reference, that’s what Catholic and Protestant religion teachers are.
Why let Ditib Imams or otherwise potentially radicalized preachers spoil the Muslim youth? Germany needs to define and proliferate a modern, moderate and peaceful Islam.
Fastest speedrun was like not even 10 minutes.
And that was to beat him. Just reaching him and dying to him should go substantially faster:
Property acquisition in the US more expensive than in Europe? I think not, at least for the immense swaths of land that make up most of the US’ land mass.
The legal fees I see, but that’s why most developed nations have legislature for disowning property owners of land necessary for infrastructure at a set compensation. Whether that’s fair or just is up for ideological debate, I’m sure.
The Commission transmitted a proposal to the European Parliament. The Parliament and the European Council have to discuss and pass the proposal for it to go into effect.
The Samsung Galaxy S4 made me a meme at my local network provider store between 2013 and 2015. That model just kept on breaking for no discernible reason.
My first S4 (S4 0), the one that I actually bought with my new service plan, held up nicely for about half a year. Then, it started to randomly power off. Using my phone as my alarm in the morning, I overslept several times due to this. It also just randomly turned off in my pocket, and later even in my hand. I was able to replicate the error in the store. They replaced the phone with a new one (S4 1).
The entirely brand-new phone had a swelling battery after three months, which I replaced out of pocket with a new original one. This one, too, bulged up soon. A third, off-brand battery did the same. Back to the shop I went. Of course, they told me it ought to be user error, which I couldn’t disprove on the spot. So I offered to insert one of their brand new batteries and leave my phone with them for two weeks, using a loaner. They accepted and, lo and behold, the phone inflated that battery, too, just lying in their shop drawer being charged. This got me my second replacement device (S4 2).
This phone had no electronic problems. The screen, however, sat visibly snuck between the bezels. I applied a then-novel glass screen protector to the screen instead of the usual adhesive films. The screen developed tension cracks below the screen protector. Back in I went and got the screen replaced under warranty (to my own surprise). I even had them apply a new protector screen which had a little bubble around a speck of dust at the bottom. We were on first name basis at this point, so we laughed about it, arguing that the bubble needn’t annoy me too, since I’d be back soon anyway.
I was back soon, anyway. The screen cracked again. They remembered the bubble, saw I hadn’t dabbled with the protector, and surmised that the fault needed to be this phones faulty manufacturing. I got the third replacement (S4 3). It’d be my last one, too.
The Samsung Galaxy S4 was a great phone, in and of itself. It had great features at a competitive price point, was really slim and offered good performance while not entirely buying into the whole phablet trend. I liked it, in concept. The people at “my” cellular shop assured me that it was, in fact, freaky how often I had problems with the model. They were said to be as reliable as the current iPhones.
My last Galaxy S4 started to show the known power-off issue a few months shy of 2 years since my original purchase, meaning the EU-mandated warranty was about to run out. I sold it as partly defect and got a different brand phone.
Is there an SCP for this?
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
It’d be more fitting to mandate every product to include its ecological price. Disposable vapes, for example, would disappear instantly.
Oooooh, that’s a neat idea in light of the current EU legislation concerning the Right to Repair: Introduce a mandatory, highly visible, and standardized seal that all electronic devices have to display on the front of their box:
Repairable
or
Disposable
My previous sentence sets the principle, your answer rejects the principle on an all-or-nothing basis, my following comment clarifies the application of said principle within the comparatively narrow setting of schools.
I’m not sure what’s left unclear.
It’s not about preventing religious conflicts. It’s about not giving those conflicts a forum at school, the place where children learn to be tolerant from people who aren’t their potentially fundamentally religious parents.
I hope Unity’s legal team is prepared.
I really hope they’re not, because this practice needs to crash and burn brightly as a warning beacon to other corpos’ grubby fingers.
The problem isn’t any spiritual or religious connection the children form. The problem is that most monotheistic religions are very rigid in their exclusive prerogative of interpretation concerning all things fundamental and truth-related.
Having more than one exclusively-dominant religion represented in any one space must lead to unsolvable conflict. Contradicting absolutes cannot tolerate each other.
Given that a functioning state must necessarily assume the role of a sovereign, banning religion from public spaces is pretty much the only solution for preventing religious conflicts.
Ham, cheese, and mayo it is.
I’ll raise you some mozzarella.
What about potato salad, noodle salad and similar dishes containing cooked components?
This is the correct solution: Don’t cater to anti-social consumer choices, but tow religiously.