|
Nintendo Kid posted:Blacksburg, VA to Pontiac, MI, for instance. That's one I recently traveled, at the time the Amtrak fare was $89 while Greyhound wouldn't go lower than $119 and required 6 transfers (in part because you had to get your own way to the nearest city with a greyhound stop) instead of just 4. I... stand corrected. 
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 04:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 11:13 |
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:Literally the only time I've taken Amtrak in recent memory was when I needed to get back to Irvine and was stuck in San Diego without a car. Ah, but how did you get back from the station?! (Also I highly recommend you take Amtrak up to SLO, the views are beautiful.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 05:06
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:I... stand corrected. I should note that for Amtrak, they included bus service from a 3/4 mile walk from my apartment 100 miles over to the Lynchburg rail station in this cost (and it was a nice bus too! a regional transit agency bus with reclining seats and power outlets).
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 05:09
|
|
|
SporkOfTruth posted:Ah, but how did you get back from the station?! Begging one of my dormmates from sophomore year to give me a ride from the spectrum to campus did the trick.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 05:10
|
|
|
Dreylad posted:
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 05:23
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:FWIW WolfPAC has gotten bills passed in two States already (California(!) and Vermont) and has a bunch of others in process around the country. Good thing that even out of the pool of reformers, only a small fraction of them are goddamn dumb enough to think that the corporate personhood amendment would be a good idea.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 05:25
|
|
|
Defenestration posted:Yo why does it cost like $600 to fly from Boston to Montreal? Probably like most routes that cost a lot in airlines: both no subsidies from etiher city (las vegas is famous for the casino and entertainment buiness being willing to help subsidize down ticket prices to vegas for example) and likely it's a destination pair that primarily attracts business travelers, who are generally willing to pay more. It's also a very close set of destinations, only a 300 mile drive and people out to save money can just pay about $50 in gas to do itl so there's probably little demand for low cost airfare.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 06:05
|
|
|
Happy Fourth of July, D&D. I drank enough High Life and Charles Shaw to make me feel vaguely sick, then headed inside while my girlfriend and roommate became increasingly stoned and debated whether or not SoCal racists are dumb, evil fucks or dumb, misguided fucks. I'm sticking with the former, personally. What's the old adage? Beer before and also after wine, doing fine?
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 08:07
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Probably like most routes that cost a lot in airlines: both no subsidies from etiher city (las vegas is famous for the casino and entertainment buiness being willing to help subsidize down ticket prices to vegas for example) and likely it's a destination pair that primarily attracts business travelers, who are generally willing to pay more. It's entirely up to the bean-counters. How is the economy? We shut down some service to Vegas during the recession because, "Who has money to fly out and then gamble?" Fuel costs: Airlines hedge against these to protect profits (if they make any) and sometimes they do well, sometimes they don't. Consolidation: Wait for a competitor to get bogged down in poor management and legacy costs and go into bankruptcy, then try to acquire them while they are in bankruptcy so you can charge off debts, renegotiate contracts, sell off unneeded gate space/aircraft/materiel, and hire or furlough depending on the new airline's situation. I worked as a vender for US Airways when America West bought them. That same team is now becoming the new American Airlines. It is a messy procedure and people get screwed, some people get rewarded; but overall in the current climate consolidation is actually a good thing for the airlines (all of them) because things have changed so drastically since 9/11. Here's the beginning of a breakdown of how the accountants decide what routes are profitable enough to keep, what size aircraft to use, etc: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airline_cost_glossary It surely works similarly in the trains and bus transportation industries.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 08:18
|
|
|
Wolfsheim posted:Happy Fourth of July, D&D. I drank enough High Life and Charles Shaw to make me feel vaguely sick, then headed inside while my girlfriend and roommate became increasingly stoned and debated whether or not SoCal racists are dumb, evil fucks or dumb, misguided fucks. I'm sticking with the former, personally. The order in which you drink doesn't matter so much as how much actual alcohol is consumed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 09:01
|
|
|
Happy 4th of July everybody. This is a pro video.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 09:33
|
|
|
Kiwi Ghost Chips posted:Good thing that even out of the pool of reformers, only a small fraction of them are goddamn dumb enough to think that the corporate personhood amendment would be a good idea. What's wrong with it
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 09:37
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:What's wrong with it It would break our legal system (more)
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 12:22
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:What's wrong with it For one it'll take Mississippi about 30 seconds to make it illegal for a corporation to fund an abortion. http://www.vox.com/2014/7/2/5860732/six-reasons-liberal-should-like-corporate-personhood
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 14:52
|
|
|
haha, america is like the dumbest country in the world.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 15:16
|
|
R. Mute posted:haha, america is like the dumbest country in the world. it would be funnier if we didn't also have the biggest military. then at least maybe canada could save us from ourselves. 
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 15:37
|
|
|
Ignatius M. Meen posted:it would be funnier if we didn't also have the biggest military. then at least maybe canada could save us from ourselves. you might wanna wait until at least late 2015 for that
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 15:41
|
|
|
Defenestration posted:Yo why does it cost like $600 to fly from Boston to Montreal? Canadian air travel is hideously overpriced. I don't think you guys understand how good air fare is in the US comparatively.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 16:09
|
|
|
Vivian Darkbloom posted:What's wrong with it Corporate personhood is how it's possible for any form of corporation, business, non-profit or governmental to exist at all. The entire idea of a corporation is creating a separate legal person that can handle contracts and conduct business on behalf of as few as a single persn or as many as millions. Demanding an end to it is essentially on the level of demanding a return to the gold standard.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 16:11
|
|
|
good point! not that it matters because the US would more likely annex Canada rather than the other way around.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 16:27
|
|
|
If the US annexed Canada you'd either break the two-party American system, or guarantee that the Republicans would never be in power again. Uh, please don't annex us.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 16:52
|
|
|
Dreylad posted:If the US annexed Canada you'd either break the two-party American system, or guarantee that the Republicans would never be in power again. Too late, you've finally given democrats a war they can get behind. Bombing begins in five minutes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 17:36
|
|
|
P.S. please don't push our tanks off of the Niagara Falls
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 17:42
|
|
|
Dreylad posted:If the US annexed Canada you'd either break the two-party American system, or guarantee that the Republicans would never be in power again. Think of all the bourbon and Molson we could drink together!
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 17:47
|
|
|
Dr. Faustus posted:It's entirely up to the bean-counters. How is the economy? We shut down some service to Vegas during the recession because, "Who has money to fly out and then gamble?" Wow, thanks. That was a way more credible answer then I imagined
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 18:48
|
|
|
Dreylad posted:If the US annexed Canada you'd either break the two-party American system, or guarantee that the Republicans would never be in power again. pff, like we'd let you guys be states. You'd basically be one big Puerto Rico .
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
paragon1 posted:pff, like we'd let you guys be states. You'd basically be one big Puerto Rico . 
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
R. Mute posted:haha, america is like the dumbest country in the world. I think that may actually be Spain. I don't have any facts to back that up just gut feeling yk?
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 19:29
|
|
SedanChair posted:I think that may actually be Spain. spain owns gilipollas no hablas mierda q no sabes coño joé
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 19:38
|
|
|
Wolfsheim posted:Happy Fourth of July, D&D. I drank enough High Life and Charles Shaw to make me feel vaguely sick, then headed inside while my girlfriend and roommate became increasingly stoned and debated whether or not SoCal racists are dumb, evil fucks or dumb, misguided fucks. I'm sticking with the former, personally. The only reason order matters is because the drunker you get, the more likely you are to misjudge quantities, lose inhibition, and generally become worse at regulating your alcohol intake. For this reason it is wise to taper towards softer drinks the longer you've been drinking. If you've been drinking beer, then you start drinking liquor at nearly the same pace as you had been drinking beer, your BAC will quickly spike - the classic frathouse mistake. Wine is on average a little more than twice as strong as beer, but then again people don't usually drink pints of wine at a time. None of this matters if you can pace yourself and drink lots of water, allowing yourself time to feel how drunk you are before you get another drink.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 19:46
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Corporate personhood is how it's possible for any form of corporation, business, non-profit or governmental to exist at all. The entire idea of a corporation is creating a separate legal person that can handle contracts and conduct business on behalf of as few as a single persn or as many as millions. An entity is required, personhood is not. It's completely reasonable to separate people from legal constructs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 19:51
|
|
|
size1one posted:An entity is required, personhood is not. It's completely reasonable to separate people from legal constructs. That's already separated. You seem to be yet another person who has no idea what corporate personhood means, congrats.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
wheez the roux posted:spain owns gilipollas no hablas mierda q no sabes coño joé
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 20:23
|
|
size1one posted:An entity is required, personhood is not. It's completely reasonable to separate people from legal constructs. Corporate personhood is a legal construct. So is the category of "people".
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
do americans, like, realise that there are countries outside of the us and that many of these countries have found ways to do Things that they could easily copy if they wanted to? like, corporations aren't people here, i don't think, but they still exist and we aren't living in a literal hellscape yet. maybe you guys should check it out, i dunno
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 20:59
|
|
|
R. Mute posted:do americans, like, realise that there are countries outside of the us and that many of these countries have found ways to do Things that they could easily copy if they wanted to? like, corporations aren't people here, i don't think, but they still exist and we aren't living in a literal hellscape yet. maybe you guys should check it out, i dunno Corporations have personhood in every single country in the European Union. That's how corporations work and exist.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
R. Mute posted:do americans, like, realise that there are countries outside of the us and that many of these countries have found ways to do Things that they could easily copy if they wanted to? like, corporations aren't people here, i don't think, but they still exist and we aren't living in a literal hellscape yet. maybe you guys should check it out, i dunno Suggesting that we take our cues from other countries is a non-starter among a large section of Americans. As an example, for years, comparing our healthcare system to Canada's brought an almost reflexive fury and denial that their system could possibly work better than ours.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:That's already separated. I understand the concept just fine, thanks. It is not completely separate. Granting corporations "personhood" means that the terms "person" and "persons" apply to corporations too. We've created a system in which corporations and people are combined by default, rather than separate by default. They can't be explicitly separated in laws either because as persons they are guaranteed equal protection under the 14th. The only way they are separated now are for things that will never be enforced, challenged, or absurd (e.g. A corporation being required to purchase health insurance as a person or a corporation murdering someone). Discendo Vox posted:Corporate personhood is a legal construct. So is the category of "people". That doesn't disprove my point. The rules of the legal system were defined by people, and we can do that however we want.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 21:09
|
|
|
size1one posted:I understand the concept just fine, thanks. No, you do not understand the concept because you immediately posted the next paragraph. People are people. Corporations are only legal people. Corporations do not have full equal protection under the 14th amendment, they do not have full any rights. Every other country on earth that has corporations at all has corporations as persons, because that is literally the concept of a corporation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 21:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 11:13 |
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Corporations have personhood in every single country in the European Union. That's how corporations work and exist. is that what you're doing? getting really anal about legal semantics? i honestly don't know. it could be.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 21:13
|
|