Add to this the nuclear family.

The nuclear family is an other depressant to birth rates. Previous configurations were multi-generational homes where grandparents were right there and could look after the kids. Society has changed. We went from packs of free ranging kids who were allowed to be bored to scheduling kids lives.

Humans had evolved to live in groups where the group would take care of the children. Now its parents pretty much only taking care of their own, duplicating that effort. No wonder everyone is exhausted. Something's gotta give.

No Child Left Behind - teach test taking, rather than subject matter or how to think.

Continually being told "all you have to do is believe" - and similar fake encouragements.

If you look attractive, you'll get into hollywood - why study anything?

If you are strong, you'll be in professional sports - why study anything?

Teachers' hands being tied in how they customize their lesson plans for the students they have.

Attention spans are __gone__.

I'm probably missing half a dozen.

They usually say the opposite of what winds up happening.

The "nuclear family" is a sad degeneration of the multi generation family that was common for much of the 20th century. The nuclear family was a lot less happy than the myths say. Way back was also a time that people in the neighborhood would look out for each other, and each others' kids. That is not today's culture.

Its good for kids to naturally hang out in unplanned groups of varying ages where the slightly older kids teach the younger ones. Adults would be drinking beer outside, more or less in view of the kids. No amount of "nuclear family" is sufficient to bring back that sense of community and belonging.

The implementation details, insurmountable or not, should be addressed once the basic question of would be be worth it is explored.

This is not a test of a basic income system, but it is a test of the effects of BI. For the recipients, it is essentially indistinguishable from BI.

The financing part is the engineering and political part. The implementation part. No pieces are missing, but it may be very difficult to assemble. This study, if conducted rigorously, is about the science and understanding.

It grows the economy more than it costs the economy over the long term, it can be viable. We have some data on that though not complete data. Is this repeatable? I think it would have to be for any significant pilots are attempted.

their tax rates should go the fuck up for this and stay up for a good long time.

Those can be unstable. If they don't devolve into hour long meetings, they are just peacy.

The wall's main purpose was to erect a big middle finger pointing south.

It's secondary purpose was grift [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53853297]

It never actually had anything to do with security.

Maybe this solves the problem of the NRA having to turn over documents for any investigations into money trails.

Taking the units off the market would not help them. They would still have to pay the property/vacancy tax.

Raise the property tax a lot, but give tax relief to occupied properties. This is effectively a vacancy tax but it is much easier to show space being rented out than for the city to prove it is unoccupied.

Well, bribery he's admitted too already. That is enough for me.

Not while violating Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution or Article II, Section 4 of the constitution.

No more soft drinks for me.

That their own taxes pay for these things, and don't consider them "free".

It is a straw man to say those who want government programs want "free" things.