Sorry, on mobile now and it's difficult to look up. You can search for the number of arrests and the number of lethal shootings during an arrest by race. Black people have far more interactions with police per capita, but each interaction is less likely to result in death than for other races.

What exactly? The tax return information is available from the IRS. Cross-reference it with Census district zoning.

So offices create value, not people in them? Do a mental experiment: replace offices with remote work. How much value remains?

No. Around 80-85% of people would prefer to live in single-family homes. People instead are forced by economics to live in dense areas that are designed to be hostile for humans (bike lanes instead of roads, forced public transit, no good grocery stores forcing people to eat junk, etc.)

Police are statistically less likely to harm Black people during an arrest.

This is simply false. Most of the US wealth is generated in suburbs. Or perhaps you think that companies are people?

Urban cores steal from suburbia by taxing company offices that are located in urban cores. But if you look at PERSONAL tax returns, suburbia is clearly funding the lifestyle of urban cores. And as usual, welfare queens always think that they're actually the hardest-working and deserve all they get.

Yeah, let's instead force people into 15-minute neighborhoods. With barbed wire and fences, so they won't dare to go out.

Cheaper housing, better jobs, more space for kids, better entrepreneurship, better general outcomes. There's simply nothing that urban cores can offer in these areas.

Yes, classic American suburb. And it IS cheaper.

The houses themselves tend to be more expensive because they tend to be larger. But the _services_ do NOT significantly differ in cost!

The problem is that construction and maintenance in cities is FREAKING EXPEN$$$$IVE. For example, Greater Houston Area is mostly suburban and has similar population as NYC. Yet GHA spends 2.5 _times_ _less_ per capita. If you look at specific services, it's a wash. Police is slightly cheaper in suburbs, sewer is more expensive, water is similar, electricity is cheaper.

Nope. It's cheaper to ban all commercial construction larger than 2 stories and just shoot everyone who proposes densification.

Because of toxic urbanism. Large cities subsidize the large companies by offloading externalities (costs of living) on population.

No. Leftists are morons. And you're right about the location: we need to dis-aggregate cities to make other locations viable.

Another way to look at it: city cores became so toxically dense that they force people to live in misery, because it's their only option. In other words: the country is getting strangled by bike lanes.

Nationwide. There are almost 1.10 houses per family, we literally have empty houses decaying right now because nobody lives there.

Bullshit. Suburbans are the CHEAPEST way to construct housing. And we have so many homeless because we _stopped_ constructing new suburbs.

Can you tell me without looking it up, how many housing units per family do we have right now?

Oldie but goodie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

You know that it's not true! They're extremely understaffed in their legal department, they don't have enough lawyers to sue their customers for license violations.

??? This is pretty common terminology. Enhancers ("performance enhancing drugs") are designed to _enhance_ something above the baseline, not just to merely correct a pathology.

If you don't know this, perhaps you should go back and do some more study?

Sigh. Can you cut out the "prescribed drugs are bad because they must be bad" bullshit?

ADHD stimulants absolutely do not work as _enhancers_, as your article explains. But they are not used as enhancers, they are used as medicine to fix problems. As another example: vitamin C does pretty much nothing normally, but if you have scurvy, it's life-saving. Here's an important quote from your article:

Which basically says: "ADHD drugs are not needed if you can fix all the symptoms of ADHD without drugs". Well, duh.

At 1500kW it won't be spending _extended_ periods of time charging. If you want to charge a battery for 75kWh, then 5% of that is just around 4kWh.

Assuming the thermal mass of the battery 300kg, and specific heat capacity of 2000J per 1 kg per 1 C, that's a delta of 24C. So just simply using the battery's thermal mass completely passively without any cooling is probably going to work.

Modern batteries are about 95% efficient at charging. So at 1500kW you're looking at dissipating about 75kW (100hp).

A 100hp gasoline engine needs to dissipate around 250hp of heat energy. In other words, cooling an EV is completely trivial compared to cooling an ICE car.

Pretty much all stations now accept credit cards. I think you can pay physical cash on some chargers that are attached to actual gas stations.