Yes. In the middle of a shopping area https://goo.gl/maps/5AC7tTfhNvs surrounded by lots of food choices with a Safeway, Trader Joe's, Milk Pail and Walmart all within a 3 minute walk!
1,813 karma · joined January 28, 2012
I see this as a renegotiation of the deal when one party (SF) has realized that they are getting shafted.
Twitter, Uber, etc can always leave if they have a problem.
Everyone else that works in SF has to pay for their lunch on lower salaries. If the lunch cost is so unreasonable - bring a microwaveable meal or leftovers from last night.
I really don't get why anyone is acting like this is so horrible.
I am a (former) Evernote employee. Before I joined I didn't use Evernote. After I left I started using Evernote extensively (Hard to use the app when you are constantly messing up your test account doing dev work :-) )
From my experience there I know that:
1) the people there really care about the customers. If there is any sort of problem, the customer support will really go to bat for the customer. There are more than a few times where CS ensured that a bug fix made it in.
2) If there is any sort of data corruption, Evernote will stop the weekly release to get back the data before doing the next release.
3) You can get a hold of a live human being to get support
4) Evernote has a explicit policy of never going to an ad model.
5) User privacy is highly important.
6) User security is highly important - if Evernote had a choice between Evernote as a company getting hacked or a user (not even a customer) getting their account hacked. Evernote errors on the side of protecting the users' security.
Please reward this positive company by paying for the product - that is their only revenue source :-)
The Port Authority of NY and NJ is just such a agency.
Please don't be so broad brush in your statements.
WRT your wife - go to Europe and ride the trains there. Recently I went to Spain. In Spain even the ratty commuter train traveled at 90+ mph.
Ride the TGV or AVE train. Those are quick and comfortable.
If at that point she still feels the way she does fine. But "Americans don't like trains" is a statement that is not correct. On the east coast, Americans use the trains a lot
A much better statement is "Americans don't like an uncomfortable experience"
BTW: http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/
And in San Francisco Area, Caltrain is electrifying precisely because people love the train so much. Caltrain needs extra capacity and the only way to get that capacity is with electrification. Plenty of Americans seem to like Caltrain. Plenty of Californians are ready to use the HSR project when segments open up.
> The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people
Amtraks trains from the west coast to Chicago sell the same seat 2x - 3x over the course of one journey. Most people are NOT going end to end. I have ridden the California Zephyr from California to Denver.
I have see others get on (there are seat tickets) :
* in Utah going to Iowa.
* Nevada going further east in Nevada
* etc.
How much money does the interstate highway system make? Yet we keep funding that for some reason. How much money does you local streets make ?
And before you pull out the "completely different card" remember that both rail and highways serve the exact same societal need: Moving goods and humans from one place to another. We stick humans/goods in a box with wheels and roll them to their destination.
Explain why the box rolling on asphalt should be subsidized but the box rolling on steel should not?
> Replacing cross country Amtrak with comfortable buses would be faster, more reliable, cheaper, and more acccessible to the population that uses trains
I don't believe you have ever taken a bus long distances. I have. Its like being stuck in an airplane. The long distance busses in Thailand are o.k. However you are still glued to your seat in a way that is not true for trains.
There is a reason we are called the "United" states - no?
Not true.
Chicago to Detroit: 282 miles (4.5h via car) 5hours via train TODAY. (It should really be 2 hours with a train going ~180mph)
Chicago to St. Louis 311 miles (5h via car) 5.5 hours via train (With proper investment: 2.2 hours via HSR train)
Sure end to end may be long; but even then not as long as most people realize.
http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/12/26/china-opens-worlds-longe...
> China launched services Wednesday on the world’s longest high-speed rail route, linking the nation’s capital in Beijing all the way to the country’s southeastern hub of Guangzhou.
> Averaging speeds of up to 186 m.p.h. (300 km/h), the 1,425-mile (2,293 km) route now takes eight hours to complete;
New York to Los Angeles : 2775 miles. Or double the above line. 16 HOURS via High-Speed train. 16 HOURS.
As a point of reference flight time is 6 hours. (Not counting being at the airport 2 hours early, etc.) - so lets just say ~9 hours for a plane. So a plane is twice as fast; but with significantly less capacity.
Even today, most passengers on Amtrak are NOT riding end-to-end. They are riding between Utah and Nebraska; Or between South Carolina and Vermont; Or Boston to Connecticut.
On the California Zephyr - a coach seat is sold 2-3x times for different segments of the same journey.
There is no right to vote. So the rest of your case does not apply.
Furthermore, I don't agree at all with your analogy. I feel that it is fundamental requirement to have complete access to the law. So any examples, that result in arguing to the contrary I disagree with up to and including the "taking of property".
> But that doesn’t mean that you are obligated to let everyone onto your property!
This is also not true. The legal concept of "Easement by Necessity" ( https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/easement-by-n... ) applies so once again your example is incorrect.
> The obligation to ensure free access to the law rests squarely with the government.
Equal protection clauses and First Amendment control here. Otherwise there is secret law.
In a degenerate example, "the crime of murder and a proper defense shall be determined by standard 451 from the Bradbury Institute." The Bradbury Institute will be happy to sell a copy of that standard for $100 million.
> Along these lines, can the SDOs continue to make money on derivative goods such that they have an adequate incentive to continue producing these standards? As one amici notes, even after a sister circuit ruled that an organization that drafted a model building code adopted into law lost its copyright, see Veeck v. Southern Building Code Congress International, Inc., 293 F.3d 791 (5th Cir. 2002), its successor organization remains profitable both through sales of codes and of “program services, including consulting, certification, and training.” 66 Libraries Amicus Br. 22 (citing Int’l Code Council, Annual Report 52 (2015))
There is HUGE value in the training materials around proper use and understanding of these standards.
For example, a building standard may specify that a sewer plumbing run must have a 1"/12" slope for proper drainage. The training comes in the form of handling the problem cases and still staying compliant with the standard.
In the accounting field, accounting standards are made and enforced to a large degree by private entities. Staying current requires constant training hours, recertification and in some cases external visits from other accounting professionals.
Especially, if the fact is real. Facebook wants to be a media company (http://fortune.com/2016/12/23/zuckerberg-media-company/) except when they don't.
A media company has a responsibility to accuracy.
You ignored the part where I said that if a person has served their sentence, this represents the end of the social punishment. If you want to argue for a life long sentence than do so.
In order for someone to function, they need a job. A convicted and released child rapist needs to pay rent. How would you propose housing, clothing this person so they are not homeless in front of your office?
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/jul/14/citizenfour-dir...
"Citizenfour director Laura Poitras sues US over 'Kafkaesque harassment'
Film-maker whose documentary about Edward Snowden won an Oscar says she has been held for hours at a time by airport officials, told she was on a no-fly list and threatened with handcuffs for taking notes"
1. How would someone else know that the person did X?
2. What if that crime had nothing had bearing on the position?
3. What about the concept of a sentence representing the 'complete payment to society'? Denying someone the ability to make a living turns a finite sentence into an indefinite sentence.
For me,
1. If someone was guilty of embezzlement, this would be relevant (positive or negative) if the position involving money handling (cashier, or accounting) - but not relevant if the position was social work.
2. If the person was guilty of stalking, a position that would allow access to customers' PII would be problematic.
There is your really good reason.
From article:
"We had one ladder here that was fully involved in a fire for 25 minutes, and the whole tip of it—six feet—was crispy. It looked like a log you pull out of a campfire," Braun says. "That can't go back in service but we were curious, so we put a new halyard [rope used to hoist ladders] on it for a load test. Even in that condition, it passed."
I bet the expert woodmakers doing this job have very good reasons. Reasons that you haven't thought of..
Seriously, these people are experts. They probably know their job, really, really well.