I think it was already happening under Clinton and Bush, but Trump brought decorum to an end. In fairness, in the 1850s we had a congressman shouting classless insults at another before that other congressman beat him with a cane, so it was worse right before the civil war.
Agreed but it was fun to type! A useful outlet if you will. Politics has always been a dirty game. I long for the days that we argued about arugula and 48%. For some reason that seems like a classy debate compared to where we are now, 2nd grade insults.
Yeah, people used to duel over the slightest insult back in the day. I'll definitely take what we have now.
Yeah, when we consider how nasty politics is, we need to remember that it was much worse back in the day and that it's much worse in other parts of the world. People in parliaments in Asia, Europe, and Africa get beaten up from time to time.
So the best solution to US immigration policy (meaning something other than open borders) at UT is segregation. George Wallace would be so proud.
The State has an interest in managing local municipalities waste/recycling programs? If so, Texas may be just as "crazy conservative" as California is "crazy liberal".
Legally the Court did the right thing. The bans violate state law. On the merits, I'm not necessarily a bag ban advocate, but I think banning the bans is dumber than the bans themselves. Just leave it up to cities to do what they deem appropriate for their communities. The beauty of local control is that if you don't like the ban, you can just drive to a suburb to shop. It isn't a big deal. And FWIW, I live in a country with a "bag ban." It's not the apocalypse.
We're drowning in plastic waste (see Great Pacific Garbage Patch). It kills a lot of wildlife when they ingest it. You hear it said that every plastic module ever made is still in existence. That turns out to not be true, mainly because Europe and Japan burn plastic waste and get rid of it that way. But your average plastic bag can last for centuries in a landfill. Sounds like a very nearsighted decision to me. Does anybody really care what they bring the groceries home in?
Having lived in Austin since 1994 I've survived the "Bagacalypse." Randalls gives me a nice paper sack with handles every time and I use them for garbage sacks. We do spend 10 cents at Target (my daughters home away from home) and I don't mind paying. I always forget my cloth bags in the trunk anyway. That's on me. No inconvenience here...
Couldn't the court have simply refused to take up the case? I know nothing about this case but it would seem to make sense that a local municipality should be able to manage this. If Austin wants to be "green" with no plastic bags why should the State care? Stating before that I know nothing about this case is it something that conservative judges had a knee-jerk reaction to an environmental agenda?
Because we aren't the world's biggest offender we shouldn't worry about environmental impact. OK. "Virtue signaling" has become a euphamism for anyone who cares about anyone other than themselves and their conservative friends.
They could have, but the result would have been the same. The cities were the ones appealing. They had already lost at the intermediate appellate court level. I agree, but remember that cities are not to the states as the states are to the federal government. States might grant cities a certain degree of autonomy, but they don't have to. If they want to interfere, they pretty much can, whether it's a good idea or not. The Texas Supreme Court is rabidly pro-business and will typically do whatever the business community wants it to do. Furthermore, it doesn't mind butchering the law to do it, and it will legislate from the bench or abuse its power in various ways if that's what it takes. However, from a legal standpoint, this was a no-brainer. The state had the right to "ban the bans," and it passed legislation that was clearly designed to do exactly that. It was pretty clear. Having said that, there was a kneejerk reaction to an environmental agenda, but it came from the Legislature when it prohibited the ordinances. It didn't help that the City of Austin led the charge for the bans (though the case at issue actually involved the City of Laredo). The Legislature pretty much hates the City of Austin for obvious reasons and loves to screw with it
Yet force others to do their bidding for no good reason. What’s wrong with properly disposing the plastic bag?
US college education costs have risen 297% from 1979. But a McDonald's Happy Meal costs 40% less. One is subsidized by the taxpayer, one is not.
This will read crude but it is reality as well -- I am guessing the chart for the amount of human waste the various countries put in the oceans is somewhat similar.
Generally sewers mostly dump into rivers which biologically treat the sewage prior to reaching the ocean. Even the amount that reaches the ocean, it tends to bio-degrade close to shores in bays and beaches. The oceans are fine. More crude - when a waiter asks if you want water, say no and add “you know what WC Fields said about water” (btw he preferred whiskey). Answer: Fish frack in it.
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018...l-massive-scale-human-sacrifice-aztec-capital PC caused historians to ignore detailed accounts by the Spanish of this atrocity.
I think I read last month less than 2% of all surface water on earth is free of any trace of human feces contamination. Something like that
