Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The WTF? Thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • San Bernardhinault
    replied
    True. A one-off "We'll buy your house for something close to market value, but it'll fall into the sea and you have to fuck off somewhere else, and that is that - no more offers after this one, and no more bail outs (or bale outs), anything that goes wrong, any time you flood, you're getting yourselves out of their and dealing with any mess" would be something I'd think was acceptable. I bet none of them would take it, thinking that the government was still going to rescue them next time. And they'd probably be right.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hot Pepsi
    replied
    Originally posted by San Bernardhinault View Post
    You're probably right about Salisbury, although I'd not be 100% sure. Most of the homes on the coast look like they were built in the last 60 years or so. Still, I don't think the state should necessarily bail out people who have waterfront property, even if its owned generationally. Because once you start doing that you end up funding the rescue of all the fools who've been buying coastal property in Florida or South Carolina while ignoring geography and physics, expecting Big Government to save them while at the same time whining about Big Government.
    Bailing them out once and telling them they have to get out might be cheaper than endless temporary fixes funded by endless backroom political deals.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hot Pepsi
    replied
    I think it is “recognized” in a few other states, but maybe not “observed.”

    Leave a comment:


  • Exiled off Main Street
    replied
    Originally posted by Hot Pepsi View Post

    Not exactly.

    It's on Patriot's Day, which is a rare example of a state holiday, officially observed in Massachusetts and a few other states but not nationally. It honors the first battles of the American Revolution/War of Independence in Massachusetts.

    Patriot's Day was established in Massachusetts in 1894. The marathon has been run on that day, as part of the celebration, since 1897.

    People in Boston get shitfaced on any day off work.
    Although it is a State Holiday (in MA and Maine only) - only state run offices are closed. We all go to work as usual - public schools will be closed for spring break, not Universities. It's kinda of a fake holiday like Evacuation Day (Boston only)

    Leave a comment:


  • San Bernardhinault
    replied
    You're probably right about Salisbury, although I'd not be 100% sure. Most of the homes on the coast look like they were built in the last 60 years or so. Still, I don't think the state should necessarily bail out people who have waterfront property, even if its owned generationally. Because once you start doing that you end up funding the rescue of all the fools who've been buying coastal property in Florida or South Carolina while ignoring geography and physics, expecting Big Government to save them while at the same time whining about Big Government.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hot Pepsi
    replied
    Originally posted by San Bernardhinault View Post
    Or, at the very least, accept that when you buy coastfront property in a warming climate with more extreme weather events that you're playing roulette with the odds that your house will survive until you die.

    I think the fact that insurers won't insure and mortage companies won't give mortgages on waterfront properties is a bit of a giveaway that you're just hoping your house outlives you.
    In the case of the people in Salisbury, many of those houses have been owned by those families for many generations. These aren't all wealthy people who had other options for how to invest that money.

    Certainly, they were built long before anyone worried about climate change.

    It might be cheaper in the long run for the state to just buy them out and let nature take it's course. Sorta like Centralia.
    Last edited by Hot Pepsi; 13-03-2024, 17:18.

    Leave a comment:


  • San Bernardhinault
    replied
    Or, at the very least, accept that when you buy coastfront property in a warming climate with more extreme weather events that you're playing roulette with the odds that your house will survive until you die.

    I think the fact that insurers won't insure and mortage companies won't give mortgages on waterfront properties is a bit of a giveaway that you're just hoping your house outlives you.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hot Pepsi
    replied
    Jesus said that in Matthew and Luke.
    It is interpreted ethically and eschatologically, but like all of those parables, it refers to something that the audience would have understood. So even 2000 years ago, they knew that building a house on sand was stupid.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ginger Yellow
    replied
    “I don’t know what the solution is,” Guilmette said.
    Don't build/buy homes on an eroding, sinking shoreline?

    Leave a comment:


  • Evariste Euler Gauss
    replied
    If the 3 little pigs story had been about a threat from the tide rather than from a wolf, that's what the first little pig would have used.

    Incidentally, if anyone fancies a chuckle, this is good:

    Finnemore 3 Little Pigs (youtube.com)

    Leave a comment:


  • ad hoc
    replied
    Barrier built out of sand proves to be ineffective against the sea. Who could ever have guessed it? https://www.thedailybeast.com/dollar...st-just-3-days

    Leave a comment:


  • beak
    replied
    Dutch has the wholly cromulent landbouw but unfortunately uses it to refer to agriculture.

    Leave a comment:


  • hobbes
    replied
    We need a different term for it. How about "Land Coining."

    Leave a comment:


  • ad hoc
    replied
    Originally posted by ursus arctos View Post
    ad hoc Would you consider the traditional Dutch practice centred on drainage and the construction of barriers to be more fairly described as "reclamation"?

    I would be inclined to do so.
    I don't think we are "re"claiming anything (as per HP and Beak). We're extending the land area or something. It's not really a word I has thought about before yesterday evening on this thread but it's a bit odd really.

    However I can see drainage as being different from dumping enough stuff in the sea to create land

    Leave a comment:


  • San Bernardhinault
    replied
    Day old clamato is past its best by

    Leave a comment:


  • caja-dglh
    replied
    Originally posted by ursus arctos View Post

    For a moment, I thought you had changed your avatar to a bottle of Clamato
    Not a bad idea. The Sancho sauce is past its best by.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hot Pepsi
    replied
    I doubt that. I don’t think anyone arrived on the east coast until after the glaciers had receded.

    And it wasn’t many people and thew moved around. I don’t think they ever would have “claimed” all that area such that anyone could “reclaim” it from the sea.


    The population of all the Americas before colonization was no more than about 100m. Maybe a bit more. But mostly in the south.

    The only estimate I could find said only about 100,000 people lived in New England in 1600.

    Leave a comment:


  • ursus arctos
    replied
    Originally posted by caja-dglh View Post
    I think he is simply joking on this theme.
    For a moment, I thought you had changed your avatar to a bottle of Clamato

    Leave a comment:


  • ursus arctos
    replied
    It is incredibly messed up, but sadly typical of our times

    Leave a comment:


  • Janik
    replied
    Originally posted by Hot Pepsi View Post
    We can't be said to be "reclaiming" it. We're just "claiming it." There's no "re" about it. The area, in most cases, has been underwater as long as the humans have been in the area.
    The dubious claims department is hot footing it over.

    Humans have been basically everywhere, particularly continental costal areas, since the last ice age. Why? Precisely because of the last ice age, or rather it’s peak (certain definitions of “ice age” mean it’s still ongoing). That created land bridges such as between Great Britain and mainland Europe and North America and Russia that allowed humans to migrate everywhere. Estimated sea level rise since then is 100+ metres. Those bays around Boston, or the Zuidersee in Holland were never more than a handful of metres deep. Their time as sea was both brief and, in geological terms, extremely recent.

    White humans may only have been in Boston whilst those bays were water-filled. That’s a different thing, though.

    Leave a comment:


  • caja-dglh
    replied
    I have looked a little to see if this is here or any other thread (even the NYT thread although this is quite a good investigation). It is certainly really messed up and a relatively long read.

    Seeking social media stardom for their underage daughters, mothers post images of them on Instagram. The accounts draw men sexually attracted to children, and they sometimes pay to see more.

    Leave a comment:


  • caja-dglh
    replied
    I think he is simply joking on this theme.

    Leave a comment:


  • ursus arctos
    replied
    Does he mean Clamato?

    It isn't alcoholic

    Clamato /kləˈmɑːtəʊ/, /kləˈmeɪtəʊ/, /kləˈmętoʊ/ is a commercial drink made of reconstituted tomato juice concentrate and sugar, which is flavored with spices, dried clam broth and MSG.[1] It is made by Mott's.

    Leave a comment:


  • beak
    replied
    I get the disagreement with the term "reclamation", but would say the term at least makes a little more sense when discussing e.g. draining marshes and fens, where the land has always been present but inconvenient to humans, as opposed to piling tons of mud, rubble, and dead gangsters into a body of water.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hot Pepsi
    replied
    That is a thing - variant of Michelada - but not in Boston, as far as I know.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X