Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The WTF? Thread
Collapse
X
-
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.
-
Originally posted by San Bernardhinault View PostYou'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:
-
I think it is “recognized” in a few other states, but maybe not “observed.”
Leave a comment:
-
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.
- Likes 1
Leave a comment:
-
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:
-
Originally posted by San Bernardhinault View PostOr, 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.
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:
-
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:
-
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:
-
“I don’t know what the solution is,” Guilmette said.
- Likes 2
Leave a comment:
-
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:
-
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:
-
Dutch has the wholly cromulent landbouw but unfortunately uses it to refer to agriculture.
Leave a comment:
-
However I can see drainage as being different from dumping enough stuff in the sea to create land
Leave a comment:
-
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:
-
Originally posted by caja-dglh View PostI think he is simply joking on this theme.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Hot Pepsi View PostWe 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.
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:
-
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.
Leave a comment:
-
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:
-
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:
-
That is a thing - variant of Michelada - but not in Boston, as far as I know.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: