[Q&A] Questions you want answered (D&D Edition)

Reviving for the new D&D:
-ask or answer questions better suited for D&D than EE
-not intended as a debate thread; if people want to debate a particular issue feel free to create a new thread for it.

H.P. Lovesauce wrote:
AUs_TBirD wrote:

I'm an architect, and we've noticed the recent slowdown. Friends with relevant knowledge have reported that applications for new building permits have collapsed this year.

Please forgive the lack-of-knowledge ignorance, but beyond broad-strokes "economic activity," can anyone explain why is this a bad thing? I understand developers only make money when they build new stuff, much as a shark dies if it stops swimming, but in my experience, buildings do not evaporate.

Can renovation + infrastructure improvements not serve as well?

Basically it's bad because building more housing is the best way to relieve the largest source of pressure driving up the cost of housing, which is a major issue just about everywhere now.

Stengah wrote:
H.P. Lovesauce wrote:
AUs_TBirD wrote:

I'm an architect, and we've noticed the recent slowdown. Friends with relevant knowledge have reported that applications for new building permits have collapsed this year.

Please forgive the lack-of-knowledge ignorance, but beyond broad-strokes "economic activity," can anyone explain why is this a bad thing? I understand developers only make money when they build new stuff, much as a shark dies if it stops swimming, but in my experience, buildings do not evaporate.

Can renovation + infrastructure improvements not serve as well?

Basically it's bad because building more housing is the best way to relieve the largest source of pressure driving up the cost of housing, which is a major issue just about everywhere now.

As someone with friends in the both the building and planning industries, my understanding is that the commercial building slowdown is obvious because there’s little demand. Lots of people want to buy houses but can’t afford to due to high interest rates. Meanwhile, building makes up a large portion of the local economy in many areas. It’s a loss of a lot of good paying blue collar jobs that have taken the place of factory work.

Mabye this goes here

Who determines who is on the ballot in each state - for federal elections?

The first Google result says

Usually, you win the nomination by winning a party’s primary election. You can qualify for the primary ballot a few different ways:

In some states, like in Missouri and Alabama, you just need to file with the state’s elections office by completing any required paperwork and paying any fees. Some states that require filing fees will waive them if you submit a petition — in Kansas, for example, you can qualify for the congressional primary without paying the $1,760 fee by getting the signatures of 2% of party members in your district.
In others, like in Illinois and Maine, you must submit a petition with a certain number of signatures from voters registered with the same political party. The required number of signatures varies by state. In Maine, for example, if you want to get on the primary ballot for the U.S. House you must collect 1,000 signatures from registered Democrats in your district.
Finally, some states, like Colorado and Connecticut, have party conventions where the party chooses candidates for the primary election, although unselected candidates can still qualify for the primary ballot by submitting a petition.
Smaller political parties that don’t hold primaries typically nominate their candidates through caucuses or conventions.

Which is all fine - ok but that means it is the states that decide who is on the ballot by whatever method they choose.

So it is a state's rights thing. Which means I don't see how the federal supreme court can take that away. if the states have the right to decide who is on the ballot then the feds can't say you have to have person X on the ballot. It is up to the state.

At least that is what would make sense to me so I am not sure what the legal argument is that 'states can decide who is on the ballot, unless they decide a way the feds don't like'

Republicans only believe in states rights when it's politically convenient. And that includes the Republicans on the supreme court.

Can someone explain why Congress just voted to send billions in aid to Israel? Aid for what?

Reuters says it was "$26 billion for Israel, including $9.1 billion for humanitarian needs".

The rest is mostly money which they use to buy weapons. A certain amount of the money they normally get from us is required to be used to purchase weapons from the US, and there is a provision that Israel may only use those weapons for its own defense (whether that provision is being followed or not is - of course - a matter of some debate). Another amount is for things like their missile defense system.

I don't know what specifically is in this particular "supplemental" aid package, but I'd imagine the terms are roughly similar to what they normally get.

LeapingGnome wrote:

Can someone explain why Congress just voted to send billions in aid to Israel? Aid for what?

In reverse order: To aid in their genocide. To funnel money to arms manufacturers.

Well, it's like how states spend gambling funds. You have a bunch of money for genocide stuff, then set aside a portion of that for genocide harm reduction and remediation. You know, like the billboards you see with helpline information.

Stengah wrote:
LeapingGnome wrote:

Can someone explain why Congress just voted to send billions in aid to Israel? Aid for what?

In reverse order: To aid in their genocide. To funnel money to arms manufacturers.

OK yeah that is pretty much what I expected. Such hypocrisy. One week to say Israel is doing bad stuff and then the next week give them money to do more bad stuff. f*cking politicians.

Anyone know where I can find GOOD reporting on the student protests?

I’m seeing tons of reporting that just regurgitates what politicians and university officials are saying. But I’m not seeing much boots-on-the-ground “here's what’s actually happening at the protests” reporting.

Today’s episode of It Could Happen Here has an interview with independent journalist Talia Jane, who’s been attending the Columbia protests.