Recent comments in /f/massachusetts

nixiedust t1_j9pcv1t wrote

like they've got 50 years! Florida is doomed and its voters are just letting it sink. The latest studies I've seen predict coastal areas in FL underwater by 2040. Most Floridians don't realize their government has plans for this...it's not a "might happen" but a "how soon."

Hopefully some of the wildlife will outlive the human population. There's a ton of biodiversity down there when you remove the icky humans.

1

giddy-girly-banana t1_j9pb8jo wrote

Whoa! There’s a lot of crazy to unpack here.

You’re still worrying about masks? That’s so sad and pathetic.

The climate is warming, that’s obvious. If you think otherwise at this point, I’m not going to be able to convince you. Consider this though the oil companies themselves knew about it 30 years ago, and they’ve admitted as much. They’ve also engaged in a relentless propaganda campaign to hide that fact because it would destroy their business. Most of the outspoken climate deniers are funded by oil money. Except of course the losers who do it for free.

Good luck out there.

−1

sporky211 t1_j9paz6f wrote

Reply to Mass RMV by KinkotheClown

If you have Triple A it is honestly the fastest and easiest way to do it. You still have to make an appointment but you will be in and out within 15-20 minutes of arriving. Still takes the 10 days for the license to actually come in the mail though

3

Figwit_ OP t1_j9p8yh5 wrote

Yeah, I actually agree with both those things being stupid and crazy. Seriously though, who the fuck cares about a rock that sort of looks like a dudes head? And it's everywhere!

Edit: we should be able to criticize ourselves and where we live without getting too defensive. NH has some fucked up policies and people up here, no doubt. Mass does some wacky shit sometimes, too. Maybe not quite as wacky as NH, but wacky still.

2

BovaDesnuts t1_j9p7xz5 wrote

>How does improving the economy is a specific area NOT benefit the people living in it? Jobs? Food? Accessibility to services, medical care, businesses…

Oh, easy. When it doesn't come with improved conditions, it tends to lead to social cohesion and social capital loss while simultaneously displacing poor people and damaging their health.

The mistake you're making, and the one that the state documents refuse to address, is what happens to the people who are already there.

>You do know the gentrification is not the result solely of expanding public transport right? Have you seen the housing prices in the last three years WITHOUT the railway?

CDC indicates it's mostly driven by push factors, such as a lack of housing and massive job growth in nearby cities. Maybe we can think of a city with these issues nearby?

0

MOGicantbewitty t1_j9p731x wrote

How does improving the economy is a specific area NOT benefit the people living in it? Jobs? Food? Accessibility to services, medical care, businesses… if your concern is keeping people for other areas out, that’s just ridiculous. And I see nothing from you backing up the negative impacts to Worcester and NH from adding public transport like railways. You need to back that shit up with evidence and studies.

You do know the gentrification is not the result solely of expanding public transport right? Have you seen the housing prices in the last three years WITHOUT the railway? Please, use sources or stop talking to me. I have real work to do.

2

BovaDesnuts t1_j9p6x1f wrote

>The east west rail is NOT the MBTA. It can connect and work in conjunction with the MBTA.

Metro area, not MBTA. You know. Metro West, but further west. The W towns, if you don't know where that is.

>And you can’t just spitball with no evidence. Try reading the earth of documents that have been a published that I linked you too.

I did. They're... not encouraging. It pretty much confirms my concerns that they're just looking to expand the Boston metro

0

MOGicantbewitty t1_j9p6jwr wrote

The east west rail is NOT the MBTA. It can connect and work in conjunction with the MBTA. And you can’t just spitball with no evidence. Try reading the earth of documents that have been a published that I linked you too. And perhaps submit questions to the PVPC about the impacts of a trolley system in Springfield. Because it’s been rejected as a viable idea a bunch of firm. They’ll have peppers to back it up

1

natwashboard t1_j9p5vuu wrote

general concessions are pretty terrible. If not unprepared for a big crowd, they have limited choices due to inventory issues. Some of the food vendors heading up to the seats aren't bad when they are available. Better to get in line early b/c security is incredibly slow. Blow kisses to the psychotically dressed Norton police tactical invasion team as you stand there.

2

BovaDesnuts t1_j9p5kh3 wrote

So maybe, and I'm just spitballing here, public transit in Springfield might, say, reduce congestion and car dependency in the area and make it a more attractive location to set up shop for people not working in labs in Boston?

I'm not opposed to regional transport, I'm very specifically opposed to the expansion of the Boston Metro. That's a concern I haven't seen addressed.

0