Jump to content

PHLaggie

crowd sourced
  • Posts

    664
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by PHLaggie

  1. 5 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

    The problem you're having is not uncommon at all, and in fact it is frequently exacerbated by the transgender rights groups themselves. You are conflating sex with gender despite trying not to do so. 

    Women is describing a gender. Female describes a sex. There are females who identify as men. If they are still physiologically female but identify as a man then they may be a man who menstruates. On the other hand, there are males who identify as women. They are women who do not menstruate.

    It's a total societal mindfuck at this point, and like I said previously, it's a common mistake even among those who are fighting for transgender rights.

    Thanks, Huckleberry; agree with your observations.

  2. WTF did I just read...

    of course had to be a tweet by a "journalist".

    "Not all women menstruate and not all who menstruate are women. Period equality is simply about equality. Period. #NationalPeriodDay"

     

    What is Surly opinion on this? Am I too aggy to not get it? Or am I too Texan to get it but not care? I'm trying to care... but is this an example of taking things a bit too far to the crazy? Biologically we're all either male or female, and only females can menstruate, right? It's another matter that some identify as the opposite gender from what they were born.  Am I wrong?

  3. This is yet the latest edition of a fight that has gone on in American eco/conservation profession practically since the founding of the national parks and the eagerness to settle the West.

    Ken Burns in his "The National Parks: America's Best Idea" documentary (and the companion book) covers the tussle between the wing led by Gifford Pinchot (one of the first leader of the Forest Service, and who brought European ideas of forestry and environmental studies to the U.S.) and others that wanted to use parks and federal land conservation as a means to benefit the humans and the human economy, versus those led by John Muir and Stephen Mather-- the first director of the National Park Service-- who wanted to preserve parks as an end in itself-- to protect nature for future American generations.

    Pinchot wing of ecological use versus Mather wing of ecological conservation.

    One would think we have grown past the old ideas and know better. But the human greed knows no bounds and the fight to preserve nature, just as the fight to preserve American freedom, is a battle that every generation must fight.

    • Like 1
  4. Guess mama bear 399's days are numbered. :(

    more details on her story...

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/show-tell-with-wildlife-photographer-thomas-mangelsen/

    tl;dr version: photog makes a grizzly bear famous by photographing her and her cubs, in order to spread the values of conservation and love of nature. In cruel ironic twist, in the run up to Wyoming declaring open season on grizzly hunting, the hunters walk up to the photog and openly state their desire to shoot the now-famous mama grizzly bear because she'd make a cool trophy... because of the photog's famous works.

     

  5. My sister just got diagnosed with cancer. :(  She's seeking treatment at M.D. Anderson in Houston in the coming week; let's see how it goes.

    It's on the right side of her tongue-- which is crazy because she doesn't chew tobacco, nor smoke, nor drink much alcohol.

    Apparently there's a spurt of oral cancer in the U.S., and usually on the right side. May be it has to do with cell phone over use?

     

  6. 1 minute ago, Machinator said:

    I think the caveat is that offers are committable when they're made, but they have an expiration date.

    So, in other words, Herman wants recruits to commit soon after an offer is made-- or he too looks around, seeking out other recruits for the same position(s)?

    • Fuck You 8
  7. 3 minutes ago, TrojanPrincess said:

    I'm a visitor here as well, but I would think your tiny brain could come up with some worthwhile discussion without being a total, flaming jackass.

     

    two posts above that one seemed more worthwhile but you seemed to have missed those. But, no worries, for you'll surely earn upvotes for this post. Good strategy, Princess! Or is that a Trojan horse...hmm! Also a good strategy!

     

    • Fuck You 9
  8. 3 minutes ago, Atticus said:

    Sometimes it's better to ask questions instead of making assumptions. Do they not teach that in farm school?

    Lots of assumptions being made on this board, in jest or otherwise, all the time. No questions asked. :)

    • Fuck You 2
  9. 11 minutes ago, mr. sunshine said:

    Also your school, for all of the bluster, has won all of one legit national title in football and that was when John Sharp’s wife was learning to suck dick in a stagecoach. Fuck you you fucking fuck

    name checks out? lol

    lots of sunshine to ya for yer team, pardner.

    • Fuck You 2
  10. 18 minutes ago, mr. sunshine said:

    You’re a fan of one of the most penalized programs ever. Seems like a little deference should be in order. The laughing until I’m crying emoji doesn’t quite relate that. You’re not in the echo chamber here

    What has that got to do with what I posted? My post was about over the top making stuff up by one of the Longhorn beat writers. Makes for a nice story. But most here seem to get it that it's good fiction.

    You do realize that if you accept all that was written in that post as 100% accurate, no grains of salt added, that it doesn't really add up, don't you?

    For example, I see 7 in-state WRs and 2 in-state pass-catching TEs with UT offers. You seriously believe all those offers are fully committable? That's more WRs signed than even Sumlin ever did in one season, and posters here regularly skewered him for signing lots of WRs... lol.

    Or that UT coaches thought nothing of the decommitment/recommitment drama of Arjei Henderson and Theo Wease? Everything checked out there? Or perhaps they just liked the game those two have?

    UT coaches also have 10 offers out for in-state DBs. Plus apparently furiously recruiting DBs from elsewhere. If all of them decided to commit to UT tomorrow is Herman going to accept them all?!

    • Fuck You 5
  11. 2 hours ago, Chopper said:

    I wonder if someone on staff needs to do a better job of proactively explaining this to recruits, potential recruits, and parents.

    erm so you really believe that post by IT, eh? It also included this gem, in context:

    "Texas has to play by different rules because you're not going to see uncommittable in-state offers from this staff. Part of that is ethical, part of that is self-preservation with Texas high school coaches, and part of that is the staff just generally not being in a hurry to offer younger players. 

    The staff puts a high priority on program/culture fit. They want to take their time with evaluations. They want to gather as much information as possible."

    😂

    I think most surlyhorns readers know when the 9.95ers, including the ones on the UT beat, are shoveling shit into their subscribers' inbox.

     

    • Fuck You 9
  12. On 5/10/2018 at 12:14 PM, 52-80 said:

    Getting her name permaprinted on the pages of the interwebs....bodes well for future employment opportunities.

    oh, you'd be surprised at entire cottage industries that would hire her, or fund her "research", or collaborate with her, invite her to speaking engagements... the whole Frankfurt School of cultural Marxism is alive and present in many far-left areas... and 2016 election results has brought the far-left segment of Democrats even more to the power so they're politically energized too.

    She'll be ok. NOt like she is seeking a real, corporate job, where proper norms of social behavior are expected.

  13. Quote

     

    "Because densely populated urban centers concentrate human activity, we think of them as pollution crisis zones. Calculated by the square foot, New York City generates more greenhouse gases, uses more energy, and produces more solid waste than most other American regions of comparable size. On a map depicting negative environmental impacts in relation to surface area, therefore, Manhattan would look like an intense hot spot, surrounded, at varying distances, by belts of deepening green.

    If you plotted the same negative impacts by resident or by household, however, the color scheme would be reversed. My little town has about four thousand residents, spread over 38.7 thickly wooded square miles, and there are many places within our town limits from which no sign of settlement is visible in any direction. But if you moved eight million people like us, along with our dwellings and possessions and current rates of energy use, into a space the size of New York City, our profligacy would be impossible to miss, because you’d have to stack our houses and cars and garages and lawn tractors and swimming pools and septic tanks higher than skyscrapers. (Conversely, if you made all eight million New Yorkers live at the density of my town, they would require a space equivalent to the land area of the six New England states plus Delaware and New Jersey.) Spreading people out increases the damage they do to the environment, while making the problems harder to see and to address."

     

    https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2004/10/18/green-manhattan

    (a slightly dated article by now; but it generated a lot of thinking when it was first published. it certainly got me thinking.  i had only recently moved to Dallas back then, from Houston, for a job).

  14. 22 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

    Can I ask how many kids you got PHL and you age range? 

    I got three, and both me and my wife work from home. Yeah, I'll take my half acre with a small soccer field on the side of the house for the kids, a good school district, mature oaks, and room to spare in the suburbs 10 minutes from the marina for the time being. There is definitely pros/cons relative to downtown living, but at this moment in my life, it's working out just fine. 

    When I was married with no kids, we loved being central.  Shit, we would have probably stayed there but the remodel to add the necessary space for our family was pricing out almost as much as just buying another house, and the lot constraints were challenging. And there were no real financially viable options that met our needs in central Austin. 

    Different strokes for different folks with different requirements and in different stages of life.     

    I hear you. I'm still single and have no kids to worry about. My priorities would change pronto if I had school-age kid or two and my catchement school in town wasn't up to snuff... which, currently, it isn't. My options would then be a charter school of my choice (some are decent, many are nasty...worse than regular public schools, and got the charter management as a political payoff in the pay-to-play shady local politics), or a decent private school, or move to a nearby suburb...my preference would be one of the per-war towns dotting this whole area because those towns all have some of the same urban amenities but are far more genteel obviously, and most have direct train connection to downtown.

    Different strokes for different folks is right.

    I was just fundamentally against the unlimited (no second thought given) sprawl of post-war American cities... there are vast tracts of really good farm and orchard land here to in Philly area that have given way to new subdivisions far out into the exurbs...that's just not me, and after reading enough about these issues, I doubt it would ever go back to that lifestyle.

  15. 21 minutes ago, bolverk said:

    One challenge we have in Texas is our over-reliance on property taxes to get shit funded, which makes the price of the "dirt" on which "improvements" are built outrageous. You should probably move this to the unpopular thread, but I think that an income tax to offset property taxes would greatly improve our situation.

    Right now, I live on 0.16 acres in a ticky-tacky, late-1970s subdivision,  and my lot price is appraised at $100,000, which is insane. Of course, most of the taxes go to the Austin school district. Unfortunately, about 1/3 of my school tax dollars leave the district to support "property poor" districts (aka the Robin Hood plan) around the state.

    At the same time, school district boundaries in Texas are rather arbitrary and don't align with actual "wealth". As an example, I grew up in a mid-sized town in the oil patch (4A) school, but the district boundaries didn't even reach with the city limits. Two other more rural 2A schools have the actual oil fields in their districts, so they receive all the benefits of free money flowing from the ground. The result is they can hire better teachers and offer subsidized housing (the school districts actually have constructed homes for teachers), which reinforces the flow of transfer students to property "rich" districts.

    The whole system is insane.

    It seems to me that a more equitable tax structure that was focused on spreading the wealth via income versus property ownership could alleviate some of our issues regarding rising home prices. 

    Edit: Or just have statewide property tax (which is unconstitutional in Texas) that is devoted strictly to education and is shared equitably based solely on enrollment counts.

    everyone hates property taxes in PA... especially the middle part of the state that is emptying out of young folks (unfortunately). Basically, if you're approaching retirement and have no kids or grandkids in school and your house is paid off, then continuing to pay property taxes feels like rent that never stops on a property that you own. The old folks-- the ones who always vote in droves-- finally are having their voices heard in Harrisburg. But Philly has carve outs against anything that happens in the rest of the state...partly because Philly's school district is saddled with about $1 billion in unfunded liabilities and therefore must keep the tax revenue spigot flowing...

     

    Texas has far better school funding, even if it's not the most ideal. I went to a middling school district west of Houston and even though we lived within the city limits it wasn't the HISD but a different one. Pretty much everywhere in America, property taxes are what pays for public schools, and we as a country idealize the public school system as a good that we should want... though charters, parochials, and privates are huge here in Philly (primarily because Philly schools are crazy messed up save for a few neighborhood and magnet schools).

    I agree with you that there should be a statewide property tax solely to fund public schools-- then the funding formula will be even, and everyone pays the same rate for that one line item.  Then if your town wants shiny new cop cars or paid fire dept and not a volunteer one then you pay extra. A statewide tax would also de-incentivize continuous self-segregation... people will still buy themselves into a richer neighborhood and richer cohort, I suppose. But schools would get equal funding per capita. 

    Here's an overview of the politics of eliminating property taxes. It's not a good way to go, IMO. One of the reasons Texas is booming is because it has no income tax...companies and people love it!

    https://www.ydr.com/story/news/2018/04/13/eliminating-pa-property-taxes-sounds-great-but-heres-what-gop-ad-dont-tell-you-you-could-pay/506289002/

     

  16. 1 minute ago, bolverk said:

    Within urban planning and architecture, there is the notion of the "missing middle", especially in Sun Belt cities which were fast-growing after WWII. From the 1950s to the present, there have only been two real models for housing: tract homes (whether modest or McMansion) or apartment complexes. More recently, we're developing high-rise condo or apartment towers. But there still remains an untapped demand for something in-between that I think a lot of us are actually seeking that would be similar to the brownstone/rowhouse model or even something a little more modest.

    that's great. The urban infill has a lot of opportunity for that sort of development. Even if it's not brownstone or truly rowhouse, perhaps it is the New Urbanist concepts... those are doing very well in the nicer parts of Dallas north of downtown.  I don't know the price points for those-- I'm sure they're pricey compared to the market, but obviously they are targeted toward a different audience...and may be due to all the in-migration to Texas cities from West and East Coast/Snow Belt areas, that demand is there and may be growing.

    New Urbanist with hidden parking garage, and a mix of uses is a nice, medium density infill. More should be encouraged.

    And any new train lines should have stations that are automatically zoned for Transit Oriented Development... high density, mixed use, fully leveraging that shiny new train line. Mockingbird Station north of downtown Dallas is one such area but more should have been built by now.  In Austin, the solitary train line should have more density built right next to its train stations, if at all possible.

  17. My house in Philly is 2400 sq ft; it's not small. I just don't have a huge backyard and I have no frontyard (my primary private outdoor spaces are my tiny backyard which is nonetheless nicely maintained with two fruit trees and some greenery; and my roofdeck with awesome views of the city all around); I don't live in a highrise, and it didn't cost me a whole lot compared to houses in the suburbs; nicer suburbs here with "good" school districts command higher housing prices and higher real estate taxes. I guess it's a different dynamic in a 300+ year old city/metro area compared to a still-growing sunbelt area like Houston or Dallas.

    What I give up in "elbow room", I make up for a walkable commute (or a cheap and quick transit ride) and no hassles with buying/storing/maintaining a private car. Eventually I may move to an old-school suburb with transit access so that even though I would have a car I wouldn't need to use it much.  The predominant urban architecture of Philly is a rowhouse, which also saves on utility  bills and since mine is a new construction house it is well-sealed anyways.  On the plus side, the symphony, theater, movies, grocery stores, restaurants, bars, parks...all are within a short walk or subway ride or taxi/uber ride away.

    It was very hard to give up the car the first time I moved here. But for me, the tradeoff has been okay. And I certainly feel I've reduced my environmental footprint a whole lot compared to my time living in Houston and Dallas areas earlier.  And looking at housing prices in nicer areas of Texas metros...they're catching up to Philly area for sure, may be even comparable to Boston area? It's shocking. I guess you can still buy a nice big house for only $200k but you will be out in the exurbs somewhere in brand new subdivisions. More ranches paved over...

     

  18. 1 hour ago, Newdoc said:

    Looks like he left a legacy to science that looms large even if there is not a “Nobel” attached to it.

    yea, it's one of those examples in history where the medal or the award is the loser for not having been bestowed on the person. the person, their legacy shines regardless.

    Everyone knows the Nobel Peace Prize is thoroughly politicized; and it was for colonial political reasons that Gandhi was never awarded one. That doesn't reduce Gandhi's legacy. It just makes the Nobel committee look worse off in hindsight.

    And it's a shame that Shawshank Redemption was zero Oscars, but doesn't take away from the fact that it's one of the best movies ever made...

     

    • Like 1
  19. If you do it, why wouldn't millions of others? Then, suddenly, that half- hour commute looks more like an hour commute due to traffic, and due to the fact that the sprawl has left any idea of a mass transit basically useless, so everyone drives everywhere-- even to pick up a gallon of milk that their "neighborhood" grocery store. Or you having to wake up at some ungodly hour in the morning to beat traffic. "Rush hour" has expanded in most sprawled out areas of America to be more than just an hour now.  And that's when you end up with the endless, soulless sprawl and the traffic jams and poor personal health as well as long-term unsustainable development patterns that we're saddling the next generation with.

    I guess I made my choice. I gave up my car, moved to an urban area with lots of density that supports adequate mass transit that gets me most places. If I need a car for whatever, I now have fanciest or cheapest of Uber/Lyft, or I can even drive my own with a carshare service; need something for a weekend or longer, just rent one. At least I don't have to pay for car insurance, car maintenance, and car loan...not to mention the "free" parking.

    Housing is certainly a free choice to be made. But government policy should be promoting more sustainable options that are better for the aggregate, rather than catering to the individual's choice. If people still want to sprawl out, they shouldn't be subsidized by ever expanding freeways and surface streets.

  20. Sun belt cities that got their growth spurt after World  War II are all basically car-centric nondescript suburbia. 

    It's not just the big houses, it's the urban form. If you have to go to the gym to get a workout-- but you drive to it, and park your big SUV in a "free" parking spot, then that's one of the ironies of modern American urban plans.

     

×
×
  • Create New...