I mean we probably could. Survive != over eating like 5k calories a day. The average American diet would have to shrink and CA would have to stop exporting crops but it could hypothetically be done. CA already provides like 45% of fruit and veg, but also exports like 50% of what it produces. So combine all that with the food we import from other countries and I think we'd be ok.

If, of course, we could actually distribute the food equitably. The fact that we haven't beaten food insecurity in this country is absurd and a disgusting failure of governance generally. But that's a problem in all states

Apparently, it's an acronym for "BlackOut Rage Gallon"

Of just that city??

shrug I feel like it's not that big a deal. Killing people who don't want to die is basically one of the worst things you can do to someone, but EoL situations get trickier. All humans are going to die eventually. Like I think you and I are imagining very different scenarios here. The people that MAID would apply to aren't people who have a full rich life that "could have been" if they didn't get the treatment.

Like, we put our pets to sleep if they are suffering and there's no hope left, yet we force ourselves to live through that same pain until the end. You say it's not for pain mitigation, but if someone's remaining "life" is just bedridden pain, how exactly is it cruel to allow them the choice of ending it?

But again, as long as we can all just agree that NO ONE IS FORCED TO USE THIS OPTION, similar to abortions, if it's not for you, then just don't do it. You can get upset about it, but ultimately, there's nothing after life aside from decomposition. The people who die don't give any shits anymore, and so if it's gonna happen anyway, might as well have some vestige of control.

Are there potentially people who would/could bully their family member into agreeing to be euthanized? I mean, I guess so? We already allow other people to decide to pull the plug on life support (I know it's different), we also allow family members to coach people into/through medical procedures just in general.

Worrying that someone who is actually qualified for MAID will decide to end themselves solely because of "pressure" from caregivers seems like such a specific stretch that should not block the whole idea from happening.

Implement MAID, and then see if anyone is abusing it. I mean, you also have the doctors, they aren't stupid, they are used to dealing with people who are seeking specific procedures while under duress/fear/pressure, and this would be no different.

Also, MAID is already a thing in many places around the world, so whatever worries you have about it, just like, Google if they actually happen or not. Clearly in these places where it's legal for years haven't had any complaints grievous enough to shut the whole thing down.

I don't really view any life generally as anything that special/beautiful. It seems like you are arguing for a position that doesn't hold water. Like, they are only killing themselves because they feel they are a burden? Well two things, they are literally already going to die anyway regardless of their feelings, and they literally are a burden on the others.

Normally the rationale behind not wanting suicides is that the people have more life to live or the issues they have are temporary. Neither of those apply here.

Like I get the instinct to be against it, but it's a unique situation compared to "traditional" suicide. It's also not like anyone is forcing people to die.

If the worry is that others with power of attorney would like, trick people into signing up for MAID or something, that's a whole other issue.

All of this unless I'm not understanding what you're saying correctly

Jesus fuck that article is terribly formatted lol. It sounds like it was written by AI

All my memories of that time are abject and complete darkness, frigid cold, shivering while dozing off. Total misery. Waiting for a bus to take me an hour away.

I was blessed to have a "progressive" high school that recognized the issue and mercifully started at 8:30 instead of 7:20.

They can say it's "for the parents" but my folks also did not want to get woken up at 6am regardless as breakfast was made and to drive me down into the center of town where the communal bus stop was.

*never warm

But yeah, it used to go below zero during the days somewhat regularly.

People acting like 50-60F in December is normal like I just can't believe it. Do people not remember the concept of snow days?

Just look at like, Calvin and Hobbes when shit is set during winter. That's what it was like when I was a kid. Snow pants, sledding, snow men, snow balls, etc. And for weeks!

Born in late 80s here, it's absurd that people who've lived in Mass for 40, 50 years and "don't see anything wrong" like HOW? It's extremely obvious how warm it is.

When we're not even sure if it's definitely gonna be below freezing at night shit is fucked.

People love to harp on Americans for not knowing geography or whatever, but the actual danger is not knowing biology/ecology. I swear, if everyone understood what was at stake there would be much more uproar.

Yeah, every discrete location has a floor and a ceiling. The HDI is saying that Mass has a higher ceiling than the rest of country, but I'd also argue that Mass's floor is higher than most of the country's floors as well.

I mean, aside from the temperature in winter, I'd rather be homeless in MA than in like, Mississippi.

> My point was that it isn't just a matter of putting up the solar panels over a parking lot and there is a ton of savings because they no longer have to plow and salt.

...

>It has been done in plenty of lots so there is no reason to think that it can't be done in others.

So what's your point again? You literally just acknowledged that it's already happening and hasn't had any of the issues you're supposedly concerned about, right? I think we're past the need to bring up already accounted for "flaws" in their implementation, so to me it seems like you're being either an anti-solar fearmonger at worst or a negative nancy for no actual reason at best.

I mean, I'm sure they account for this when they design/install them. Some of you folks are talking about this like it hasn't already been a thing for several years in many places.

Like all these "what ifs" can be answered by just looking at the current state of the art because it already exists. And besides, if a random redditor can come up with a concern or question, I'm sure the professional construction and solar developers have also considered it already. Are mistakes made anyway across the industry anyway? Sure. Is that a reasonable excuse to prohibit new development? Not really.

I mean, are we calling like anything in a blue state with a population bigger than 2000 a trendy city now? I want to buy in my rural home town and can't afford it, unless Williamsburg is now trendy somehow