Jump to content

jonoh81

Burj Khalifa 2,722'
  • Content Count

    4,484
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

jonoh81 last won the day on February 14 2019

jonoh81 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

870 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. jonoh81

    Voting

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/west-virginia-mail-carrier-guilty-104244819.html Another Republican getting caught doing voter fraud.
  2. Great news- certainly better than the 12-story hotel they were originally talking about for this site- but please, please, please do not let this be another fake-out like Millennial or aspirational height that ends up getting reduced with every future rendering.
  3. I'm not sure you can really say that when the main suburbs are largely independent cities. There are 15 main suburbs within Franklin County. I believe only 4 of them are actually landlocked by Columbus- Grandview, Bexley, Worthington and Whitehall. Upper Arlington is not quite landlocked by Columbus boundaries, as there is township land between it and Hilliard on the western side. There are also several small independent places likes Riverlea and Minerva Park, but only a few of them are also landlocked. Suburban areas within the city limits are a little more subjective. Is Clintonville a suburb or just a Columbus neighborhood? Linden? Hilltop? I'm not sure that would be any different than neighborhoods in other cities.
  4. You're right, I think I am mixing up the numbers. In 2010, Franklin County was just under 61.2% of the metro population versus just over 62% in 2019. Columbus was 67.6% of Franklin County in 2010 versus just over 68% in 2019. Cleveland, meanwhile, was about 31% of Cuyahoga County in 2010 and about 30.8% of the county in 2019. Cuyahoga was 61.6% of the metro in 2010 and about 60.3% in 2019. The county-to-metro populations are similar, but heading in opposite directions. So yeah, Columbus would still be the most compact in terms of where the population- and therefore the development- actually is. Columbus will pass Cleveland's density potentially within the next decade or so. The county densities are not as different as you make them out to be- 2706 vs 2475, and Franklin County will also eventually pass Cuyahoga's. Sprawl in Delaware County may be greater than in some other areas, but it still accounts for relatively little of the metro's growth. The city of Columbus added almost as many people by itself the last 10 years as all of Delaware County has in the last 30. Walkability is not directly related to density. Density is only the measure of the number of people divided by the area size. It doesn't address concepts like walkability or transit access or building type or height. Dense areas are more likely to be walkable, but not necessarily.
  5. I'm not necessarily talking about area size. It's more about the amount of existing development considered low-density or "exurban" in nature.
  6. I would suggest that had the Cleveland area’s population declined from its original population, but did not expand from that original size, it would now be in a vastly better position to revitalize itself.
  7. Columbus is arguably the most compact metro in Ohio. More than 70% of its population resides in Franklin County, with more than 50% of that within Columbus itself. Its urbanized area also has the highest density in Ohio. There are at least 2 Ohio metros that have more of its srea development being low-density sprawl- Dayton and Cincinnati. No Ohio city sprawls like those in the Sun Belt, though.
  8. jonoh81

    SCOTUS

    Doesn’t matter in terms of the Vance case. That’ll move forward I guess.
  9. He also misses the point, as usual. A lot of people simply don't have any extra cash around to be donating. The ability to donate regularly also comes from a position of relative economic privilege, and not necessarily any indication of who is actually more generous or a better person. Warren Buffet has given away like $37 billion in the last 15 years. Does that mean anyone who can't match that is a crappy human being? People do what they can with what they have, and a whole lot of people are not going to be donating when they worry about how they're going to pay their next bill. It's the same situation when people complain that poor people aren't paying any or enough taxes. I would bet that most poor people would love to switch places.
  10. Devin Nunes' winery needed a PPP bailout more than small-time landlords or their tenants. Never forget what Republican priorities really are. The smarmy pretend concern over the poorest Americans getting screwed is just not believable anymore- not that it ever really was.
  11. Homeless people will just have to "live with it", just like the deaths of our loved ones.
  12. The irony here is that every single conservative/Trump supporter will be told to blame this on Democrats.
  13. Reduced antibodies doesn't mean no antibodies. And if the antibodies have disappeared completely, that they may have gotten it before seems pretty irrelevant without a proven T-cell immune response being there. It would just mean they're just as susceptible to getting it again.
  14. I think the definition of unequal is literally "not the same". I think you're trying too hard here. You don't see them as real women, and therefore have both different expectations for them and different judgements in terms of their rights and behavior. One of the first things we all have to do in situations like this is to admit that we have biases in the first place, or we'll never be able to fully confront them. Trans people have some of of the highest rates of depression and suicide, and they are regular victims of violence and murder because of those biases against them. No matter how passive and innocent we think our views are, they do affect others. That level of discomfort you and most people feel does mean something, because trans people are definitely aware of it. The comparison to pedophilia is kind of ironic considering quite a few people incorrectly believe tha gay people in general are more likely to molest kids. Ok? Pedophilia is not an orientation or even about gender, though. There is no relation. For the most part, pedophilia is about power- the sexual gratification of having control over someone too young and too weak to fight back, and those desires being construed for a twisted kind of love. It's a destructive mental illness, and kind of irrelevant to gay rights or trans people, both of which are biological and non-destructive on their own merits. But those elements, again, are not related to LGBT in any way. Extremism or mental illness is not specific to any of those communities. You are also going to have a fringe element in all aspects of society and in every demographic. That doesn't excuse using the fringe as a justification for our continuing biases against those who are not part of that fringe, and whose conditions have no relation to the fringe's actions or beliefs. Being LGBT doesn't make one an extremist anymore than being a racial or religious minority does. Beliefs are chosen or taught, they are not biological. Right, but you've also admitted that you're uncomfortable with how they view themselves in relation to born women, and that born women should also have priority in female positions and have places of their own that trans women shouldn't be able to access. That bias contributes to the overall societal rejection of their equality, whether that is your intention or not. If my position was that I have no issue with gay people, but that straight people should have priority and that they should have safe places, jobs, etc. that gay people can't have access to, I would imagine you would call that discriminatory. Some biological women and men would and do object to allowing trans in their bathrooms, though. Which boils down to the question of, is equality more important than personal comfort, or is it the other way around? I don't think trans rights undermines feminism at all, though. It's not either-or. We've tried separate but equal before and it doesn't work. If we believe they're women, it's a fight for feminism, period. If we don't view them as women, it's not. We can't on one hand claim to be for trans rights and equality and call them women, but then deny them access to actually living as one, just as we couldn't say we believe in equality for black people, but be against integration. It doesn't work.
  15. Then again, I think your refusal to see them as equal is an issue. There's still clearly some level of discomfort. I have never heard of trans women calling gay men transphobic for refusing to date them. If such an element with those views exist, I would agree that's pretty stupid. Biological attraction is a real thing that can't be forced regardless of our personal biases. I'm not single.
×
×
  • Create New...