Shhh! Facts are not welcome.
BTW, according to several articles I looked at they import more than 27% of their electricity now.
The US is doing that as part of a team. I think the reason people donât hear about it more is because the US team member is a defense company, Lockheed Martin.
$300k? In the Bay Area, if you put down $300k, youâll still have a $1M+ mortgage . . . for a small, old starter home.
Biggest state in the union is likely to have the biggest homeless problem. Let alone the weather is more conducive to living outside.
I had a full contingent of Solar power put on my garage by Vivint and I must say it working out spectacular. My power bill has gone done significantly. 70%
No, that cant be it.
In 2017 Texas had a population of 28.3 million people
Californiaâs population was 39.5 million
Texas homeless in 2017 was 23,548
Californiaâs homeless was 134.278
So California was only 29% more populus than Texas, yet their homeless rate
was 570% higher.
Why do you think that is, other than the weather?
Hereâs the link for the above stats.
You know you can build up instead of out right?
And the thread should have ended there. Because thatâs all that needed to be said!
Why other than the weather? Homeless people live outside. Wake up.
There are homeless people in states where it snows.
You know that right?
When my question went over your head, did you feel a breeze?
Even some dogs dont know when to come out of the rain. You make zero points.
yeah⌠be proud, dude
Biggest state in the Union? Itâs the third biggest.
Youâll be very lucky to make your investment in those panels back during their lifetim.
Largest population
Thereâs that amazing grasp of the obvious again. At least you still have that.
Then why did you bother to âcorrectâ him?
For fun, letâs do you: âNowhere in my post did i say anything about acreage. My post is completely, totally, absolutely, verifiably, unquestioningly, perfectly true.â [fill in your favorite, trite insult]
2 Likes
I can contribute to this.
If the free market were given a free hand in NYC it would build one heck of a lot of bland looking highrises very quickly.
In fact, it would probably build two or three hecks.
ALL of the coastline in places like Coney Island, the Rockaways, Brighton Beach would stop having 2-5 story âcharming historicalâ buildings and begin to look like the highrise dominated beach fronts if Cannes, Diamondhead etc. etcâŚ
Too many people would want, if they could afford it, to live a stones throw from Manhattan in a chic highrise overlooking the ocean. If dinky little towns like Ocean City MD can do it so can the worldâs second financial capital. It is the government and ONLY the government that has prevented this from hapoo decades ago.
Ditto with Midtown. I canât immediately find a good photo, but viewed from the side, Manhattanâs skyline looks like a two hump camel. Highrises have long been legally barred from midtown. Hippys hate tall buildings and Greenwich village has been Greenwich village.
Personally I donât think NYC streets and subways could handle all the new population a free unfettered housing market would bring in. Clearly some govât intervention is an absolute necessity. Itâs called âthe tragedy of the commons.â
With so many people working from home these days the traffic flow isnât the problem it once was. They can always build more elevated commuter transportation if needed.
There is such a concentration of capital in large cities like NYC they will always draw as many people to them as can fit comfortably and quite a few more.
Iâm not saying itâs necessary bad, but itâs just reality. Anytime you have a high demand good, service, or commodity in limited supply the price skyrockets, thatâs just market forces doing what they do.
Texas and Alaska really dont fit into my definition of America.
How much were the panels? Iâd love to go solar
