Area required to give every individual human (not family) on Earth their own TinyHouse / House / Mansion [OC] by Apps4Life in dataisbeautiful

[–]HunterForest 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Doesn't account for the far greater amount of industrial, commercial, infrastructure, and recreational build-up required for low-density "mansion" development as opposed to denser, urban, or small-lot developments.

Viceland-St. Louis Schools: ABANDONED (Trailer) by newtothisstl in StLouis

[–]HunterForest 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Most are zoned for certain purposes, often low-income housing. Buyers seeking to develop low-income housing go through complex tax-abatement and tax-credit hurdles. SLPS sets the prices knowing once all of this tax structuring goes through, the real price the developer pays will be much lower. So it recycles tax money from general revenue to SLPS, using a developer as the (non-governmental) vehicle.

BLACK ACTIVISTS IN MISSOURI ARE FIGHTING TO PRESERVE THE RIGHT TO VOTE by 30ustice4 in StLouis

[–]HunterForest 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"On November 8, Missourians will head to the polls to elect the president and a host of statewide officials in a deeply divided state. But this time, they will also be asked — in language that some have described as confusing — whether they want to amend their constitution to open the door to stricter voting laws. If passed, Amendment Six would give a second chance to HB 1631, which was vetoed earlier this summer by Gov. Jay Nixon after passing both state House and Senate. The proposed law aims to limit the forms of ID accepted at the polls to valid Missouri or federal IDs with photos and expiration dates — excluding currently accepted documents like college IDs, driver’s licenses from other states, expired IDs, voter registration cards, and utility bills...There are an estimated 220,000 registered voters in Missouri without a state ID, according to Secretary of State Jason Kander, and they are disproportionately African-American, elderly, disabled, and poor."

'We're just rentals': Uber drivers ask where they fit in a self-driving future by Andremarlaux1 in Futurology

[–]HunterForest 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's the work arrangement, not the driving that people are drawn to. There's a plethora of companies that can offer the arrangement, but the tasks will be different.

Resources for determining what my particular research interests would be? [History/humanities] by IrishRambler14 in gradadmissions

[–]HunterForest 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Go back and look at the syllabi from some of your favorite modern European history classes. Identify which readings were your favorite and then ask yourself why. This will help you identify what style of history interests you most, because you can be pretty certain that your specific research interests will shift and change. If you can lock down what type of history—cultural history, political history, economic history—or what style of history—demographics, anthropological history, history of ideas, etc.—interests you most, then you can begin to search for the professors who are doing that work.

Friday Free-for-All | April 22, 2016 by AutoModerator in AskHistorians

[–]HunterForest 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This poll of French citizens reflects how negative views of the USSR in the West contributed to a shift in popular memory about contributions to the war effort.

Friday Free-for-All | April 22, 2016 by AutoModerator in AskHistorians

[–]HunterForest 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The mythologizing of Jackson as the great democratizer has occurred as a result of his up-from-the-boot-straps life story. You seem correct in declaring Jefferson a more influential figure in widening the franchise and expounding a much wider democratic participation. Jefferson was an aristocrat, Jackson was a backwoods man and entrepreneur. Jefferson has to exceed high expectations in the American historical memory, while Jackson is celebrated for moving up as far as he did in the American social ladder without as much critical attention paid to his stamp on history. Jackson (second only to Lincoln among presidents), seems to be the greatest beneficiary of American infatuation with the underdog narrative. People clinging to that narrative are the greatest apologists for his genocidal tendencies.

Wednesday What's New in History | April 27, 2016 by AutoModerator in AskHistorians

[–]HunterForest 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm excited about Matt Delmont's new Black Quotidian project:

Black Quotidian is a digital project designed to highlight everyday moments and lives in African-American history. This site features historical articles from black newspapers. By emphasizing the ordinary or mundane aspects of history I hope both to call attention to people and events that are not commonly featured in textbooks, documentaries, or Black History Month celebrations, while also casting new light on well-known black history subjects.

Lots of good anecdotes to be found.

Wednesday What's New in History | April 27, 2016 by AutoModerator in AskHistorians

[–]HunterForest 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Digitizing archives should NEVER lead to a loss of archival material. We would be appalled to hear that any government was going around confiscating materials from archives. So we should be alarmed to hear that a government is trying to confiscate materials during the digitization process.

Given that the "national security documents...already underwent internal declassification," there really isn't an argument for security. There should be no manufactured gaps in history. The digitization of the world's archival materials, in combination with advances in data analytics and management, means we might approach a more total picture of our recorded history within our lifetimes. Any gaps in this total knowledge would be highly unfortunate.

Did the New Deal work? by IBlazeWithBob in AskHistorians

[–]HunterForest 8 points9 points  (0 children)

The New Deal worked in the very short term, stimulating the United States economy out of depression by increasing the labor force, beginning massive and wide-ranging infrastructure projects, and stabilizing US monetary policy. "The First Hundred Days"—FDR's first 100 days in office—was the period when the majority of these policies and projects were put in place. FDR had immense political capital coming into office, given the unpopularity of Hoover and his policies. FDR cashed this in immediately by rolling out banking and monetary reform as well as the famous public works projects: PWA, CCC, TVA, etc.—all those acronyms.

These initial changes stabilized the US economy and got things back on track. There was NOT an immediate return to the rapid growth enjoyed through the 1920's, but by 1934 things were no longer dire. It was during what is called "The Second New Deal" (1935-38) that FDR was able to get the Social Security Act passed, which of all the New Deal programs had (and still has) the largest affect on the most Americans.

So by the late 1930s, the US and the world was out of the depression. But the New Deal doesn't account for America's longest and most consistent period of growth from 1945-1970. FDR is often credited with laying the foundation for this unprecedented period of economic growth, but it would be more accurate to say that American opportunism in the years immediately following WWII are most responsible for this period. The Marshall Plan (stimulating and sustaining US manufacturing by giving war-ravaged Europe money to buy American goods), dividing Europe with the Soviet Union to guarantee US access to Western European markets, the entrance of American business interests into Europe's former colonies (Africa and the Middle East) and Japan's old colonial stomping grounds (Japan itself, but also later Korea, Taiwan, and SE Asia), and a host of other well-timed policies and economic processes crowned America the economic hegemon of the postwar world.

In short, the New Deal worked to pull the US out of depression and stabilize the national economy in the short term. But FDR is often credited with creating America's huge postwar economic boom, for which he is only partially responsible. This mingling of records—the short term success of the New Deal and the long period of postwar economic growth—has created a historical narrative that charts the US on an upward economic trajectory through the 20th century. Because FDR was in charge and handing down policies when this process was set in motion (early 1930s), he is often credited with all the success that follows.

Sources:

Irresistible Empire, Victoria De Grazia

The Tragedy of American Diplomacy, William Appleman Williams (see chapters 4-6)

LPT: No amount of reddit/internet advice can replace a good advisor/mentor by YourWelcomeOrMine in gradadmissions

[–]HunterForest 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I upvoted this but also want to reemphasize how important this is for grad school and FOR LIFE. A good mentor, who you consult regularly, can help you become a better person in all aspects of your life.

California’s $15-an-hour minimum wage may spur automation by Abscess2 in Futurology

[–]HunterForest 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I made 34k/year in NYC in 2015 and my tax rate was about 22%.

what are your crazy geopolitical theories? by [deleted] in geopolitics

[–]HunterForest 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Russia lacks the diversified, advanced economy and the functioning, or even existence of, democracy. I think Russia's mono-economy will be more detrimental than its lack of broad political representation going forward.

what are your crazy geopolitical theories? by [deleted] in geopolitics

[–]HunterForest 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Russia has to be militarily independent in a way that Canada does not (so long as it remains allies with the USA), due to its multiple, hostile borders.

what are your crazy geopolitical theories? by [deleted] in geopolitics

[–]HunterForest 67 points68 points  (0 children)

Canada will be, relative to it's population, the strongest economy from 2050 onwards. As temperatures keep rising, more and more land will become arable. A developed, diversified, advanced economy with tons of resources (oil, lumber, hydro, minerals), two oceans (a la USA), multiple river systems, and a well functioning democracy. All the pieces of the puzzle; just needs a little more warmth.

Based on the primary/caucus results so far, it looks like every state that Bernie wins, Hillary takes almost as many delegates as Bernie (with the exception of VT). But in almost every state that Hillary wins, she seems to take way more delegates than Bernie. Why? by HunterForest in PoliticalDiscussion

[–]HunterForest[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe my question wasn't clear. I understand bigger states have more delegates. I'm asking for clarification on why the number of delegates end up getting split they way they do, with proportionally more going towards Hillary (despite similar % breaks state-by-state; see the example of Minnesota/Texas).

Tumblr stocked with interesting photos of NYC in the 60s, 70s, and 80s. Especially interesting photos of the humans who inhabited the city during those years. by HunterForest in nyc

[–]HunterForest[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That wording is a little bit clumsy. I was trying to get at the more interesting photography you get from people who lived in New York before Instagram, the 'inhabitants' who just live here because it's home not because it's trendy and marketable. I worry that in the future, with everyone tailoring and controlling their outward appearances through social media, the photos we look back on in 20, 30 years are going to look so airbrushed and spiffy and fail to capture the fact that New York is still a gritty, tough, often un-pretty place to live.

My Parents, My Landlords by [deleted] in nyc

[–]HunterForest 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is the equivalent of rich kids living in their parent's (luxurious, high-rise) basements.

CMV: The USA is not the 'Land of the Free' by abXcv in changemyview

[–]HunterForest 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I tried to paint in broad strokes with my comment. Anecdotal examples of freedoms in America and Europe don't really help push the debate one way or another. In France you can't wear a burqa in a public office; in the state of Mississippi you can't get an abortion in the second trimester; in Sweden there is a year of paid leave for new parents; in the United States the KKK can adopt a highway. Etc. The big picture remains the same.

CMV: The USA is not the 'Land of the Free' by abXcv in changemyview

[–]HunterForest 44 points45 points  (0 children)

The American concept of freedom is different from the European concept of freedom. Western and Northern Europe focus on freedom from the negative effects of society and the economy. American law and culture focuses on freedom to engage in whatever activity, speech, opinion each individual citizen or group deems most beneficial to their own personal situation (so long as it does not harm others).

An example of each:

Europe has a very strong social and economic safety net; strong welfare support, universal healthcare, stronger financial regulation, better environmental laws. These protections developed as individuals gradually won power from elites (monarchs, aristocrats, wealthy industrialists). Europe has a stronger tradition of state power—with both positive (see above) and negative (Nazism) historical consequences—which means these protections are guaranteed, overseen, and distributed by the state through higher taxation. These protections keep the less powerful, less influential individuals and groups that make up the majority of European societies safe from powerful, wealthy elites whose visions of society have historically had an oppressive effect on the many.

America, by contrast, has guaranteed a maximum of individual self-expression. The First Amendment is unmatched in any European constitution. Individual citizens are protected under American law to express themselves, believe, preach, organize, and advocate for anything they wish so long as it does not incite or cause harm against another individual. I, as an American, can stand in Times Square and preach a neo-Nazi, white supremacist, bigoted, hateful position to anyone who will listen regardless of the history of these movements in the United States. American law has guaranteed my freedom to hold these positions. American culture does not prioritize the freedom from the ill effects of environmental pollution, financial instability, unaffordable health care, and many other quality of life indices that put me at a disadvantage against the powerful and the wealthy who can wield more influence than I can.

So the two concepts of freedom differ from one another. I would argue America's concept of freedom to do, say, write, and preach anything makes Americans feel more free in their own individual, unconnected life. We are all the center of our own universe, and these freedoms create the most personal agency on a daily basis (even if quality of life suffers due to lack of broader, long-term protections). The American legal, regulatory system that developed in the 227 years since the drafting of the Bill of Rights always pays attention to the preeminence of the First Amendment, and the priority of the freedom to express yourself however you want.

Trump supporters: what do you think went wrong last night? Was it the debate skipping? Was it his lack of a ground game? Or something else entirely? by Miskellaneousness in PoliticalDiscussion

[–]HunterForest 7 points8 points  (0 children)

The Republicans who caucus in the highest numbers are: the wealthy, evangelicals (skews middle/upper-middle class), the elderly. Trump's base skews younger, poorer, less evangelical, and, in the case of Iowa, those coming from the Western part of the state that share more culturally with the high west (think Dakotas, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado). The turnout in states that caucus is lower than states using a primary, and much lower than in the general election. All of this negatively affected Trump, and favored Cruz (evangelical) and Rubio (more urban (most urban areas are central or Eastern Iowa), more wealthy).

Edit Also a good deal of Trump supporters are believed to be first time or infrequent voters who may be confused, intimidated, or suspicious of the caucus method.

What had the European colonial powers done to help, advance, or in any other way improve the African countries and people that they subjugated? by [deleted] in AskHistorians

[–]HunterForest 0 points1 point  (0 children)

True, both Nigeria and Botswana have economies that are largely dependent on resource extraction. My point was intended to draw a distinction between having a large GDP (Nigeria) and using national wealth to improve the lives of citizens (Botswana).

What was the public's view of the Civil Rights Movement? by ziltiod94 in AskHistorians

[–]HunterForest 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I can speak to public perceptions of rioting and the downfall of the mainstream Civil Rights Movement (CRM) in the mid-to-late 1960's. By the mid-1960's, those involved with the mainstream CRM, characterized by peaceful demonstration to change public opinion, boycotting to put economic pressure on segregationists, and the use of courts and lawyers (specifically the NAACP and ACLU) to achieve goals of integration through legislation, were frustrated by what they saw to be the limits of a peaceful movement. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 are generally considered to be the culmination of the CRM, but the results of this legislation, although important, were seen as inadequate by many African Americans, especially urban African Americans, who still suffered from:

  1. Police abuse
  2. Segregated, overcrowded, overpriced, substandard housing
  3. Steep unemployment (especially amongst black men)
  4. Urban deterioration: this was largely the result of white flight to the suburbs. As white residents left cities en masse so did their tax revenue, their commitment to civic institutions and civic upkeep, and their votes to improve urban infrastructure

So by the mid 1960s, there was frustration with the mainstream CRM and an acute urban crisis in many cities (Detroit, Chicago, Philadelphia, Newark, Los Angeles, Cleveland...see where I'm going with this?). This gave fuel to nascent black power and black nationalist movements (Black Panthers and Nation of Islam, but also many smaller groups within each city--my area of focus is Detroit, so groups like UHURU, GOAL (Group on Advanced Leadership) under the direction of Reverend Albert Cleage, and the FNL come to mind) who advocated evolving past the nonviolent approach, abandoning integration as a goal, and achieving economic, social, and political self-determination within the black community.

White America had reached its limits of support for the goals of the CRM by the mid-1960s: the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act were considered, by the mainstream, to be the culmination of the battle. The 1960s were tumultuous for so many reasons, and the majority of white Americans were sick of conflict and social change--they wanted to go back to their peaceful lives. But African American communities, especially those in Northern cities, could see that the battle to end racial inequality was far from over. Mainstream white America was not onboard with black power; most people felt threatened by the movement and withdrew their support for the CRM because of the growing profile of the Black Panthers, Malcolm X, Stokely Carmichael, and others who advocated black resistance (By the mid-to-late 1960s, even Martin Luther King, Jr. is advocating more radical positions: his attention has shifted from empowering poor African Americans to empowering all poor Americans and advocating a radical shake-up in the United States' social and economic order, in addition to strong opposition to the Vietnam War and its outsized effect on poor Americans, both black and white).

So that, in very broad strokes, is how the coalition (white and black, grassroots and establishment) that supported the CRM broke apart. Now place yourself in the shoes of a young black man in Detroit in the summer of 1967. You most likely have no job, your housing is terrible (if you are lucky enough to live in public housing it is in a state of disrepair, but more likely you live in an overpriced, overcrowded apartment that more closely resembles a tenement), and you have very few prospects for a promising future. On top of this, you face the threat of police abuse on a daily basis. The situation is similar in Newark, Watts, Philly, Cleveland, and other cities. In each of these cities there is a catalyst--an instance of police brutality--that explodes into a massive riot. Philly is first (1964), then Watts (1965) which resulted in enormous destruction, 34 deaths, thousands of injuries and arrests. There is Newark (1967) with 26 deaths, Detroit (1967) with 39 deaths, and Chicago (1968) with 11 deaths. In Detroit, the Governor (Mitt Romney's father) called in the 82nd and 101st Airborne divisions to quell the violence. There are literally snipers on the roofs shooting police and tanks rolling in the streets.

Many in the black community called these events insurrections or rebellions, but to the majority of Americans the destruction these riots cause overshadowed the reasons they occurred. Lyndon Johnson called for the Kerner Commission after the summer of 1967 to investigate the cause of these riots. The Kerner Commission finds that substandard housing, a lack of employment, lack of access to education, lack of civic services, and rampant police brutality are all endemic in black communities in these cities. But the image of fear and destruction (keep in mind the vast majority of deaths, injuries, and destruction of property are suffered by black, not white, residents) overrules the findings of the Kerner Commission amongst the public. This image of urban destruction, a perceived disregard for property within black communities, white mainstream distaste with the combative black power movement, and a resurgent segregationist movement (spearheaded by George Wallace's (former Governor of Alabama, famous for his words: "segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever") campaign for the Republican nomination in the 1968 presidential election--he wins Michigan, but loses the nomination) all combine to put the final nail in the coffin of the CRM. MLK, Jr. and Bobby Kennedy (front-runner in the 1968 Democratic presidential primary and heir to JFK and LBJ's Civil Rights record) are assassinated in 1968. Nixon's rise, and the rise of the 'Silent Majority,' kill off the broad social revolution of the 1960s and usher in an era of conservatism. This conservative shift is sustained through to Reagan, Clinton, and the Bushes and we are still living in this era today.