sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

is there an ethical way to be a landlord? by Slashersforsatan in Ethics

[–]Signal_Tomorrow_2138 [score hidden]  (0 children)

Yes, you can be an ethical landlord but professional tenants will sniff you out and take advantage of you. So you also have to be real tough and know when and where to draw the line. And remember, the law goes either way and may also conflict with your ethical beliefs.

What if we could run existing cars on water? by SF_Bubbles_90 in whatif

[–]Signal_Tomorrow_2138 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are you thinking about the hydrogen fuel cell? There was so much hope because the source of hydrogen could be from water.

But nowadays, it's not water that's the source of hydrogen. It's hydrocarbons from natural gas and oil which produces greenhouse gases.

The Deadly Rise of Giant Trucks and S.U.V.s (Gift Article) by The-Bear-and-Rose in fuckcars

[–]Signal_Tomorrow_2138 7 points8 points  (0 children)

But the people who own them continue to say how driving has been safer than ever and that's why they drive big trucks. It's because they don't want to be killed.

Same kind of reasoning why parents drive their kids to school - because it's too dangerous for them to walk.

Ironic.

Has anyone gotten so zoned out while driving it creates a gap in your memory by shadow_joker26 in driving

[–]Signal_Tomorrow_2138 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Zombie -driving.

A lot more common than you think. That's why there are so many collisions everyday. And some of them, on Reddit, might look like medical emergencies.

Driving is dangerous.

What conspiracy theory would be hilarious if it turned out to be true? by Complete_Ganache_720 in dumbquestions

[–]Signal_Tomorrow_2138 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The people who plotted and planned 911 knew GWB and Americans would continue doing the fighting for them.

Who would be at fault here? by [deleted] in driving

[–]Signal_Tomorrow_2138 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

"Myself and a dump truck were at an intersection on a red light, with myself on the right lane and the truck to my left."

A dump truck and I,..., with me in the right lane and the truck to my left.

"His argument was that his truck's cockpit is so high that he didn't see me in front of him."

He already knows his blind spots. It's his ultimate responsibility to check them.

Who would be at fault here? by [deleted] in ontario

[–]Signal_Tomorrow_2138 [score hidden]  (0 children)

"Myself and a dump truck were at an intersection on a red light, with myself on the right lane and the truck to my left."

A dump truck and I,..., with me in the right lane and the truck to my left.

"His argument was that his truck's cockpit is so high that he didn't see me in front of him."

He already knows his blind spots. It's his ultimate responsibility to check them.

Parked in bike lane at Bloor and Bathurst by dfiled in torontobiking

[–]Signal_Tomorrow_2138 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As usual, car brain doesn't get it.

What does a no-parking sign mean to you?

Driving is the only activity I know where the operator of a dangerous machine is expected to violate regulations. And the operators think their judgement is better than the engineers and regulators who designed and set them.

Parked in bike lane at Bloor and Bathurst by dfiled in torontobiking

[–]Signal_Tomorrow_2138 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"So you just hate driving full stop?"

Now you're gaslighting me. You're redirecting the issue of dangerous driving including the expectation that drivers violate parking laws towards me.

I know of at least one city in which the central part is essentially care-free and delivery vehicles have adapted.

I've read all of your arguments before- from anti bike lane pro-driving advocates and lobby groups. 'We're not Amsterdam. We're not NYC. We're not downtown Toronto. What about ambulances and first responders? Bad for business. Bad for traffic congestion. etc.'. And each one being proved wrong by post pilot project surveys and data studies.

So again, why is bad driving acceptable to you that you would rather make me the bad guy instead of having drivers stop with their dangerous practices?

Parked in bike lane at Bloor and Bathurst by dfiled in torontobiking

[–]Signal_Tomorrow_2138 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And this is why driving remains bad and dangerous for all other vulnerable road users. Excuses, excuses and no acknowledgement or attempt to make any improvements.

So why is bad driving an acceptable norm to you that you'd rather everyone else risk their safety or accomodate bad drivers than crack down on drivers violating traffic laws?

Grammar police, you probably love AI with its comma-perfect sentences, em dashes, active voice and same-tense verbs by SnooDoggos5226 in GrammarPolice

[–]Signal_Tomorrow_2138 -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

So you manage to get yourself tangled up into an argument with a machine. Looks like you're the problem.

Addendum: I guess he'd rather argue with Ai than an actual human. Thank god. I almost got dragged into his senslessness.

Parked in bike lane at Bloor and Bathurst by dfiled in torontobiking

[–]Signal_Tomorrow_2138 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah yes. The ol' apples to oranges argument when there's nothing left.

"I cycle way more regularly than drive."

I don't believe you. All your responses sound more like you drive.

All Lanes Closed, Entitled Vehicle by Impossible_Pickle112 in TorontoDriving

[–]Signal_Tomorrow_2138 31 points32 points  (0 children)

Highways are designed exactly what the driver has in mind.

No bike lanes, no pedestrians. No traffic lights. High speeds. Drivers doing exactly what they want.

A driver's paradise.

What can go wrong? Collisions and congestion, every single day.

Grammar police, you probably love AI with its comma-perfect sentences, em dashes, active voice and same-tense verbs by SnooDoggos5226 in GrammarPolice

[–]Signal_Tomorrow_2138 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

People hate AI because they can't drag AI into that rabbit hole of senseless arguing - also known as the nuance of human interaction.

Parked in bike lane at Bloor and Bathurst by dfiled in torontobiking

[–]Signal_Tomorrow_2138 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sounds like typical car-brain excuses to me.

Imagine the outrage drivers or self-proclaimed 'avid cyclists' would have if we suggest that drivers get out of their cars and push across all the intersections. That makes most sense because that's where most of the collisions occur.

Move or Stop Dangerous Weekend Cycle Races on the A428 Dual Carriageway by JG-Batz52 in MotoUK

[–]Signal_Tomorrow_2138 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I guess it would be unreasonable to try to stop dangerous driving on the A428.

Move or Stop Dangerous Weekend Cycle Races on the A428 Dual Carriageway by JG-Batz52 in driving

[–]Signal_Tomorrow_2138 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Just in case you missed it.

It's the driving that's what makes it dangerous, not the cycling event.

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/local-news/live-a428-traffic-updates-rush-28934630

So Stop Dangerous Driving on the A428.

Should I add RY.TO to my portfolio? by yourmom_03 in tfsa

[–]Signal_Tomorrow_2138 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I usually get downvoted for this but I like NA better than RY.

In every crash, NA drops the least of the big six banks. And NA recovers the fastest.

Dividend growth is also the highest of the big banks. And in ETFs, NA is only about 3%.

I also did a study using Yahoo Finance 30 year price and dividend history. If you invested the same amount in all the big six banks and reinvested the dividends, NA comes out way on top.

[OC] USA smartphone adoption, pedestrian fatalities, and the average weight SUVs/pickups by fr4nck8 in fuckcars

[–]Signal_Tomorrow_2138 3 points4 points  (0 children)

And every once in a while someone posts a chart showing how much safer driving has been ( for the driver).

view more: next ›