smkmn13
smkmn13 t1_j68dvuf wrote
Reply to comment by RunnyDischarge in Letter to the editor: Ranked-choice voting a better way by mjg13X
I think you misread, or I wasn't clear - I'm part of the "hardon" myself, apparently, and the linked post is one sided in favor of RCV and addresses (rebukes) the complaints
smkmn13 t1_j68cggk wrote
If you want to read more specifics, I found this helpful. It's from an advocacy organization, so it's one sided, but it addresses the standard complaints against RCV:
https://www.rankedvote.co/guides/understanding-ranked-choice-voting/pros-and-cons-of-rcv
smkmn13 t1_j68bsyj wrote
Reply to comment by Justinontheinternet in Letter to the editor: Ranked-choice voting a better way by mjg13X
I think the point is RCV would allow for legitimate 3rd (and 4th and 5th) choices that would benefit everyone. There are plenty of Democratic voters, for example, that would be interested in voting for a different, perhaps even more liberal candidate if it didn't mean implicitly supporting the nominated Republican.
smkmn13 t1_j60tgqr wrote
Reply to comment by TheDudeMaintains in CT's legislature salaries are starvation wages, $28k/year. You have to be retired or rich to serve. This is regressive and should be changed. by MormonReformist
Sure, assuming they can find a job that pays the same rate on an 8-month-a-year basis (with a schedule that perfectly matches up with the congressional sessions). My larger point is that this system (and low compensation) incentivizes people with disproportionate means to run for office.
smkmn13 t1_j5zjbcf wrote
Reply to comment by nikedude in CT's legislature salaries are starvation wages, $28k/year. You have to be retired or rich to serve. This is regressive and should be changed. by MormonReformist
The person I was responding to said "that’s still more or roughly the same as what many other jobs make from working all year," so I was clarifying that all (FT, full year) jobs in Connecticut are actually required to earn more than 28k.
Scaling the pay for 4 months implies that you can get a job for the remaining 8 months at a similar rate, but there aren't many jobs / careers that allow you to work 8 months a year and keep the job each year, let alone advance normally, unless you're already well established and successful (which was the point of my original comment earlier in this chain).
smkmn13 t1_j5z98et wrote
Reply to comment by _343_Guilty_Spark__ in CT's legislature salaries are starvation wages, $28k/year. You have to be retired or rich to serve. This is regressive and should be changed. by MormonReformist
Not really - 28k divided out by 40 hours/wk and 52 wks/year is like $13.50 per hour, less than the state minimum wage.
smkmn13 t1_j5ygpbl wrote
Reply to comment by MormonReformist in CT's legislature salaries are starvation wages, $28k/year. You have to be retired or rich to serve. This is regressive and should be changed. by MormonReformist
Does it though? What kind of job / career lets you work 7 months / 9 months every other year?
smkmn13 t1_j5tson6 wrote
Reply to local over the air tv channels? by beowolf66
I've found directionality makes a big difference. We're east of Hartford, and point our (external) antenna southeast - we get a pretty decent number of stations from both Hartford and New Haven area, although ABC is always pretty hit-or-miss. This was suggested elsewhere in the thread, but https://www.antennaweb.org/ is great to visualize where signals originate.
smkmn13 t1_j5oq771 wrote
Reply to comment by RandyPhylum in Frontier vs. Comcast by RandyPhylum
I had intermittent, very brief (<5 min) outages on a relatively frequent basis on fiber for a while (although they were almost always between 2 and 5am), but they did some sort of neighborhood-sized switch upgrade which totally solved the problem. Since then we've been pretty much consistently up.
smkmn13 t1_j5opg4u wrote
Reply to comment by thesbaine in Frontier vs. Comcast by RandyPhylum
Either works, lol
smkmn13 t1_j68e6e9 wrote
Reply to CT Subaru drivers by uuuge
No, I don't think Subaru drivers are systematically worse, although given it's a brand known for safety there might be more defensive drivers behind the wheel which might seem worse to some people.
Also, "subris" (Subaru hubris) is real, but I think it applies to anyone with their first 4/AWD car - people think the increased traction that helps you go will also help you stop, but it doesn't!