ESC

If you met some these execs, you’d probably run in the opposite direction. They’re a weird bunch.

It will be interesting but one does not have to be poorly off to feel desperate, so I’m not sure if it will matter that much.

It often happens when a society’s prosperity decays, even if the right doesn’t offer rational solutions. Climate change is driving a ton of problems but for many of these voters it is nonetheless a lesser concern. I think for many people who feel desperate, everything starts to look like a zero-sum game. So they vote for a policy of all take and no give.

Stacking wasn’t perfect but even with stacks of doom it allowed for a balanced variety of viable playstyles. You pretty much have to cheese a min/max urban sprawl (iirc - it’s been years) on Civ5 to beat the higher difficulty levels because of the differences in action economy, which undermines replayability. Replayability is the heart of Civ.

Some changes in G&K seemed like they were designed to patch the economics to a degree.

I was poor and didn’t want to have to pay for a patch, so I ended up getting tired out on vanilla and didn’t get into G&K much by the time I could justify buying it. But from the discussions I’ve seen the issue was too fundamental to simply be patched over. It’s still a good game but Civ4 reigns as king imo.

California is already draining itself on tax breaks for property owners, and capping insurance increases would rapidly accelerate the current flight of insurers out of the state.

And you want that in exchange for a rent hike cap on 51,700 rent-controlled units, in a city of 4 million? Seriously?

Hard for the state to rebel against itself, no?

In my opinion, his park should be more open about the natural flow months so visitors can choose when to visit.

That’s what the government ordered them to do.

I agree the visitors should be made aware. I’ve been to parks in the past with the same practice, and was a bit miffed when my local friends informed me. I don’t want to support the practice but I mostly wouldn’t have cared if the operators had just been transparent about it. I’m sure they’re worried about protecting the “brand.” But I understand that the attractions are the lifeblood of the local businesses and the need for accessible natural wonders.

More than legitimacy, my concern was how it affects the local ecosystem. Hopefully not too much.

It looks like it was a private operator responsible and the government has instructed them to be more transparent about it.

Artificially assisting waterfalls during the dry season happens in tourist traps around the world.