MidnightSlinks

MidnightSlinks t1_jef2kpu wrote

For me, it's not so much that I'm driving less but that I'm going to things that I just wouldn't do if driving (and then paying for parking!) were the only option. Especially now that I'm WFH, there's no way I'd go to evening events downtown without the bus/train. I'd probably go to the Nats once per year vs 10-15. We'd also need to be a two car household instead of one.

So it's a mix of saving money and opening up the city for me. Plus spending more money in ways that stay in the community vs sending it out to multinational companies via higher oil/gas consumption and buying more cars.

19

MidnightSlinks t1_jed5fv0 wrote

I have no idea what your point is. You said someone should not consider taking a loan out for a truck. The next person disagreed with you and pointed out that even a $20k car, which is modest these days, will be bought on loan by the vast majority of buyers. And their point, and mine, was that typical trucks are more than that (like 2-4x more) and are indeed bought with loans all the time.

4

MidnightSlinks t1_j98y9r9 wrote

My former co-worker quit to teach diving and run boat tours in the Caribbean.

Several yoga teachers at my old studio had gone from enthusiastic practitioners with office jobs to part time instructors to full time instructors.

My friend left corporate law when she had kids and never looked back (husband has a good job and she loathed big law). She may go back part time but won't be pursuing anything in the legal field.

Not sure this counts because it's actually more work, but my other friend quit Big 4 consulting to go to medical school to be a pediatrician.

10

MidnightSlinks t1_j64bqza wrote

You can probably get hired as a server. DC allows employees 16 and up to handle alcohol as long as there is supervision on premises from someone 21+, which functionally means you need your bar tenders and manager to be 21+ but servers can be younger as long as they're just carting drinks to tables.

16

MidnightSlinks t1_j5znta1 wrote

>But that may just be because it's running more frequently to compensate for the yellow line.

This is the case. There is no redundancy on green, and those people are also impacted by significant delays if their journey was originally to be on Yellow across the river, so green has been somewhat prioritized.

It's also why they're running Blue and Blue + trains, with the latter being the Blue line except where it diverts and covers the Yellow line tail in VA to Huntington.

10

MidnightSlinks t1_j5ljt2j wrote

That's not what it's saying, but I can see how you could interpret it that way since it's not well written.

They say that they took the total annual costs of groceries, housing, transportation, health care, and utilities, added those together, and assumed that those core expenditures probably equated to around 80% of what you actually spend, so they added an additional 20% that you needed in savings to have enough for your actual annual expenditures, which would include stuff like clothing, haircuts/personal services, dining out, gifts, non-local travel, etc.

2

MidnightSlinks t1_j2ejhzp wrote

DDOT puts out notices for everything and holds community meetings on most major changes. These can start a year or more before the construction begins so you're way too late once you see something happening.

Make sure you're on all your community Listserves as DDOT tries to get the word out. DDOT also has mailing lists for major projects that you can get on once you hear about them and you'll usually be automatically added if you go to a community meeting on a project.

10

MidnightSlinks t1_izssgig wrote

The US has proscecutorial jurisdiction on crimes committee on civil aircraft owned/operated by American companies. (It also has jurisdiction over crimes committed on foreign aircrafts on flights that land the US, and that's so that US officials can legally board the plane and arrest the person once it lands.)

This and related laws were put into place after a pilot was attacked in 1950 while flying over international waters. Even though it was an American civil aircraft both departing from and landing on US soil, the US had no laws on the books giving it jurisdiction.

Because the crime was committed over UK soil, the UK also has jurisdiction and they prospected his co-conspirator back in the day, but are letting the US take this one.

97