This is actually one time when we want to be last, another way to look at it is Massachusetts is 2nd place in states where you're likely to live the longest.

I understand the rationale, I'm just saying that it's not rational; your governor is spending over a million dollars of taxpayer money on an issue that simply does not exist.

The state is secretly run by the maple syrup cabal, they are trying to preserve their hold by keeping out illegally imported Canadian maple syrup. Now that they have successfully lobbied the governor to lock out Canada their next target is going to be the far superior Vermont maple syrup.

That an awful big stretch, I can guarantee that number is almost nonexistent and that any undocumented individuals in NH either came through the southern boarder or more likely simply overstayed their visa.

This is nothing more than your governor wasting taxpayer money to pander to the right and appear tough on immigration. Wake up and see it for what it really is.

Really NH, are you guys so insecure that you need to protect yourselves from Canadian’s? They have strong beer, weed and universal healthcare; they are not crossing the border to get into NH.

Newton would be you're best bet, but that's if it's in your budget (high six figures to start). Other options are Lexington and Wellesley, but they too will be in the high six figures.

So the solution here is they should have granted him the variance and then taken up IJ’s offer to button up the current law so it doesn’t become a free for all with signs littering the Whites which I think we can all agree is the original intent of the law and one we could all support.

I've stayed at The Shire Woodstock, wasn't anything earth-shattering but would stay there again and great location to walk around Woodstock.

I'm sure that Vermonters will roll their eyes, but I'm from Boston and my wife and I fell in love with Vermont doing a random day trip there to visit Woodstock. It was during the pandemic once things started opening up, so I picked a random place in Vermont (Gillingham's) and we loaded up the kids and dog for a road trip; we've been there about a half dozen times since.

If you can afford it then Newton is great, close to the city (especially Longwood) and easy access to pretty much all the major expressways. For your kids Newton has some of the best schools in the state which is saying a lot because Massachusetts has some of the best public education in the country.

If I recall correctly tax sources are roughly 1/3 property tax, 1/3 income tax and the other 1/3 are things like sales tax, corporate taxes, and excise taxes. Massachusetts has a population of a little over 7 million and about 2/3 of those live in the greater Boston metropolitan area. We can remove property taxes from the equation due to those taxes going directly to the cities and towns to fund services such as education, police and fire. That leaves us with the other 2/3 that comprise mostly of income, sales and corporate taxes. Considering that 2/3’s of the population and a large portion of the major corporations being located in the Boston metro it’s safe to say that a majority of income, sales and corporate taxes are coming from the Boston Metro area.

Greater Boston is the economic driver for the state and generates a majority of income for the state in terms of taxes so it’s actually the other way around.

Greater Boston is the one paying for the infrastructure in rural Mass, so a town 2 hours outside Boston of a few thousand is not paying to maintain the roads in the city of Boston or fund the T; they are actually receiving more for the $1 in taxes they contribute than someone living in Boston, Worcester or Springfield.

They should actually be championing for more investment in the infrastructure of greater Boston, because that investment improves the economic output of the state which generates more taxes which results in more funding for them.

Exactly this, regardless of the night a 17 year old who is a new driver shouldn’t be driving at that time and no way they should be working till then. While I agree with OP’s sentiment there is an easy solution to the problem and that is don’t be on the road on NYE, that goes double for a 17 year old. A 17 year old’s job is not worth them being on the road past midnight on NYE, I’m over 40 and I’m home by 9PM on NYE or taking public transportation. You can’t control other people actions and the risk is just too high for me to justify driving around with my family on New Years Eve.

What is your 17 yo doing working till 12:30, on new Years Eve no less.

I’ve got a Samsung washer / dryer combo unit; works great and runs on 120V, just be aware that a full cycle can take a few hours and due to it being a combo unit you can’t have one load in the wash and another in the dryer. Otherwise it’s a great unit and much better than dealing with the communal units in the basement. Installation was as easy as a dishwasher and no need to vent, exhaust gets condensed back into water and sent through the drain. Got mine at Costco for less than $2k.

Gotcha my bad

Massachusetts has the 12 largest economy in the country, 3rd largest per capita; that’s hardly an economy tethering on the edge.

The state also has some of the highest median incomes in the country, some of the highest credit ratings and one of the highest percentages of citizens with rainy day funds. The state as a whole also sends more money to the federal government than it receives so financially it’s not dependent on the federal government for funding.

It is expensive to live in the state, no one is going to argue with that fact. However the state’s economy is heathy and with all the investment in biotech and life sciences along with our world renowned hospitals and institutions of higher education there is plenty of room for continued growth.

You act like that’s a bad thing?

There is only one party working to move the country to renewables and that party is not the Republican Party so you should be happy with who won. Renewables are the only solution to the fluctuating energy prices and the sooner we get them in place the better, Fung would have just been another Republican working against renewables and the Republican agenda would not bring down the cost of energy. Their solution which are just more pipelines and more drilling would do little to bring down costs and come with a significant environmental impact which is then left for the taxpayer to clean up, while also lining the markets of big oil along with those in Congress who support them.

You are aware that oil and its byproducts are sold on the global market and the prices are set by the free market, something Republicans like to champion. So unless you are willing to admit that the free market has failed and that commodity prices should be set by the government then there is little that can be done by any one person or party in Washington to lower energy prices in any meaningful and long term way (well there is one solution and we'll get to that). If anything the US is in a much better position than most other countries when it comes to energy supply and pricing and there is only one party working on a long term solution to the global energy problems in the form of renewables and that party is certainly not the Republican's. So if you really want to address the energy problems then you should be happy with who won because that's one more person in Washington working on an actual solution, Fung would have just been another Republican working for the oil lobbies and an obstacle rubber stamping legislation working against renewable energy.

Not going to happen, everyone likes the idea of nuclear but no one wants it in their backyard. The fact is nuclear, especially modern day nuclear power plants, is extremely safe and extensively regulated. Coal actually produces more radiation than a nuclear power plant and if a nuclear power plant put into the environment even a fraction of the radiation that a coal plant does it would be shut down. The perception of nuclear is just too tainted and the investment is so much that we will never see another plant come online in this state. Off shore wind is out best bet, we just need to get grid level storage online to make it reliable.

In 1920 during war time it made perfect sense to safeguard the US merchant fleet; in 2022 with globalization it makes less so. What they need to do is amend the act removing the requirement that the ships be built in the US to just be US flagged ships.

The problem with nuclear is that it takes decades and billions to build a nuclear power plant and there is a lot of risk because even with that investment there is the real chance that you could end up with a power plant that never goes online.

Most people agree that nuclear would solve a lot of our energy problems but there is a lot of not in my backyard for both the power plants and the wast which just compounds the problems I described above. The reality is unless there is a fundamental change in the way we build and operate nuclear power plants that both makes them safer and significantly less expensive to build then we are unlikely to see any new plants come online any time soon. We would be better off investing that time and money into wind, and solar along with grid level energy storage.

No by law it has to go back to the taxpayers.

It’s actually the “secret” entrance to the founding fathers Freemason Temple; the temple itself is still in use but this entrance is permanently sealed and the location of the current entrance is unknown.