This might be a stretch, but most economists and economic historians generally agree that immigration benefits the economy. And so, I was wondering recently if the reduction in immigration in the 1920-1930s due to the immigration act could have been one of the causes, or just on influence on the great depression?
It's why we can't have childfree living, at least those of us in America. Unlike the other reasons (race/color, religion, sex, national origin, disability), parental status is uncalled for. There are plenty of options for them, and no options for those of us who want to live in peace but aren't fucking rich.
Childfree people can't have shit.
EDIT: People realize that it's a rant for a reason, right? It's not always going to be the most logical or be realistic. It's a fucking rant.
EDIT 2: More accurately, it does say "familial status" (though I'm not really sure what the difference is). And yes, technically that does apply to childfree people as well, but that's not really what people think of when they hear it, and society still caters to people with children or people who want children.
Okay I live in UTah in a condo. I have a 1 year old and 1 on the way. We received a complaint from our neighbors stating that my daughters running is too loud and to please stop or they’ll report us. Is this allowed? I also worry because we have a newborn coming and there will be lots of crying. I’m pretty sure both of these go against the fair housing act? And if so, can someone please help me find the direct link to this so I’m prepared? Our quiet hours are between 10pm-7am and my daughter is always asleep during those hours so her running around is never during quiet time, only during the day
DISCLAIMER: I did about 5 minutes of research for this post. I do not work for the university and I have no idea what their actual plans are.
Background
As you all know, a few hours ago Big Kris sent an email which contained the following highly controversial points:
>- Every student should have an individual plan for isolation housing if you have a positive COVID-19 test and quarantine housing if you are exposed to someone with the virus.
>
>- Students in university housing should know that on-campus isolation and quarantine housing continues to be limited. Space is not guaranteed. (See the Safe and Healthy Buckeyes website for recommended spaces).
Their website links to a list of "Quarantine and Isolation Hotels" -- which are presumably hotels that the university called up and asked to hold COVID-positive students.
My Theory
As everyone already knew, it's about the money. But maybe not like you think.
The university has literally $100 Million in government grants they can give to students who apply for it. The form is dead-simple, and states:
>The emergency grant can be used to assist with expenses related to a student’s cost of attendance or for emergency costs that arise due to coronavirus, such as tuition, food, housing, health care (including mental health care) or child care.
You don't have to file a FAFSA, and in my opinion a sudden $500-$1000 hotel stay counts as 'financial hardship', even if you don't have financial need. The university can distribute these funds as they wish, as long as you submit documentation. I think it is the university's plan to direct students to request this grant money if they end up in a hotel. This is not a bad thing -- the university doesn't have to directly pay for it this way (it's govt. money), but you do have to actually request it. I think all you'll need is the hotel receipt and documentation of a positive test (don't quote me on that).
They have $100 million (wtf), which if it were distributed equally among our ~65,000 students is $1500 per student -- more than enough for a hotel stay (and not every student will need a hotel stay). Now the university didn't come out and say "we'll pay for your hotel with government
... keep reading on reddit ➡
Japanese immigrants faced extensive discrimination and xenophobia in the United States, facing things such as the yellow peril myth and the Gentleman's Agreement and such. What I'm curious about specifically is that with the ever increasing informal restrictions on Japanese immigration, why was there such heavy debate about formalizing the restrictions? I found major discussion about this in the Congressional records as well as the New York Times. Why was this as major a concern as many people made it out to be in this specific moment? And probably as an extension to that, why were the restrictions informal in the first place?
Seeking your experience of the process to get ACT Housing to pay half or just allow access to replace the fence?
I want to remove the old timber 1.4m fence adjoining my ACT housing neighbours and erect a colorbond 1.8m one. It seems like I just have to email or call their maintenance area. Ive found very little info online. Should I contact them before getting quotes? How long has it taken others to finally have the ok to remove and erect a new one?
All I found Found this buried inside a Tenants Responsibility and Maintenance PDF. Worked out that TFM is Total Facilities Maintenance. "Where a private owner requests replacement the request should be made to the TFM who will carry out appropriate investigations and arrangements. The TFM has the authority to enter into fencing agreements with private owner up to the above standard. "
Any tips or advice?
Fyi there's no appropriate flair for this post and you have to choose one. Why?
Yes, I did just copy and paste the descriptions.
As the Election for President rages on, it is time to find out who will win the House and Senate.
Democratic Party
Leader: Finis Garrett
The Battle of New York (1924 Democratic National Convention) really did paint the future for the Democratic Party. They nominated Underwood, a progressive, liberal, civil rights advocate. Obviously there are more Conservative members, mainly John Davis, but if they continue nominating people such as Underwood, the Democratic Party could return to the Progressive ways of WJB.
Republican Party
Leader: Frederick Gillett (Retired)
While it may seem the Republicans are heading in a more Progressive direction due to the nomination of Herbert Hoover, this may not be the case. Harding was a pretty unpopular President, and many believe Hoover would have a better shot at beating whoever the Democratic Candidate for President was. Hoover did only barely beat Harding for the nomination
Farmer-Labor Party
Leader: None
The Farmer-Labor Party is currently a relatively minor third party, albeit, one with two seats in the Senate and three seats in the House. The Farmer-Labor Party has picked up steam recently, mainly due to Harding's Presidency and the fact that they nominated Herbert Hoover for President in 1924. Hoover's association with the party was what led to many Progressive Republicans and Democrats, such as Robert LaFollette, to become official members of the party. They do lean a tad Socialist, but they are not technically Socialist, more just Leftist.
I've seen these come from various states, but specifically more recently Washington. Where an agent will make some cute post about how sending a letter to a seller is against the law breaking the Free Housing Act. As far as I can tell sending a letter doesn't actually do this, however I'm not a lawyer and don't know the specifics. Assuming that the letter doesn't involve blackmail or bribery, are these legal?
So to keep this brief, I have been in a year lease with an apartment complex since August and have 3 roommates not including myself, that has a shared living space. This is in North Carolina. At this apartment complex in normal situations, all roommates have to agree to have a dog in the apartment. I know that 2 of my roommates and myself did not approve of a dog, as there was a roommate “meeting” in October where 2 of my roommates and myself told the other that we did not want a dog in the apartment.
I got an email today from my apartment complex stating that “We would like to advise you that one of your apartment-mates has recently received approval to keep a dog as an assistance animal in your apartment.” And when I reached out to them about this, they said that it involves Federal Fair Housing Laws.
I understand that apartment complexes are pretty much forced for allow emotion support animals. I just can’t find anything about rules dealing with apartments that have roommates.
I also know that this dog is not a service animal and is an emotional support dog.
My question/need advise: How does this work in an apartment that have shared living areas and kitchen. And what are my rights as a roommate that this is being forced upon?
Thank you! Sorry for any possible formatting errors I’m on mobile
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Lodging_Houses_Act_1851
Last night, the Meesa senate convened to discuss pivotal legislation that is key to the Patterson administration’s agenda. The ‘Meesa Public Housing Act’ and the ‘Love Act’ were both scheduled for a vote late Thursday evening. A total of 7 voting members were present at the meeting.
Picture of the beautiful Meesa Senate chamber from the view of the infamous Peanut Gallery.
The first measure to be debated was the long awaited ‘Meesa Public Housing Act’. During Mayor Patterson’s campaign, he raised the issue that many of Meesa’s “citizens” do not even live in the holy city. There is simply no available or constructed housing for senators and citizens in any of Meesa’s disticts. Many citizens have been forced to sleep in the NASDANK homeless shelter or take refuge in one of Meesa’s many mattress stores. With this new legislation however, all of these poor living conditions would be put to an end. The Bill allowed reduced land purchasing taxes for those wishing to construct residential buildings to rent out as well as closed the resale of land loopholes that could be exploited by Meesa’s wealthy land owners. The government would also collect taxes on rent profits collected by land lords in this new system. The proposed housing act passed the senate with virtually no opposition. Meesa citizens can expect to see new residential buildings popping up very soon!
After touting a great legislative victory, Mayor Patterson then moved on to his next piece of legislation: The Love Act. In this law, polygamist marriages would now be legal as long as all parties are consenting. This law also limited lawyers ability’s to initiate divorce, gave powers to the mayor to approve marriages, and forbids the marriages of players and mobs. These provisions were heavily opposed by Tribune of the Plebs DrPhoprah and the right honorable gentlemen and attorney General hummus Syed. DrPhoprah spoke first on the Love Act in a heartfelt speech where he confessed his feelings for Sir Isaac the IV. “The thought of my feelings for this mob being denied by Law is simply unthinkable,” DrPhoprah said to our capital hill reporters. Awkward silence then filled the senate chamber following Phoprah’s speech as Mr Patterson called for a vote to add mob marriage legalization to the ‘Love Act’. This motion was passed by a razor thin margin of 1 vote.
[This Post
... keep reading on reddit ➡This is interesting, I guess something got changed up. Oh My.....
Hi, sorry for the layout and general bad grammar!
I’ve been living in a Scottish student accommodation for nearly a year and have had repeated issues with them coming into the flat (including bedrooms) completely unannounced. In the past i’ve sent emails pointing out the law that state we need 24hours notice and stating that due to mental health issues (psychosis that includes paranoia about break ins) having people randomly come into the flat and my bedroom is causing me issues. This week alone we’ve had staff come into 2 of our bedrooms while we’ve been sleeping and I’m kind of at a breaking point with it, is there anything I can do?
