It doesn't matter. It's still just as illegal to get into an unlocked car or one with wide open doors without permission. The same premise applies to computers in a lot of places, access controls don't matter. If you access something on a computer not indented to be accessible, it's considered a crime.
Is it illegal, in fact? If a cop saw you, you'd be arrested and prosecuted for attempted auto theft, and your "I just wanted to see how comfy the driver's seat was" defense would ring hollow in court. But sitting in an unoccupied car without authorization isn't trespassing unless it's parked on the owner's land, and I'm not sure what other laws would apply to that specific act.
Obesity isn't a temporary problem, practically every weight loss solution fails at 2-5 year outlooks. If this drug has to be taken for decades it's still better than decades of obesity.
Any condition that is not chronic is temporary by definition. It doesn't matter if it can be cured in 5 years or 20. If a person is dependant on a drug to maintain health, then they have a chronic condition.
This is explicitly not what this ruling means. The Judicial branch will rule is an agency has the power to regulate a limit for X in the water. The limit would still be set by an agency.
It could work with abundant housing, say 20% more housing than the number of people that want to live there. If there's always a lot of empty units, landlords are encouraged to reduce rents to not be stuck with too many vacancies. Rents can go up so much now because there are more qualified applicants than units. That number likely requires about 200% more housing in large cities, which is unlikely to ever happen.
The effects of prop 13 are overstated. The problem is California didn't build enough where people want to live. Many states have laws restricting property tax growth, my own state limits it to the lesser of inflation or 5%. It's the lack of building that pushed prices so high that selling only makes sense to leave the state.
No, the effects of prop 13 are not overstated. NIMBYism is a bigger problem, but prop 13 makes it financially reckless to ever move. Yimby policy would lead to less drastic divergence between value and tax rate as value increases slower, but there would still be a gap as people who bought SFHs in the town center would see the properties value grow due to the lack of land value tax.
It's not prop 13 that made property values 10x in the last 30 years. It's the lack of supply forcing bids ever higher. Downsizing and rebasing taxes isn't a big deal if you went from a 1980s 100k 4-bedroom house to a modern 300k 2-bedroom condo, it's a huge problem if the cheapest option is over 1 million.
If any of that were actually true, postfix/revers polish notation would be more popular. Math has it's own languages with all the same problems every language has.
The school decisions were absolutely some of the worst decisions, especially with the number of professionals dedicated to child health and welfare begging for the exact opposite.
