221
Massachusetts town grapples with sea rise after sand barrier fails
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2024
221 points (98.3% liked)
News
23424 readers
1530 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The nerve that some asshole thinks they are entitled to hundreds of thousands to millions of taxpayer money to protect their wealthy property while the average american can barely afford a run down home or rent.
They already made it clear they're not interested in spending their own money. That nearly $600k sounds like a lot, but when you look into it, that cost was spread between numerous homes on the beach there. I was purusing the Beach Associations Facebook page trying to find details, and failed, but looking at the coastline and the number of houses on it, I'd wager it was meant to protect at least twenty homes, if not plenty more. These are multi-million dollar homes, and if it was only 20 homes involved, that's about $30k each, which suddenly feels much more affordable to rich fucking twats.
So a group of rich twats bundled together to barely scrape together just over half a million, because all of them are too fucking cheap to pay what it would actually cost to solve this problem, and further, don't think it's actually a problem except to them and their homes.
What a bunch of cheap idiot fucking tools. Rich people are always so fucking cheap.
The problem is that the way to actually solve this problem is to move. Building a seawall would be environmentally harmful and would only delay the damage by years or decades.