>>1860022>if you really need full stealth, your best bet is a rugged reliable bike.Some truth to that but also just a lack of range/time. You can go back and forth running a bunch of errands with a car across a larger area and haul more shit, it's just true; bonus points if its a truck, which i wish everyone had.
>Now answer my previous post in a concise, straight to the point manner, or stay posting alone.I don't appreciate the manner in which you are communicating to me. You have not specified which argument you are unsatisfied with.
>>1860026>suburban infrastructure is subsidized at the expense of taxpayers who don't live in itAnother cia mockingbird media narrative. Depends which suburb you live in. It's like the meme that the southern states NEED California in the union and that's why they dont secede. Or italy, or greece. The money is printed by central planners anyway so you're the sucker believe OTHER POOR PEOPLE are the cause of your problems. Communities should be self sufficient though and organize around the principle of subsidiary where they smallest group of insufficient people should collaborate so that they are.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidiarity_(Catholicism)>Subsidiarity is an organizing principle that matters ought to be handled by the smallest, lowest or least centralized competent authority.>And that maybe cars and fuel should be taxed higher because of it.This is taxfare. Same with sin taxes on sugar and ar-15s. You're falling for a narrative. There are a million ways to pay for infrastructure, but the government forces us to use only one. NFTs could be a good way to fund some suburban infrastructure but they make it more difficult with all the anti money laundering regulations and bullshit.
>suburban development is, with the current tax model, fiscally irresponsible.You could also say that with the current societal model of institutional power that anything else but pod livin' is antisocial!
