My mother has Alzheimer's and I am always with her when she takes that test, so I end up mentally taking the test alongside her. They actually have two different tests, depending on which doctor she sees, a shorter one and a longer one, and my mother mostly gets the shorter one. There's one part where they list four (five? let's go with four) words and have you repeat them back to them. Then, they ask you some other questions, and then they ask you to recall those four words again.

Other than misremembering the exact date, which I'm guessing everybody occasionally has the wrong date in their head, that question remembering the four words after being distracted by a different question is the only part where I could ever have lost points, since I have occasionally forgotten one of the words. It's the only question that I feel a normal person has a chance of missing. It truly is a test specifically for dementia.

The fact that Trump always says the test is difficult and that he got a perfect score on it, given Trump's history lying about things like winning golf tournaments, I think is absolute proof that he does extremely poorly on the test. He very likely fails it. He brings it up all the time because he's as bad at lying as he is at everything else. Good liars know not to bring up the lie a lot. Bad liars keep repeating the lie because they're afraid you might not believe them.

Too expensive. Most bus stations are basically just a sign, sometimes you also get an ad poster and a shelter. Bringing kiosks would imply setting up electricity and internet. When you could instead just make a phone app.

“Wonderwall” is a song that’s very easy to learn on guitar so the meme is that bad guitar players will bust out a guitar and subject you to their bad rendition of the song at inappropriate times when nobody asked for a performance.

man with gun go "bang bang bang". man with guitar goes "bang bang bang". one with gun the other with instrument.

So you're the one who puts pointless red circles everywhere?!?

No, I get it, the problem the way we've chosen to build society, but now that it is the way it is, judges and juries are reluctant to ban someone from working and buying groceries for anything less than a prison sentence...

Like it's pretty crazy to me that the State (USA) can seize you car if you transport drugs with it, but not if yoU literally run over a human being. People with multiple violations and triple-suspended licenses still get to keep their cars.

Definitely do check him out, he's dry humor about cities' unique challenges and wins for mass transit. On Nebula or any of the YouTube variants

Yeah but still would have to do 100km by car because no train station close to to destination I speak of. Or I would have to take RER and add 2 hours of travel time.

The problem is that even in my local area the infrastructure is built for cars so much that walking takes 10x longer than it should.

The Local Group, which includes the Milky Way galaxy, is over 10 million light years, so you can easily see that I have no choice but to own a car to be able to get around.

Most places in Europe and many places in China have functioning mass transit. Most places in the US do not. The car lobby is very powerful in the US, and they work hard to make life impossible without a car.

I agree that subsidizing more rail would be good, but it’s pretty fixed, location wise. It’s already in place for most intercity travel.

Rural/outside city living is diffuse, scatters in all directions from a city. It’s why there’s rush hour in most cities. How do you run rail to all those locations? Can you imagine the nimby screams? It also significantly drops real estate values having trains rolling through the backyard.

I'm sure the passengers on the bus would love a 25 minute detour just to pick me up from my rural farm.

that doesn’t mean we hand drivers licenses to incompetent or irresponsible people.

Judging by the way people drive in my city, that's exactly what it means :(

the solution is not to give everyone the inalienable right to drive

It's not a question of "solution" writ large. It's a recognition of existing infrastructure and the consequences of denying a subset of the population its use.

redesign the city such that people who can’t drive

Sure. Love that idea.

But, in the meantime, if you've dropped 40 miles of concrete through my neighborhood, such that I need a vehicle to get across it...

"We should build more pedestrian friendly infrastructure" is very different than "ban a subset of bad drivers and let them pound sand about it"