Full of empty shops and tents with homeless living in them all over the pavements ..

Amazon many tech online companies also Dapps Apps will reduce the workforce in the high street   bars clubs and what not BUT if no many have money then your bars clubs and what not will be EMPTY ..

So i imagine it to be like this NOW remember the TECH industry rules in this part of the world and yet still with all the monies floating around you see this..
Oh and it wont get better because   WELL i let you work it out..

 https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=san+francisco+homeless&&view=detail&mid=2F163CEA47432A8D20292F163CEA47432A8D2029&&FORM=VRDGAR

ENJOY  THE FUTURE ^^^^

To be honest, I think our future will realize all our scifi fantasies! Think about it… It’s all starting -AI, self-driving cars or flying cars, then there’s blockchain tech and virtual currencies. Then there are talks now about space colonization as well as immersion into a virtual world. Mind-blowing, right? I just read about it in this discussion here: https://www.reddit.com/r/transhumanism/comments/91g7yd/should_we_focus_on_space_colonization_or_digital/.
One thing is for sure –our future will be so high-tech and way beyond what our imagination can create.

It is needful to say that before the completion of a magnificent building, it starts from the foundation, therefore, to excel as a crypto enthusiast you must start from the foundation, which is through the acquisition of knowledge.
I will not deny the fact that learning is a continuous process, but whoever is coming newly into crypto, should try as much as possible to learn first the rudiments before venturing into any aspect of crypo in order to avoid making costly mistakes.
What you already know cannot be taken away from you...
So, start from the foundation today and get the best from the crypto space.

It absolutely DOES mean that 'we' would NOT 'aim for it.'  It will be hugely expensive in a number of ways to try to grab all guns and has zero chance of being effective anyway.  The only thing which it will accomplish in the U.S. is that the ratio of armed responsible citizens to armed criminals will be vastly less, and there will be a blood bath.  Most of the blood will be that of the responsible civilians since criminals will switch from non-confrontational crime to confrontational crime when they can do so safely.

Currently criminals cannot rely on confrontational crime in rural areas with very low police protection, and there is limited such protection because it is simply not economically feasible to employ a large police force in such areas.  The guiding hands funding/motivating the 'gun grabbers' are fully aware of these dynamics, but they also tend to believe that citizens should be aggregated into dense population centers where they can be more easily monitored and the rural areas should be minimally inhabited (mostly by their own staff engaged in resource extraction.)  Rampant crime will provide another justification for population movements.

All your questions are things that gun control by government promotes. The difference is that government controls it all rather than everyday people controlling.

If you want to live free, you have to stand up and take responsibility for how you live. You control your guns with your kids all the time. You train your kids how to be responsible for their actions. You don't leave your guns lying around so your kids can get them without proper overseeing.

Gun control by government is simply all the crimes being done by government because government has the strength if they have the gun control.

I personally know of no-one who has accidentally shot their wife or husband.  I do know of situations where a person has accidentally hit their wife on the head with a sledge hammer driving fence posts.  Fortunately it did not severely injure her.  I know of a situation where a person ran over his wife while trying to jump-start an automobile.  Unfortunately this did result in a fatality.

Being alive and actually doing things in the real world is a risky thing (but some weirdos actually enjoy it...go figure.)  Sitting on the couch an watching TV all day helps...until you reach about age 50 then it still helps, but mostly it helps the medical/industrial complex.

A skilled engineer will almost never try to get to 'zero.'  We know the trade-offs which occur most of the time, and we balance these in a coherent manner.  A starry-eyed utopian dreamer will always shoot for zero.  More commonly so will a brainwashed retard who listens to their bullshit.  Or more often they are listen to a cold and calculating engineer who is spinning yards of utopian bullshit for the masses but who has an entirely different agenda in mind.

The U.S. has plenty of gun control and these problems are at a tolerable level and most of them dropping.  Those which are not dropping will only get worse as citizens are dis-armed.

Gun ownership control against tyranny of a Government has no relevance.
Private guns against Government guns is a no contest.

Unless you are keen to go out in a bullet blaze of glory - gun ownership does not increase your survival chances.

Government tyranny and control develops slowly - in the minds of people. If you have a gun you will be isolated and disarmed. One by one.

I see people terrorized by police in the USA now. People shot because police think they have a gun.

Massacres that are happening in gun toting countries - you cannot convince people in such a society that their guns are responsible for it.

How effective is any resistance against a modern equipped army with handguns and rifles ? The weapons that are effective are already banned in the US.
Anyone got an RPG ? Surface to air missiles? armed aircraft ? Machinegun made after 1986 ?

One of my US friends told me his neighbor shot herself yesterday. Suicide by gun (by far the easiest method) is 46 times higher in the USA than in the United Kingdom.


Lack of gun control means:

More gun crime
More accidental gun deaths
More gun suicides
More police shootings
Increased likelihood of an armed intruder in your home.

Proper gun control means:
People with mental health issues do not have access to guns. Criminals do not have easy access to guns. People should not need have to have guns for "protection". (It would imply that criminals have access to guns)

A perfectly sane person should be able to have recreational use of a gun.  Tank ? Hell yeah - I want one of those.

LOL what a load of bullshit ! Back up that statement with historical facts. Here are some historical facts:

Hitler

Most of the gun control in Germany came from the Versailles Treaty around 1919. Germans were banned from possessing firearms.

Treaty of Versaille, imposed by the allied powers
Article 169 "Within two months from the coming into force of the present Treaty, German arms, munitions, and war material, including anti-aircraft material, existing in Germany in excess of the quantities allowed, must be surrendered to the Governments of the Principal Allied and Associated Powers to be destroyed or rendered useless."

In 1928, the gun control laws were made less severe.
The Nazis actively campaigned against gun control legislation.
Hitler didn't come to power till 1933 ! Hitler didn't take guns, he made it easier for people to get guns !
Hitlers 1938 law actually weakened gun control and made it easier for everyone except Jews to own guns !
In 1938 the legal age at which guns could be purchased was lowered from 20 to 18.
By 1938 Hitler had so much control that no matter how many guns the Jews had it wouldn't have saved them.
The Russian Army lost 8-10 million men fighting the Wehrmacht and another 14 million civilians - the Russians had machine guns, tanks, anti aircraft guns, aircraft, explosives etc.

https://www.salon.com/2013/01/11/stop_talking_about_hitler/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

Mao

Mao didn't take away guns. Not only did people living in the country have rifles for hunting, some communities even had small artillery pieces and anti aircraft guns.    

Of course it was under the proper direction of the party. It wasn't hard to get or own a gun during Mao's time.

It is only after Deng Xiao Ping took over that the militias were gradually banned, and their weapons were confiscated.  

Stalin

Private citizens could own hunting weapons if they had police permission. Police and militia could confiscate guns of people that showed "irresponsible behaviour"

In 1929-30 there was a clampdown on guns. - so Stalin exercised gun control.

Of the 6 million people that perished under Stalin it is said that 3 million starved to death. Maybe they could have eaten their gun if they still had one.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/little-gun-history/

A simple cost-benefit analysis would show that clearly, a blatent poisoning like this has much more damage back home than it does good. Putin isn't stupid, if he really wanted revenge then he would do it in a way that wouldn't point all the evidence back to him. Russians are certainly not clumsy when it comes to spy work.

So who did it then? Well the "evidence" that the poison came from Siberia is far from damning--anyone can waltz across the border to Kazakhstan and then hop on the next flight to London with a bit in his pocket. But it certainly is a good way to lay the blame on someone...

The most logical explanation is that the event was ordered by the " Deep State", and the hit was done by a German EU asset working in Porton Down. Had the Russians done it, then it would have been a professional hit, not the amateur botch up that one expects from EU "assets". There is no conceivable reason for the Russians to have done it, by the way.

That is the only explanation that fits all of the "facts" that have come to light.

Racism has been on increase in some countries like never before, there are some countries that if you don't have a particular colour of skin, hair, eyes you can't just enter some places or gathering. This is an unfortunate occurrence.
I think Africans especially black Africans are the most affected by this anomaly.
FIFA, UEFA are taking a drastic measure against whosoever that is guilty of racism in football. We are all one, let all united to discourage racism.

Well, i see cities in future using high technologies. A lot of gadgets that can be use to make living easy and convenient. We dont need to go out everything is done online. Even houses are using remote controlled gadgets. Those things i see in the future.

since IOT(internet of things) is on the process of being a part of our daily life, imagine all things being automated, cabs w/out drivers, high rise buildings with a robot assistant to welcome you a smokefree ride and maybe some old school bicycles for those that support environmental care but i would not remove beggars from the future city or include flying cars as it would not be practical putting in our world's gasoline reserves unless there would be a modern way of transportation that does not depend on gas, yeah there are electrically dependent mobiles but not that efficient to make an airplane fly or a ship move in water.

there are two sides:
no discrimination in relation to people on the one hand, it is unfair
the second side: i'm against migration, because i do not want another people to live in my country where I pay taxes and build the opportunities for my family and children, not for  others.

This has nothing to do with race but religion so this is not racism.

Hi! Today, I want to talk about a topic that I've experienced multiple times in my life, in this country. And that's racism! How do you view racism? Is it still alive in this country, in your opinion? Have you ever experienced racism in your life? How did you handle your racist experience?