USAnum1

I opened it side-by-side with my other tabs (using win + left arrow, win + right arrorw) after pulling the tab out. That way I can continue browsing without actually putting the other tab in the background.

It is a silly restriction!

edit: mootothemax's suggestion is even better, I didn't realize the tab can go in the background after being split out.

To give them the benefit of the doubt, it's possible they've made a new account (45 days old isn't too much tenure).

Heck, I've done it, since it's probably not the best to create a digital repository of all my opinions!

Another thing I thought of was using the <table> tag for layout.

It's austere, as well as an anti-pattern when used exclusively. Despite this, it just plain gets the job done. It has also proven quite sturdy/reliable, even on popular sites like this one.

Cool idea!

Any plans to share your experience creating the app or to show off the code itself?

Anything worth working on for 6 months is likely interesting to learn more about. Plus, it's always nice to find out how others tackle ambitious personal projects.

Very cool site!

Some quick feedback: changing pages (eg: navigating from 'new' to 'inspiration', 'sources', etc...) while in night mode switches the user back to day mode, which can be quite jarring.

Not only that, up to the late 20th century many products other than pipes contained lead. Lead paint, leaded gasoline, etc. The jury was out on lead in everyday use until quite recently.

I doubt the poisonous nature of lead was well known when these cities were built.

Your inflation point is something I had not considered.

The cost of negative interest is likely less regressive than than the existing system of inflation.

It will be interesting to see how this untested financial environment will settle to equilibrium, and what our world will look like as a consequence (like you mention, more VAT? Or fewer taxes as borrowing grows cheaper?).

Although true, there really is no substitute for money (cash or a deposit account) in terms of liquidity and fungibility.

You need at least some liquid capital, and those with the least money will always be 100% liquid (or very close to it), and are hence the worst off under negative interest.

>"Savers might stomach a modest fee for making bank deposits, but as rates go deeper into negative territory, they will find ways to avoid charges. Switching to cash is the obvious solution, which is why some have suggested getting rid of banknotes altogether"

This is an incredibly troubling aspect of the push toward a cashless economy. Not only does it marginalize the unbanked (those who can't bank due to illegal immigrant status, or other mitigating circumstances), but it's also an incredibly powerful tool for population control.

It removes the agency a modest savings give us, by concentrating all wealth under the control of a select few anointed conglomerates. It also allows onerous policies like negative interest to be a new, truly inescapable regressive tax regime.

Edit: notahacker makes a compelling point that negative interest is likely less regressive than inflation. I thought it was something worth bringing to the root of the thread.