@roguetrick @thehatfox @aelwero @li10 @BlinkerFluid
If I were looking for subtle trouble, I'd look at the brain, which might be influenced in its development by a psychoactive chemical in childhood.
And at the wetware that runs on it.
Not at the chassis.

@li10 @aelwero (do we not have long term data on use of nicotine by inhalation? )

@Double_A @PunnyName Firstly, we don't do that.
Secondly we vote where our neighbours are.
Thirdly a double vote has a high chance of being noticed.
Fourthly, there are few polls where ond vote would make a difference. The ones where it would/have get even more interest in advance and afterward.

@tal @0x815 Or perhaps in some places when they build something in 1990 with a predicted lifetime of 30 years, say, they simultaneously write in the 2018 diary" get bids to replace X starting in next 2 years"?

@wewbull
That's categorical thought, which is an error with a continuous variable such as speed.

That they break, or do not break, the law ("rule" doesn't quite describe it).

You may also care to consider that if one driver does not exceed the limit, it moderates the speed of others behind - you've presented this as an individual decision, uninfluenced by others, but even taken as a guideline others have influence.

@wewbull @Syldon
If by speeding you mean 35 in a 30 zone, then will the drivers who know their journey is urgent and important, as are try, and that they are more skillful than those around them, drive 15mph above the limit, or 5mph?

They'll stand out rather more if the former, and have a likelihood of killing a hit pedestrian or cyclist reduced by the change if the latter.

I suspect the chap recently apprehended for 61 in a 30 zone past children might not change, yes.

@Treczoks London residents or workers may not regret that. If you do, in your newer car, or by train, you may find the air is a bit nicer.

@JoBo @lasagna curious assertions. And I think neither correct nor clever.

@JoBo @thehatfox This is not sensible.

@tal @Mex
One can trade, if one has something others want as much as what they have that we want.
If the food supply in the world becomes insufficient for the people in the world, then yes, some may eat and others may starve. Solutions which avoid that have more merit than those that rearrange the queue.

Note that considerable of the food production in the UK is dependent on the Gulf Stream.

@theletterd @merridew
There's cutting, and there's deflecting.
A demographic shift is observed in the USA, related to political stupidity and preference on mask wearing.

@Eheran @merridew Drink is one.