dhanson865

but they only get 84% at most. So no totality for them.

and u/LaPerraDelDiablo was asking if they would see totality.

non porous surfaces up to 3 days, porous surfaces much less.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2004973?query=featured_home

more stable on plastic and stainless steel than on copper and cardboard, and viable virus was detected up to 72 hours after application to these surfaces

Was that a foot in the door approval and it was done opportunity (followed by your hard work and skill), or did he actively do things other than offer you employment that got you to that success?

You have every right to live in PR, but not everywhere is disaster prone. I live in an area where I'm too far inland to worry about hurricanes, I'm in a major valley that blocks tornados, Its a humid state so I don't have to worry about forest fires, It's hilly so it's easy to build on high ground and avoid flooding, and so on.

I have no problem with prohibiting people from living in disaster prone areas. But every community has to decide where the dividing line is between uninhabitable land and inhabitable land.

Looking at that from another angle with sufficient technology and building standards you can build most anywhere. So you can just say only X type structures in this space and that would block unsafe housing without saying no one can live there.

You then you get into where to the people go that can't afford to live in the more expensive structures it takes to make living there safe. But money is always part of the struggle of life.