I've read studies that claim that homework in general does not actually help students achieve more. Those who need extra practice and help the most are the least likely to have said help at home, making homework actually counterproductive.
So in this case, I propose the following:
1. Take a step back in networking students. Stop issuing computers, tablets, and such, at least internet connected ones.
2. Stop assigning homework.
3. I recently found out that daycare costs as much as school. In some cases more, some cases less. Most people work all year, so eliminate summer break and just have more shorter breaks. This allows the work previously done as homework to instead be done in the schools, and prevents the loss of progress our long summer break currently has - it takes weeks to just catch back up to where students were before it started.
While it won't help everybody, it might reverse the decline we're seeing right now.

I don't know, a bus or train all to myself seems more wasteful than the regular car.

It doesn't have to be perfect to still have an effect. Though yes, I'd argue that our current system is already good enough that for like 99% of the murders remaining, serious thought on the consequences did not occur. They thought they'd never be caught or even just didn't care in the heat of the moment.

Also, getting as specific as this crime isn't as necessary. If it deters somebody from murdering their fully adult spouse or even their drug dealer, good enough.

You’ve shifted my point into something I never argued.

Deterrence doesn’t require me personally to have almost committed murder. It’s a populationlevel effect observed across criminology: when the state reliably investigates and solves serious crimes, the expected cost of committing those crimes rises, and some fraction of wouldbe offenders change their behavior. That’s true even if neither you nor I were ever in that category.

You’re also treating “people who commit murder” as psychologically identical to “people who would never consider it,” which is exactly why personal anecdotes aren’t the right tool here. The question is whether solving murders—even old ones—reduces the incentive for planned, intentional killings. The evidence suggests it does.

So if you want to engage with what I actually said, the discussion is about deterrence, institutional legitimacy, and the social value of solving serious crimes—not whether I’ve ever personally been on the verge of stabbing someone.

I think that you're incorrect, that this WILL deter others, by giving the impression that we will catch them eventually if they commit murder.

There's also the idea that the criminal justice system in general pursuing crimes even if it takes a long time for the most serious ones, helps prevent people attempting vigilante justice.

I remember cases of them digging out old bacteria samples from things like old wells, a couple centuries old, not 13k, but still resistant to a raft of modern antibiotics, more than many modern strains.
The easiest explanation is that we got most of our antibiotics by examining molds and such, and it isn't like mold and bacteria haven't been fighting for millennia already. The bacteria probably just encountered something similar enough to the modern synthetic antibiotics and had to adapt.

Ouch, I can definitely see wanting to fix the color/colour thing for consistency. Reminds me of a game on steam with ONE broken achievement. Digging into it, the developer misspelled the achievement originally - then on the LAST update, fixed the spelling in the code, but not in the hook. one character edited in binary and the achievement popped.
But I'd think that an alias would work - allow people expecting color to spell it that way, but not break already developed apps that used the old colour.

Yes, homelessness is a bad thing. How is rent control supposed to eliminate it though? It tends to result in LESS housing available, which is the problem.
As for "handwave", you mistake me considering it mostly off-topic, and thus summarizing, not that I was "handwaving" it. Consider that I did mention that there are "other ways" to help keep rent prices and speculation under control. That makes your "current underregulated state" missing the target, because I already said that the current state sucks - and it isn't because of underregulation.

Since you insist, keeping in mind that this is still a summary - my slogan for solving housing problems, price and availability, would be "Build Build Build!"
If you build enough housing, then proper competition can take place, keeping rent prices down. With enough housing, it is available so that people aren't homeless. With enough housing, the speculators cannot drive the market, and a bubble is not created.

Keep in mind that I'm writing this off the cuff, a select listing of things places could do, in no particular order:
1. Cut down on the approval process. Some places have numerous committees that all need to be satisfied before construction can start or proceed. In some areas, construction can be halted by a single letter of complaint, until the committee involved meets and votes it as irrelevant or otherwise rejects it.
2. Cut down on non-safety requirements. Minimum size per unit, parking minimums, that sort of thing. Also get rid of zoning that limits housing density. In areas with housing shortages, denser is better.
3. Don't kill projects by requiring a percentage be "affordable". Building new housing tends to free up older housing to be "affordable". Rates I've seen vary between 30 and 60%, though it can take time, especially if the area is in a particularly extreme housing shortage.

Given that this is a new bill, it may not even make it out of committee. Sadly, there are people who elect idiots who engage in performative legislation. Whether that be anti-abortion legislation that was automatically unconstitutional until recently, or things like this. There are people who don't think. There are even worse attempts in history, like the move to legislatively define PI.
I mean, most of us here recognize that trying to have 3D printers recognize "gun parts" is a bit like trying to have current robots implement Asimov's 4 laws of robotics. Which always had the problem of requiring intelligence levels above humans themselves to actually implement. At which point the machine is smart enough to work their way around them.
That said - I believe, along with most economists, that rent control is a very bad policy. It destroys housing. Foreign real estate speculation can also be addressed without explicit blocks. There are other ways to improve rent prices and to keep real estate speculation down to a dull roar - foreign or not.

I mean, a functional firearm can be made with two pipes and a nail. That would actually be more powerful and longer lasting than most plastic 3D printed guns.

Yes, everybody gets the basic income.

However, I'm opposed to truly "fake" jobs. Waste is inevitable. But I want any work to have at least some use. That's why I said infrastructure - long payout, but still a payout.

When it comes to government spending, there are generally added complexities. For example, if somebody is working a federal job, they're still paying federal income taxes. So the government can count on getting 10-30% of that right back (because congress both wants the money and to be able to engage in social engineering through tax code as they do for regular people). Plus, by employing somebody in the USA, we avoid having to pay them welfare benefits for being unemployed (at least theoretically). Imagine a job shuffle where somebody isn't employed if the federal job doesn't exist. It's why the federal government will often consider spending 30% more for something made in the USA better than a cheaper foreign option, along with other theoreticals like national security.

As for free food, not necessarily. Also, your housing idea is a lot of infrastructure and labor. Best avoided. Just fix our current housing market. Housing is too expensive, there's a lot of ways to make it cheaper, especially in the cities where it is a special problem.

That's been almost expected for decades though, so might not even merit an official POTUS speech in response.

That isn't a complaint against UBI though, that's a rant against tax evasion in general. Maybe tax avoidance (Evasion: illegal, avoidance: legal). In either case, it's fixed by auditing and proper tax code. Using the UBI to flatten and simplify the code would really help.
Besides which, you really need to boost the CEO income one, maybe two orders of magnitude before the scheme you mention makes sense.
And for UBI to work, it would actually be taxed back for most of the "regular joes". Much like welfare, not everybody can be "on it". The idea though is that if you lose your job, there's zero paperwork, the UBI keeps coming in, so you're not immediately on the street. There's also no real incentive to NOT go looking for work - a lot of people sit on unemployment until it's about to run out, to maximize that income, treat it like a vacation.
Because the UBI doesn't disappear if you get work, might as well.

Remember, the DoD has a plan in case of the girl scouts performing a full up insurrection.
Some speech writer at the white house doing up some sort of speech in case of the discovery of extraterrestrial life is not unexpected, though I'll note that there are many possible levels, from not very impactive to very impactive, but incredibly unlikely.
Low impact: We've discovered and verified some sort of microscopic life on Mars, Europa, or such.
Medium impact: We've found signs of life on a planet orbiting a different star
High impact: We've found signs of intelligent tool using life in a different solar system
Extreme impact: We've discovered ET, and they're visiting.

This is a common problem I see with UBI proposals.
It's supposed to be Universal. A big part of being universal is that by NOT putting excessive requirements on it, you keep administrative costs low.
For example, my proposed requirements amount to "US Citizen living in the USA, not a fugitive from justice"

Okay, so you want to pull it back from the lawyers and CEOs. Anybody making over $200k/year. Well, now we need income verification, which is more paperwork, more federal employees managing that requirement. There's actually a simpler way: Tax it back! With there being a UBI paid, go ahead and adjust the tax rates. Eliminate EITC, the lower percentage brackets, etc... With some finagling, you can be taxing it all back by around $50-70k worth of income. That way, if somebody loses their $200k/year job, they're still getting the UBI,

Okay, when I first made my UBI proposal, it was $500/month. Poverty line for a family of 4, divided by 4. Done. Now it'd be somewhere around $600-700. Go with a public option for healthcare, I'd combine medicaid and medicare, then run it more like the VA. Massive savings are available by running their own facilities. But medical is too varied to be handled by the UBI payment - ranging from $0 to over $100k/month.

Zero changes for urban or rural, expensive cities or not. If SanFran or NYC wants to run their own UBI, they can.

However, if you do that, it is no longer "basic". Now you're back to needing administrators and supervisors to run the fake jobs, having to pay to set up said fake jobs, etc... What, are we going to have them grind in the latest MMO as the job?

Now, I've proposed having a "FedJob" program that does some of what you say - but I try to avoid the broken window fallacy by having them work on "infrastructure" instead. Basically, do work that will make the nation better in the long run. If the economy heats up and hires those people, then the projects can lay fallow instead until the next economic slump.

But the critical part here is that it would be actual wages for actual work.

A big part of the idea behind the UBI is that it does not penalize people for their working status - your proposal would penalize them if they already have a job, just not a well-paying one. If they're busy with a fake job, that means they can't be busy working a real job, looking for a real job, or training for a real job.

Same deal with the housing idea. Odds are it'll be located somewhere that makes getting real employment difficult.