PattyO

You need to build up a demand for higher-wealth homes by creating better-paying jobs. Better paying jobs are created by moving away from dirty industry and agriculture, and by education. Of course, you can't build an education system in a city without a good tax base or you'll go broke. Also, in order to get high-wealth residential, you need to provide water from a pump or water tower.

Originally posted by: piccboi824 I wasn't tryong to say that highways are cheaper...I support mass transit 100%. I was just making the point that because it is such a big investment and ridership in farther out suburbs is low, transit beyond buses has low priority. quote> Sadly this is true. Freeways cost us so much more in the long run. They encourage the excessive use of cars, which increases gridlock, pollution, and burning of fossil fuels at a heightened rate. People like cars for their convenience (even if you have to suffer with high gas prices and traffic jams), and in places like the suburbs (or rural areas) where everything is spread out, a car is a necessity, since you can't possibly walk or bicycle to everywhere you need to go, and there is no (or very little) mass transit available to you. I think it's also possible that middle class suburbanites might be wary of using mass transit because of the fact that MT is very much a system used by the working class that live in cities; is it possible that the middle class is wary of the problems perceived with people living in the city? No one is really advocating for the much-needed expansion of rail. Why? No one will use it, it seems like a waste of tax money. At this point it all seems like a lose-lose situation; either we build rail that no one uses, or we build freeways that encourage sprawl and unsustainable activity. What I wonder is, what sort of a situation would our country be in if we had never built our freeway / interstate system. If we had instead invested all our resources into revitalizing our rail network, but I guess we'll never know.

Ok, I have a little query for you all: I come from the US (as many do, I'm sure) and as you may or may not know, there have been some initiatives here in the US to increase the amount of goods manufactured at home... "Made in the USA." As with all things, this has a number of reasons. 1) Ensured safety - Importing goods from China, for instance, has brought us lead-tainted childrens toys and mercury-infested fish, among other things. Knowing that something was made in America under our own standards might make people feel safer. 2) Patriotism - This one isn't more apparent than in the act of numerous states passing laws that require American Flags to be made in the US. Some people feel that they should be loyal to their own country and purchase from home. 3) Job Creation - The manufacturing industries in the USA have been in decline for decades, to the point where we manufacture impressively little of what we actually purchase and consume. With those manufacturing plants have gone jobs and profits here at home, all because it can be made in Latin America or overseas for less money (even with cost of shipping). Now my story - I work at a manufacturing plant in western Wisconsin. We make products for a major American company (which I will not name). While I can't exactly explain what we do or make (I signed a contract ), I can tell you that we make things in bulk, package, and ship these items. Many of the items we make say "Made in Canada." This I have noticed, and have asked multiple people as to why the items say such a thing (I most certainly do not live in Canada, btw), but no one so far has really given me an explanation. Even the raw materials that make the finished product do not come from Canada, so I'm at a loss as to why our company chooses to label everything as if it were made elsewhere. "If my company were hoping to sell their product in the US, wouldn't it make more sense to advertise the fact that it's American made?" That's what I thought, before I began thinking... "Maybe they plan on selling this in Canada." Well, that makes the situation a lot different, doesn't it? All of a sudden, a thought popped into my head. What happens if an American company should decide to manufacture a good in China. Say, children's toys, because the labor is so much less expensive. What if this company printed "Made in the USA" on all the goods, and shipped the goods over to the US and sold them in American stores. Americans would (obviously, given the packaging) believe that it was made in America. Can such a thing happen? Can we really trust these packages when they tell us where it's made?

Originally posted by: Doofenshmirtz I'd have to say i'm pro sprawl to an extent. For instance if i had the option to extend upwards or outwards, i would usually go for outwards in most cases. However resources such as farmland, forests etc are the main concern i would have rather than internal infrastructure... however... i daresay the future of agriculture will be vastly different, perhaps utilizing indoor farming techniques in masses of skyscrapers built for the purpose... or the creation of an all purpose artificial foodstuff... using chemicals creatable in factories such as vitamins etc. quote> While that would be an ideal, at present time it would be impossible to sustain any major population using indoor-grown food... When things are grown indoors, you have to provide everything - all the light (unless in a greenhouse), all the water and all the plant nutrients, as well as prevent disease from entering the system (since greenhouses are more contained and independent of a greater ecosystem, a disease or insect inside causes more acute damage than in natural environments). At the present time, there's no cost-effective way to grow food indoors (if there was, we'd be doing it by now). Right now, the most efficient and inexpensive manner of producing food is by outdoor agriculture. As for artificial foodstuff, two words - Soylent Green Originally posted by: piccboi824 This really isn't true either. My sister lives in the inner city in a gentrified area and she knows all of her neighbors. They get together and have block parties and cleanup the garbage in their neighborhood and will help each other out whenever. Whenever we are out on her back patio, if her neighbors are out, then they will always say hi to us and start a conversation. When it comes to having a sense of community, it all depends on the people who live there. If you and your neighbors don't take the initiative to form a community or make each other feel welcome, then you're never going to have community whether you live in the city or not. quote> Like it was said above you, all these things aren't universal, and can change depending on a very localized and individual basis. Aside from that, one obstacle that stands in the way of the Suburb is making public transit a desire to those living in the suburbs. It's true, if a system or network or rail line or whatever were built out into the suburbs, very few if any people would use it regularly. It's not as comfortable or convenient as a personal car. What basically needs to happen at this point is a mass brainwashing. We need to convince all suburbanites that they'd rather ride a bus or a train than drive to work.

Originally posted by: Aro0w Originally posted by: piccboi824 I just wanted to comment on the recurring issue of improving mass transit in the suburbs. There are several reasons why making improvements to transit in the suburbs is often infeasible. Let me lay it on the table for you. 1.) Building transit takes MILLIONSquote> Isn't bus a form of mass transit? I'm sure that doesn't cost Millions... quote> Well, if you're starting a bus network from scratch... that means buying the buses, setting up stops, most likely a bit of advertising, plus you have constant expenses, which have to be paid whether the buses are being used or not. Even a bus service would be expensive for a real city, not to mention light rail, commuter rail, high speed rail, or subway systems. As far as initial investments go, road and freeway expansion seems to give more bang for the buck. In the long run this proves not to be so as the problems of this approach alone make it very costly.

I see your point. I guess we're at an impasse... there's simply no way I can substantiate what I am telling, except for giving you my word that it's the complete and honest truth. As for the little Obama side-track, it really doesn't matter. He's sworn in now and not much will change that I think. That has little to do with my original topic, mind you. Please close this thread as there is nothing to add to the discussion if you're not willing to accept my word (what possible motive would I have for making this up, btw?) that this is actually happening. Thank you.

Originally posted by: Duke87 Alright, look. You claim you're making something in Wisconsin but stamping "made in Canada" on it. However, you won't say what, or by whom. So, for lack of any actual evidence beyond taking your word for it, I'm going to have to point to rule 31 here: You must have pictures to prove your statements In other words, you're going to have to demonstrate to me that you're not just making this up before I'll believe it. quote> I'd love to show you pictures, but photography in the plant is a fire-able offense, as is breaking the secrecy of some of the products we make; it's just the way it is. I work for a company called Amtec (Amery Technical Products), based in Amery, Wisconsin, that makes products for 3M inc. (among others). That's all I'm really able to discuss without going too far. Anything beyond that and you are just going to have to accept my word for it, because I can't think of any further way I can attempt to prove this without breaking a contract and putting my job on the line. If you can think up a way for me to do that, by all means I am listening. The product I mentioned are called hang tabs - they are strips of plastic with adhesive backs and holes punched into the top. They are used on packages for products in stores, and hung (usually) on racks / shelves in stores. They are made in the United States (we're not the only produce, they could have producers in Canada or elsewhere for all I know), but the intermediate boxes and the cases that are shipped are both labeled 'Made in Canada' . There are a couple other things labeled this way, but other products made in the plant are labeled "Made in USA" . I haven't personally seen or worked with every single product in the plant so I can't really say how much is labelled as Canada vs United States. And to manticorefan, you say prove that Obama wasn't born in the US, I say prove that he wasn't. Because from where I sit he's president right now, so it's going to take a lot of proof to change that fact.

That sort of thing makes me wonder how many 19th Century survivors we have left. I can't even guess how many, probably in the hundreds at this point, if not lower. Does anyone know where such information could be found?

Originally posted by: noypi07 It is impossible and impractical to make larger cities. Impossible since you need to edit the main .exe for it to work, which may harm the game itself. Impractical since a larger city requires more RAM, etc, which will make crashes more often and game much slower.quote> Todays machines are beginning to overcome your second statement, but the first statement will always remain. Altering the main game is too risky, you risk losing everything.

Well, that's awesome then. I do have one further suggestion if you feel ambitious. I don't know where the game saves- if it saves to the game's regular save file, but if possible I think it should save to an autosave file. That way a game won't be permanently automatically saved if the builder does something that they don't want to save (starts a disaster in their city, for instance) and autosave kicks in before they're able to exit out of the city (in case they forget to shut off autosave). I don't know if this is possible (i've never worked with coding or programming, etc) but that would be cool in a 2nd version as well.

A quick question to you... I understand if you don't want to say, but can you give any hint how you did this. It seems all very astounding that SC4 has been out for 6 years now and no one so far has written a code to avert a very well-known and annoying bug, yet you wrote one in a night. Also, as was said on page 1 of this thread, does this tool save the game data and the satellite image, or just game data? Because someone on 1st page suggested that instead of saving both, you save just data with this tool so that save times are brought to a minimum... can you investigate to see if this is possible for a second version? Nevertheless I will be downloading this immediately. Thank you! *Edit* I googled an autosave as well and found a blog by someone named "The Real Red" who just created (June 28,2009) an autosave for SC4 - I can see that Lord Yabo saw this as well on the 15th of July and posted a thank-you, saying "Based on ideas in this article I wrote a simpler to install and use C# version." Therefore, I think that if this program does work, credit is due to this "Real Red" as well for writing the base for what would become Lord Yabo's program. Just my $0.02 the-real-red.blogspot.com/2009/06/sim-city-4-crashing-to-desktop-autosave.html << The Real Red's blog

Originally posted by: Blue Lightning Do you use a wireless keyboard? If so there is a button you have to press for keystrokes longer than 2 (usually, some keyboards don't have/need one)quote> I have a wireless keyboard and that keystroke works just fine for me. Besides, I think it has to be at least 4 keys anyway for what you're referring to (othwerise how would something like ctrl+alt+delete work?).

Are you in a city or you in the region, because I know that ctrl+shift+C doesn't work for photos in region view. Otherwise I'd suggest just using print screen if you really need to take a picture, it's a little more annoying to do it that way but you won't have the photo menu sticking into your shot.

Originally posted by: chris0101 What's so sad about a car made in Canada? Our labour laws are on par if not better, as our environmental standards. (Of course, by that logic, we should all buy things made from Western Europe) Nobody is being paid $2 an hour or anything like that. Furthermore, most outsourcing is not from the US to Canada, it is from the developed world to the rest of the world where wages are lower, costs are cheaper, taxes are lower, and laws are more lax. quote> Americans, when they buy American cars from an American company expect that those cars are actually built in America. It's not that Canada isnt'a good place, but Americans expect (incorrectly) that American automakers will manufacture nationally, when it's not the case. And I heard about Toyota... I don't know if its all the cars they sell in the US that are made here, but I think its a good idea. Any way to increase manufacturing in the US is fine by me, so long as it's done reasonably.

No like I said the products used in the final product were all from the US... some of them even made in the same building. My issue is more or less. could a company make something in another place and pass it off as american-made?

Originally posted by: confused04 I love that you are from the Minneapolis-Saint Paul area cause its something I can actually discuss ( as I live near the Cathedral in Saint Paul). Although, from your experiences, the suburbs have been engulfing the exurbs in Wisconsin, compared to other cities, Minneapolis-Saint Paul has a very small suburban area for our population. Minneapolis, like Portland, OR, have development boundaries so MSP doesn't expand that much. Yes the metro area is clearly into Wisconsin now, thats not saying much because the only thing between downtown Saint Paul and Wisconsin is the skinny Washington county (which in itself is still predominately rural). quote> OK, I do know that much about Washington Co... if you drive from Hudson towards St. Paul, there's pretty sparce development until you just about reach 694/494, so that's true. There is no denying growth both in that county and across the St. Croix (although in this recession, who knows how much). Suburbanites (as in the populace, not the governing bodies) in the Twin Cities actually support light rail in droves. Whatever decreases traffic in their morning commute is fine, even if it doesn't benefit them directly. Park and rides provide excellent alternative options for parking downtown. quote> That I agree with too, I've gone by them in the cities and they always seem packed. Its the outstate people (like Brainerd) that get upset over mass transit funding. But thankfully, MSP is getting a system of light rail going so that the current Hiawatha line will not be alone. They just started utility work on the Central Corridor, a line connecting Minneapolis-Saint Paul which will have MUCH higher ridership than the current line. They are about to choose an alignment for the Southwest Corridor (Eden Praire, St. Louis Park, Hopkins, etc) and they are doing an alternative analysis for the Bottineau Corridor (Northwest) and the Rush Line Corridor which was a commuter rail project until a light rail line from White Bear Lake to downtown Saint Paul appeared like a very cost effecient option. So 4 new lines in the work. The only issue is that suburban governments are kinda weery cause they believe crime will follow the light rail and that kids might have issues crossing the tracks (umm... this isn't hard folks). quote> That's good And no, it's not difficult to stay off the tracks. The way I see it, if an idiot plays chicken with a train, then at least that idiot isn't alive to procreate and make more idiots what will ruin the world. That might be a little harsh, but I believe I've made my point. On top of that, the North Star Line isn't just a proposal. Its almost done, Its opening in a few months and its commuter rail. quote> I stand corrected! I guess I hadn't been paying the most attention to it. I think a commuter rail into wisconsin would be brilliant. quote> I can't see that getting off the ground; they still haven't built a new Stillwater bridge and people have been talking about it for decades. I don't know the opinion of a Minnesotan, but I think the bridge into Minnesota is more important for the Wisconsinites than it is for the Minnesotans... which is odd because the Wisconsin Legislature doesn't seem to want to go along with the deal. Oh well, I guess it will take the Stillwater Lift Bridge to collapse during rush hour before anything will be done about the situation. The Union Depot in Saint Paul is being set to become a multimodal transporation hub and the new Target Field stadium is also a new transportation hub (Hiawatha, Central, Northstar, bike highways, buses, possibly southwest corridor). Is it sad that our transportation system is centralized on a baseball stadium . Minneapolis is also working on getting 4 street car lines going for a total cost of roughly a billion dollars. Which would be awesome!!! quote> It's a shame that the Twin Cities have to basically reset the transportation network... back in the old days it had a very extensive privately-operated streetcar network from what I've read. But this sounds like good progress to me. Also, personally I love the Hiawatha line, I find it VERY useful. It connects the Mall, Minnehaha Falls, Lake Street (which you can transfer to Uptown), the Metrodome and the warehouse district... utterly useful Thankfully, the Hiawatha lines ridership has already reached its 2030 projections quote> True, but you also live in the cities themselves. To outside the Twin Cities themselves, it makes no difference.

Well, it's not like we're making things for the military if that's what you're getting at Haha what would make you think such a thing? No, I can't think that it being secret would be an issue... We're not allowed to talk about how its made or what it is, but I can tell you you'll find it in a lot of stores, so its by no means "classified"

I don't think I said that suburbs are ugly. I've lived in pretty much every environment (suburb, exurbs, and rural areas) and each area has its distinctive positive traits. I see the appeal to living in a suburb - if I were to move anywhere it would probably be to a suburb or a city just because there's more to do and more places to go than in rural areas. But at the same time I don't appreciate what suburbs do to farmland, land that could be used for productive purposes is being used to house people. Well that's all fine and good to a point, you have massive sprawl and low-density development. Higher density development is less land "waste" but of course it has its own drawbacks. And here's why expanding freeways are a bad idea. Suburban development is fueled by desirable areas. People who desire to live outside the inner suburbs move to the exurbs, specifically to those areas that already have freeway access (like along an interstate, in US terms at least). Those areas in turn grow and put a strain on the highway (heavy traffic) so the people in the suburbs demand that the freeways be expanded. So the government enlarges the highway, and as a result the area is viewed as desirable again and more development happens. And when more people move in, they create very heavy traffic and the pattern repeats itself. If we choose not to expand the freeways and instead incorporate mass transit, people will use the mass transit because the alternative would be hours-long sits in traffic trying to go to work. Especially if the mass transit is diverse, regular, safe, clean, reliable, and faster than car transport. Other issues with suburbs - Suburbs have large lawns (typically) that sponge water... it's a major drain on a city water supply, that's why whenever there's dry weather or a drought cities are forced to issue watering bans. People in suburbs don't just like driving, they rely on driving - again because their area lacks sufficient mass transit. If you have no car, how do you go to work? How do you go to the store? Those cars, clean as we try to make them, will still use gasoline. This wasn't a problem a generation or two ago, but now we know that gasoline does not have a stable price and can rise dramatically, affecting all people, not just those who drive their cars and live in the suburbs. In conclusion, I like the suburbs. They bring their own little bit of character to every metropolitan area. But they need a lot of work to keep themselves viable and to prevent their ultimate extinction. *Edit* I forgot to comment on what you said Raysfan. A similar attitude from people in the Twin Cities. We have light rail, but unless you want to go to Downtown Minneapolis, the airport or the Mall of America, its pretty much useless. They're talking about expansion, and hopefully it will connect to Saint Paul eventually, but for right now, it doesn't help much of anybody in the North, South, East or West metro suburbs. So when Minneapolis or Hennepin County or the state talk about expanding the light rail system, people in the suburbs must wonder why, since it doesn't affect them as much as freeway expansion would. And we are expanding our freeway system too.. Wisconsin Route 64 in St. Croix County (the highway that leads to New Richmond) has already been expanded and they are going to start building a bridge at Stillwater possibly (the bridge has been planned for the past 20 or so years but no action yet *sigh* , Minnesota 312 runs in Chaska in the Southwest Metro, a very highly developing area. Minnesota 100 was turned from a 4-lane limited-access highway into a full-fledged freeway just a couple years ago, US 169 is being expanded southbound, and a stoplight intersection on 169 in Brooklyn Park is proposed to be converted into a freeway interchange as soon as the money comes through. Minnesota 610 currently runs from the Mississippi River (technically Highway 10) all the way to 169, but there's a plan to cut through Maple Grove to connect 610 to I-94; US Highway 10 was relocated a mile or two north about 10 years or so ago so that it could convert from a 4-lane road into a freeway, which runs (I think) all the way to Anoka. The only bright spot is that in addition to this development, they are proposing the North Star line (I think that's what it's called) which would send either light rail or commuter rail from Minneapolis along I-94 or along the Mississippi all the way to Elk River.

Well, I'm no technical expert, but it sounds like a conflict in the plugins folder. Does it crash in region view or just after you load a city? If it crashes in city view, I'd say check your plugins to make sure there isn't a conflict there first. Then start worrying about software rendering etc.

See blade, "Mother Nature's way" isn't the neatest or most humane way of dealing with overpopulation. If there's not enough food in the world, people will starve to death. This on top of a multitude of other ways that "Mother Nature" can attempt to limit the population. My stance on this is that we, as a civilized society, need to acknowledge that the world is only so large and contains a finite amount of resources, and that those resources will only allow a certain population to live above the threshold of poverty and famine, or to live reasonably comfortable, safe and secure lives. Only time will tell what that magic threshold is, whether we've already passed it or whether it is still looming in the future, either foreseeable or unforeseeable. What is most important is that we acknowledge this fact; all that we rely on is limited by the size of our planet and once it's gone, it's never coming back. This is a real change in attitude from the rest of human history. Relating back to farming in Africa, acknowledging the lack of resources is the difference between clear-cut farming, followed by abandonment of farms and movement of crops elsewhere, and sustainable use of what remaining (possibly) arable land we have left. Plus, preventing expansion of un-arable lands by desertification or urbanization. One thing's for sure - it's easy for people in the prosperous nations like the US, Canada and much of Europe to be apathetic towards the less prosperous parts of the world, but we must all realize that we are all inhabitants of the same world, and sooner or later the changes taking place in Latin America and Africa will affect us; all people have a massive stake in what is happening on all corners of the globe.

Ok - here are some good comments, and some "criticisms" First, I really love the premise. This sort of thing appeals to me and I really wish that they (meaning Maxis) had made more weather, as well as randomly-generating weather, available with SC4. You have an interesting storyline developing, I really hope you edit it to fill in some of the holes (the times listed, for instance). As zgrillo2004 said, you need to slow down your tornado... typically speaking tornadoes are attached to the clouds above them, and the clouds are usually slower moving (at most about 45mph) and usually move in one main direction (not to say that there can't be some minor variance). Often times with storms and storm systems there is a definite front which will form a line where most of the major storms will develop. Ogden (if you mean Ogden Utah, at least) is in a strange part of the country compared to the US Midwest ("Tornado Alley" the northern plains, etc). It's typically much drier. Being the fact that Ogden is in a valley near a large lake doesn't help to try to figure out what a storm would do if it struck the area. Recall a couple years ago a tornado struck in Salt Lake City - a rare occurrence but proof that tornadoes can start anywhere. Now as for timing, typically storms will start in mid afternoon - after 2:00 pm... this is when the sun has just passed overhead (or at it's highest daily angle) and when the heat will be increasing the most at once. If the air around the area is unstable (high humidity / dew point, a cold front in the area) then storms are very possible - if Ogden is in a dry climate, I don't know how that would affect this type of weather, but I am sure that it isn't as likely for a tornado to develop in mid morning or noon as it is in the evening; there's just not enough heat yet. As for your video, besides the twister moving too quickly and erratically, you need to work on developing those holes in your downtown. If you are making this city purely for the sake of this story, then I suggest using filler buildings / eye candy so it's more impressive when a tornado comes and destroys everything. If this is meant to be an actually functioning city, then you need more development. From what I can tell, you have no highways or even avenues in your game; that's very unrealistic especially when you're trying to have a large central downtown area. All in all, you should work to make the city appear real. One final thing - in your video you show an image of Doppler radar. It needs to be refined a lot. For lots of storm cells (dubbed Super cells, often), the tornado will be on the tailing end of the thunderstorm. So when a storm enters an area, first the sky will darken and it may rain, hail will form, lightning, wind, etc, but just as that weather begins to dissipate, at the end of the storm is typically any tornado you may see (due to downward rotation of the cloud). There are a number of real signs to look out for on radar images, such as hook echoes (difficult to describe unless you know what I'm talking about.). Hook echoes are considered a very strong indicator of rotation in a storm. You can try looking up RL radar images if you need some guidance, I'm sure there are plenty of radar images of tornadoes floating around. Otherwise I hope to see this expanded!

The idea that roundabouts increase congestion is odd... logically you'd assume that if traffic keeps moving, you won't have backups like you can have when a line of cars waits at a red light. There's a possibility that (especially where roundabouts are relatively recent introductions, like in much of the US) drivers might not know how to properly use them; they may stop when they don't have to or slow down slower than they have to. And of course you always have those goofy people who get into a roundabout and decide to go around and around and around and around. I've done it I can't imagine what that does to traffic levels.

Yes, New Richmond isn't along the interstate, but I-94 runs east-west through St. Croix Co, and multiple cities in and around the county have grown due to the highway leading directly into downtown St. Paul. New Richmond's story is repeated multiple times; the town of Roberts, just down the road and right along I-94, has doubled in size. Hudson, along the river, has exploded too. State Highway 35 was made into a divided highway down to River Falls, which has also grown dramatically. Hammond, Baldwin, Somerset, even Woodville (which is over 20 miles into the state) have all seen growth in the past few years. Luckilly, where I live, we haven't seen that sort of development yet and we might not ever see it - we're just too far away. Actually, Raysfan, your situation sort of reminds me of the first place I lived. I lived for 6 years in Maple Grove, MN which, when I was born in '90, had already seen significant development and housed over 35,000 people. Today, it has over 55,000 people and continues to grow. When I was really little, the road leading towards our house was bordered by I-94 on one side and many sq. miles of gravel pit on the other. Today the pits are (mostly) closed up and "The Shoppes at Arbor Lakes" was built. I remember when I was little, when the very first McDonalds opened and when we got our first supermarket grocery store. I moved away in 1996, but while I was in the area a couple years ago I decided to go back to see my old house - I got lost. And, just like anywhere else in the Twin Cities, transit sucks. There's barely a decent bus service, we have light rail but only in Minneapolis proper, and we are extremely reliant on our freeways. In '07 when the 35W bridge collapsed, they had to reroute all of interstate 35W down a seperate, 4-lane state highway (MN280). It was a mess, and yet no one seriously thought "You know, maybe we should actually improve our transportation network" It's a shame...

Originally posted by: Easy Bakes A classic example of Bearucratic thinking. They also dont seem to have any clue that if your grand pa had waited till his infection was life threating it would have cost 3x as much and taken 3x times as long to get him better. Boggles my mind. quote> They probably thought that if they waited, maybe his health would improve without medical treatment. Which is dumb.