|
quote:It is nice to see Seattle slowly come to terms with its needs but if anything I think ST3 plans are still not ambitious enough. Also apparently the state limits how much tax authority Sound Transit has or something, it's weird because why does the state care if a region votes to tax itself more? (the answer is Republicans)
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 23:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 15:55 |
|
|
Matlock Birthmark posted:That rest stop has a great view. You can almost see Lyle from there. The drive on 14 is so much more scenic than 84, it's totally worth getting stuck behind the frequent semi - just gives more excuses to stop  Cicero posted:Ah yes, because building large public housing complexes ala Singapore and building tons of new transit is exactly what capitalism is about, you got me chief. abloo bloo bloo won't somebody think of the rich and their poor profits
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:abloo bloo bloo won't somebody think of the rich and their poor profits  Yeah good point, Europe only has higher density because of the rich, nailed it.
Cicero fucked around with this message at 23:09 on May 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:The drive on 14 is so much more scenic than 84, it's totally worth getting stuck behind the frequent semi - just gives more excuses to stop Also safer in the during the winter freeze or snow. Ya, 14 is my preferred road most of the time as well.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
Cicero posted:
You're vehemently cheerleading a system that encourages profiting from basic human needs and are proud of that, which makes you human garbage Matlock Birthmark posted:Also safer in the during the winter freeze or snow. Ya, 14 is my preferred road most of the time as well. Is it? 14 is narrower, has less shoulder, and more elevation changes than 84 -- I'd probably pick 84 in ice or snow.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:Is it? 14 is narrower, has less shoulder, and more elevation changes than 84 -- I'd probably pick 84 in ice or snow. Guess it depends on your vehicle. I just know from experience that Oregon doesn't deice 84. Washington does on 14 though.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 23:30
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:You're vehemently cheerleading a system that encourages profiting from basic human needs and are proud of that, which makes you human garbage Ultimately, more density means more competition, and thus LESS profit, not more. It's hyper constricted supply that has led to ridiculous land valuations and rents, not too much development. That's what some on the left fail to understand, because they let their ideological beliefs get in the way. They can't see developers as anything other than mustache-twirling villains. Sad, really. Cicero fucked around with this message at 23:41 on May 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 23:38
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Just like farmers are human garbage for profiting from basic human needs, I imagine? There's nothing wrong with profiting by supplying people's needs in and of itself, the issue is when that gets in the way of people actually meeting those needs because the thing becomes too expensive. It's cute to see you so rabidly defend these canards of capitalism. I'll consider speaking up and pleading a case for you to go to a gulag instead of the guillotine Matlock Birthmark posted:Guess it depends on your vehicle. I just know from experience that Oregon doesn't deice 84. Washington does on 14 though. In any vehicle, I'd pick the bigger, more "boring" road if my goal was to travel safely in inclement weather. I'm fine on ice (20+ years in Alaska), it's all the other drivers that worry me.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:It's cute to see you so rabidly defend these canards of capitalism. I'll consider speaking up and pleading a case for you to go to a gulag instead of the guillotine
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Just like farmers are human garbage for profiting from basic human needs, I imagine? There's nothing wrong with profiting by supplying people's needs in and of itself, the issue is when that gets in the way of people actually meeting those needs because the thing becomes too expensive. I'm a proponent of more development, even if the developers only want to build high value condos. Because that means more supply, plus wouldn't it be nice to have an affordable condo downtown when the bubble bursts?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 23:55
|
|
|
twodot posted:I'm not opposed to full communism now arguments, but I feel like people making those arguments need to do a better job of adding "The following ideas are only good presuming a global revolution with certain properties". While I believe that an armed revolution is a necessity, I don't think it needs to happen BEFORE people start to think outside of the mental box capitalism has built for us. We could making housing and healthcare a human right, a constitutional right, and remove the profit motive from things like food, healthcare, and shelter without a revolution. I have two business degrees including an MBA so I know exactly where Cicero is, and it's also not like I lack an understanding of how business in a capitalist system works. His life's been okay under capitalism, it's worked for him, so he has no reason to question it and every reason to make smug comments about socialists while white-knighting Amazon and citing studies from for-profit real estate developers to support an argument about how the REAL problems are because of government and/or uncontrollable market forces. That's like the US military investigating itself and saying it found no evidence of wrongdoing. But until the system reveals its true form to him, until he's been chewed up and spit out and shown just how little value that system places on him once he's no longer profitable, he's going to continue being a smug poo poo so there's little point in earnestly engaging.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 00:12
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:While I believe that an armed revolution is a necessity, I don't think it needs to happen BEFORE people start to think outside of the mental box capitalism has built for us. We could making housing and healthcare a human right, a constitutional right, and remove the profit motive from things like food, healthcare, and shelter without a revolution. quote:I have two business degrees including an MBA so I know exactly where Cicero is, and it's also not like I lack an understanding of how business in a capitalist system works. His life's been okay under capitalism, it's worked for him, so he has no reason to question it and every reason to make smug comments about socialists while white-knighting Amazon and citing studies from for-profit real estate developers to support an argument about how the REAL problems are because of government and/or uncontrollable market forces. That's like the US military investigating itself and saying it found no evidence of wrongdoing. Also lol @ quote:citing studies from for-profit real estate developers quote:Our analysis of American Housing Survey data finds evidence that housing becomes less expensive as it ages. quote:The AHS is sponsored by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau. The survey is the most comprehensive national housing survey in the United States. The US Census Bureau, obviously a tool of for-profit developers.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
Cicero posted:The primary party profiting is the landowner that sold the land to the developer anyway. What I would love to see (but will never happen) is value capture: when your home's value rises drastically due to something other than capital improvements, a large part of that value is captured (read: taxed) when you sell it, and that then funds affordable housing. Some municipalities already do this for major transit improvements that increase property values in the area.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
Cicero posted:We can make these things available to everyone without armed revolution, too. Like I said! The system has worked well for you so you have zero reason to question it. This is why engaging with you is pointless. You start your arguments with the assumption that capitalism is Good and Ok and Unquestionably Not A Problem so I greatly prefer calling you human garbage who is okay with having basic human needs gated behind a paywall.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
I wonder what it's like to think of most people that you interact with in your daily life as being human garbage. Must be tough. "My boss: garbage. Co-workers? Garbage. Neighbors, garbage, supermarket cashier, garbage, bus driver, probably garbage." Or do you only hang out with fellow marxists?
Cicero fucked around with this message at 01:22 on May 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
xrunner posted:You're funny. Taxes and regulation aren't the problem. It's the fact that everything being built is being built for the wealthy. I bought my house like, 6 years ago, for 140k. I was making like $18/hr at the time. Got laid off shortly after and spent 2 yrs unemployed. Still paid off the house payments each month, and still kept all my ducks in a row. I just sold that property for 173k within 2 weeks of making the internal decision to sell it. That is neither an unreachable goal for your average family (plus the house is surrounded by a series of K-12 schools which were ALL rebuilt in the last 12 months) or an unreachable goal for your average loner bachelor, like I was when I bought the place 5 or 6 years ago. It closes Monday. I never even bothered to list it or find a realtor - because a random human off the street just walked up and immediately took the first asking price I threw out. Yep, everything is totally geared toward the wealthy. 
coyo7e fucked around with this message at 05:33 on May 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 05:30
|
|
|
coyo7e posted:This is the biggest, saddest sack of QQ "I can't do anything because the world is rigged against me!" bullshit.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 05:36
|
|
|
That's awfully not normal and a very bad example if real.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 05:37
|
|
|
How'd you cover cost-of-living (incl. mortgage) for two years while unemployed?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 06:02
|
|
|
Places where houses go for 170k are not the ones with housing supply issues.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 06:06
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Places where houses go for 170k are not the ones with housing supply issues.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 06:17
|
|
|
coyo7e posted:This is the biggest, saddest sack of QQ "I can't do anything because the world is rigged against me!" bullshit. Other people have called you out already for a lot of what you said, but please also tell me how your experience in Eugene has anything to do with my comments on the current development boom in Portland?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 06:28
|
|
|
coyo7e posted:This is the biggest, saddest sack of QQ "I can't do anything because the world is rigged against me!" bullshit. lucky timing.jpg + that guy you sold to is probably flipping it for 50k more within the next year.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 06:50
|
|
|
coyo7e posted:This I never even bothered to list it or find a realtor - because a random human off the street just walked up and immediately took the first asking price I threw out. Do you think the person wandering in off the street with enough money sitting around to buy a house without haggling isn't wealthy? I'm glad it's working out for you, but that's pretty much wealth.txt on that person's part. Normal income people don't behave that way.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 09:52
|
|
|
Is a "luxury condo" just one that's priced high?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 17:39
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Is a "luxury condo" just one that's priced high? Yes, also adding luxury in front makes the buyer think they're getting something that isn't really just an apartment which costs as much as a house (and sometimes more!). As a condo owner for the last 9 years I can say with absolute certainty under no circumstances should you ever buy a condo. You are paying house money for an apartment, and you get the extra added bonus of assessments and HOA drama. Seriously, just don't do it.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 19:30
|
|
|
As a condo owner, any house I could buy for what I'm currently paying would be a complete poo poo hole with a longer commute.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
oxbrain posted:As a condo owner, any house I could buy for what I'm currently paying would be a complete poo poo hole with a longer commute. Yeah. Houses don't fit into our equation at all; it's just not feasible. And I'm not willing to give up 2+ hours per day for commuting. So I can stick with renting (for $800 below market), and pray we won't get priced out of the area. Or buy a cheap condo. gently caress this real estate inflation.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
Drunk Tomato posted:gently caress this real estate inflation. We could see a bust soon. Hope it doesn't take the economy with it! Although, it would be interesting to see the microwaved circus peanut try to navigate a recession/depression - life would be miserable, yes, but Obama would be pretty drat vindicated by that point.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Is a "luxury condo" just one that's priced high? On developer-side you get the added benefit of a lighter tax burden on the "public" or "HOA" sections of the property, especially if they have value-added elements. This is especially important if you skullduggery your way into control of the HOA and funnel the luxury-class funds and fees into your own maintenance / repair company.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
coyo7e posted:This is the biggest, saddest sack of QQ "I can't do anything because the world is rigged against me!" bullshit. "Things aren't hard, I could do it so anyone anywhere can!"
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
Cicero posted:I wonder what it's like to think of most people that you interact with in your daily life as being human garbage. Must be tough. "My boss: garbage. Co-workers? Garbage. Neighbors, garbage, supermarket cashier, garbage, bus driver, probably garbage." Or do you only hang out with fellow marxists? No, I don't blame people for unwittingly participating in capitalism, since it's what we all know and have grown up in. Hell, I was a proud capitalist up until just a few years ago! And I don't write off all capitalists as moustache-twirling villains -- in fact that's what makes my conviction that capitalism is broken even stronger: that good people, doing exactly what they are trained and educated to do, contribute to this fundamentally broken economic system. Working exactly as it is designed, capitalism creates haves and have-nots. It commodifies everything. It commodifies humans, turning us into numerical values of input and output. It commodifies the natural environment, so that land and natural resources are a thing to be exploited, to be sold, to profit from. Capitalism distributes resources based on ability to pay, not on need. It says that it's perfectly okay to gain and profit from doing absolutely nothing. I reserve the "human garbage" moniker for people like you, people who consider themselves of above-average intelligence who assiduously and condescendingly continue to defend a system that they've never truly questioned. You're smart enough to REALLY evaluate capitalism on a systemic basis, Cicero. I want to believe you're also smart enough to realize that this system doesn't deserve the passionate defense you give it. It's funny that you get butthurt about me calling you human garbage when you are defending a system that sees you as nothing more than that. coyo7e posted:This is the biggest, saddest sack of QQ "I can't do anything because the world is rigged against me!" bullshit. $18/hour would be a luxury for millions of Americans, you privileged twat.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
SquadronROE posted:"Things aren't hard, I could do it so anyone anywhere can!" This is white privilege summarized in a sentence, right here.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:No, I don't blame people for unwittingly participating in capitalism, since it's what we all know and have grown up in. Hell, I was a proud capitalist up until just a few years ago! And I don't write off all capitalists as moustache-twirling villains -- in fact that's what makes my conviction that capitalism is broken even stronger: that good people, doing exactly what they are trained and educated to do, contribute to this fundamentally broken economic system. Working exactly as it is designed, capitalism creates haves and have-nots. It commodifies everything. It commodifies humans, turning us into numerical values of input and output. It commodifies the natural environment, so that land and natural resources are a thing to be exploited, to be sold, to profit from. Capitalism distributes resources based on ability to pay, not on need. It says that it's perfectly okay to gain and profit from doing absolutely nothing. quote:I reserve the "human garbage" moniker for people like you, people who consider themselves of above-average intelligence who assiduously and condescendingly continue to defend a system that they've never truly questioned. But once I was out of high school and less sheltered, I came to see the flaws in unrestricted capitalism, and gradually became more progressive. Now, I view capitalism as a nuclear reactor: powerful and useful, but also dangerous unattended, necessary to be controlled. Plus, fully socialist governments have been a rather miserable failure, so that hardly seems like a viable option. Cicero fucked around with this message at 22:37 on May 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
Cicero posted:I recognize that capitalism has systemic issues. So does socialism. That's why I'm all for a hybrid system where each plays to its strengths. I think social democracies have done a great job of providing for the general welfare of their citizens and would like the US to go down that path, which is why I donated to Bernie's campaign. What would you consider a "fully socialist" government?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 22:35
|
|
|
SquadronROE posted:What would you consider a "fully socialist" government?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Well, I mostly meant economically, so countries where the public sector is all or nearly all of the economy. Yeah, that's what I figured you meant. From my understanding of it, armchair politicking, Socialism is a set of economic policies that governments adapt. In your mind was the USSR a fully socialist country? Mostly I'm just trying to tease out terminology here, and what that term means, in concrete examples, so I can use it in my own conversations. The terms "socialism", "communism" and similar get used a lot.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 22:42
|
|
|
SquadronROE posted:Yeah, that's what I figured you meant. From my understanding of it, armchair politicking, Socialism is a set of economic policies that governments adapt. In your mind was the USSR a fully socialist country? quote:Mostly I'm just trying to tease out terminology here, and what that term means, in concrete examples, so I can use it in my own conversations. The terms "socialism", "communism" and similar get used a lot. quote:You're smart enough to REALLY evaluate capitalism on a systemic basis, Cicero. I want to believe you're also smart enough to realize that this system doesn't deserve the passionate defense you give it. Cicero fucked around with this message at 22:54 on May 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 22:46
|
|
|
Socialism is most easily understood as any policy that can have communal property. If someone has better I'd be happy to adopt it.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 22:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 15:55 |
|
|
RuanGacho posted:Socialism is most easily understood as any policy that can have communal property. quote:Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production,[7] as well as the political ideologies, theories, and movements that aim at their establishment.[8] Social ownership may refer to public ownership, cooperative ownership, citizen ownership of equity, or any combination of these.[9] Although there are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them,[10] social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 22:56
|
|