|
anthonypants posted:Someone vandalized a ton of Nike rental bicycles, lol https://twitter.com/BikePortland/status/849382740030095360 Won't lie, I've fantasized about doing this pretty much every time I see those garish things. E: YESSSSSS  (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 15:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 12:55 |
|
|
Senor P. posted:The housing crisis is not going away. Even if new homes are built. The solution is the one thing nobody wants to talk about. Too much demand. The United States' fertility rate is below the replacement level, with 1.8 children being born per woman. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_fertility_rate#United_States). The fact that the United States is still gaining population is due to population momentum and immigration. This is especially true in Oregon and Washington, where a lot of the population growth is coming from immigration from other states. Most countries in the Western hemisphere are also just above or just below the replacement rate, including Mexico. The long term trend is that our entire continent is going to level off and then lose population, but people will still be moving to Oregon and Washington for a long time. One of the funny things about housing is that at the peak of the baby boom reaching adulthood and buying/renting houses (1980-1990) there was nowhere near the housing crisis that there is now, either locally or nationally (at least, I don't remember one, but of course I was in elementary school). I think the problem with housing mostly stems from the change in how people want to live, and how long it has taken to adjust to that. I think when young people started moving back to cities in the mid-90s, most policy makers and business people thought it was "just a phase the kids were going through", and thought he would all move back out to the suburbs and want minivans and snouthouses. When urbanization turned out to be a more permanent social and economic trend, the infrastructure didn't exist to support it. An example is the 1996 vote to expand light rail to Vancouver: imagine how much development would have been different if we would have had light rail in Vancouver for over a decade. It might have taken the pressure off of Portland. But at the time (and still), people in Clark County just imagined that people would want to keep on building housing developments in Hockinson forever.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 15:49
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:The problem is people who live in Vancouver tend to be tax cheats in that they use Portland for services but dont want to pay taxes and use an artificial line created by governments to avoid them. I interviewed with a company called Fisher Investments that moved from California to Vancouver, and they said well "We wanted to move to a place all our employees and executives wouldn't have to pay taxes"
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:15
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:Won't lie, I've fantasized about doing this pretty much every time I see those garish things. Wait, you are celebrating the destruction of bike services? That is so Portland.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:25
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:Won't lie, I've fantasized about doing this pretty much every time I see those garish things. The people that did this are assholes and if you support them you are also an rear end in a top hat. I really don't ever care what broader point the may have been trying ro make because they are destroying a public facility that is designed for livability and environmental benefit because they apparently don't like that a corporation was involved in paying for it. If you object to bikeshares paid for by corporations then start your own without any corporate money. If you just object to bikeshares then go gently caress yourself.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:53
|
|
|
The Puppy Bowl posted:As a new Portland resident I actually haven't heard the full story on the erosion of Columbia river bridge talks. All I know is that everyone from Washington blames Portland, and the city's desire to bring the devil MAX to the fair people of Vancouver. Secondly, repairing the I5 bridge is crucial to interstate commerce. Both states knew this, and should not have allowed Clark County and/or Portland Metro to gently caress it up. Thirdly, there was this really weird movement in opposition the Columbia River Crossing (CRC) by people who were deeply concerned that it would destroy Hayden Island, and that a wider bridge would somehow mean more cars and more smog. In reality, the only people who really care about Hayden Island are shoppers from Vancouver, and a wider bridge would only increase throughput but not the total volume of cars. In the end, the plan was done in by the Coast Guard, because the final design for a bridge was too low, and so the Coast Guard wouldn't sign off on it, and then it was too late to redesign a correct bridge because the entire project hinged on getting a one-time infrastructure grant from the federal government, and the grant said projects had to begin by a certain date.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:55
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:The problem is people who live in Vancouver tend to be tax cheats in that they use Portland for services but dont want to pay taxes and use an artificial line created by governments to avoid them. This is such an important issue and the arbitrary lines are so established people can't even conceive of how ludicrous they are. Remember the Sellwood Bridge funding disaster? "We refuse to pay for this major piece of regional infrastructure that needs to be replaced because we're on the Clackamas side of the line and so it's not our bridge" was tossed around like it was the most reasonable and logical argument ever conceived. Last fall there was a push to use a local vote in Tigard to kill the proposed SW MAX expansion, as if one community should have the power to kill an entire regional transportation project (granted, it failed, but they aren't going away).
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:57
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:
This sounds familiar *Seattle Light Rail* (well not the coastguard bit, but the plan relying on one time federal funds)
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 16:57
|
|
|
If WA adopted an income tax and ditched the sales tax, would Vancouver collapse upon itself like a neutron star?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 17:24
|
|
|
seiferguy posted:If WA adopted an income tax and ditched the sales tax, would Vancouver collapse upon itself like a neutron star?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 17:28
|
|
|
therobit posted:The people that did this are assholes and if you support them you are also an rear end in a top hat. I really don't ever care what broader point the may have been trying ro make because they are destroying a public facility that is designed for livability and environmental benefit because they apparently don't like that a corporation was involved in paying for it. If you object to bikeshares paid for by corporations then start your own without any corporate money. If you just object to bikeshares then go gently caress yourself. Yeah, gently caress those bikes and gently caress you too
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 17:28
|
|
|
seiferguy posted:If WA adopted an income tax and ditched the sales tax, would Vancouver collapse upon itself like a neutron star? I doubt it. Vancouver is riding high off of the Portland boom and the income tax thing is far less important than cheaper housing costs and the like. I mean, you should replace your sales tax with an income tax, but I don't think it would hurt the 'couv much in the short-term or long-term. Error 404 posted:Yeah, gently caress those bikes and gently caress you too Eh. They seem popular enough, and I've been able to put them to good use when friends/relatives have visited from out-of-town. The complaints are over the sponsorship (which was just the most practical way of making it happen in the world we live in today), the fact that they eat up street parking (which I have no sympathy for), the fact that they're ugly (which I get but they aren't that ugly, and what else? That they're for tourists? Okay. Sometimes places do things for tourists. They're part of the ongoing gentrification of the city? They're completely gentrification neutral - sure, they wouldn't be here but for the gentrification, but they're really nothing more than an expression of it and I highly doubt they actively contribute to it at all. I don't know, maybe I'm missing stuff because I haven't followed the biketown outrage all that closely. HashtagGirlboss fucked around with this message at 17:34 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:What about an income tax AND a property tax. Yes please. Washington needs an income tax, it would be good for everyone. I'm thinking something that kicks in at around 50k/year. And tie it to a sales tax reduction to help the poor.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 17:30
|
|
|
Error 404 posted:Yeah, gently caress those bikes and gently caress you too For real, Nike can eat a big loving dick.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 18:19
|
|
|
My only problem with the bike town thing is the lack of helmets and people who don't ride bikes in a city having no idea how to interact with traffic or what good bike routes are through town.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 18:28
|
|
|
xrunner posted:Bikes Prokhor Zakharov posted:For real, Nike can eat a big loving dick.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
I don't like having to gimp further because I couldn't find an open spot to lock up my bike, having to pass by a bunch of unused rental bikes taking up space is just an additional "gently caress you".
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
therobit posted:The people that did this are assholes and if you support them you are also an rear end in a top hat. I really don't ever care what broader point the may have been trying ro make because they are destroying a public facility A public facility installed undemocratically, using public funds for what is essentially an advertisement for a gigantic lovely corporation therobit posted:that is designed for livability and environmental benefit For the people who can afford to live in the neighborhoods these bike stations are in. Hint: they aren't poor neighborhoods. Congrats I guess, you got Lance McTechworker to leave his Audi at his half million dollar condo for his half mile commute across the Willamette. Glad my tax dollars go to help somebody!! E: and what's the net environmental impact once you factor in the people who have been displaced further outside of the city and now have to drive because biking isn't feasible? therobit posted:because they apparently don't like that a corporation was involved in paying for it. If you object to bikeshares paid for by corporations then start your own without any corporate money. If you just object to bikeshares then go gently caress yourself. lol Nike stomped out other locally owned bike rental and sharing programs and steamrolled this garbage through. Sorry you're unable to differentiate between a real community bike share program and this Brand Portland (TM) bourgeois garbage. SyHopeful fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/SenJeffMerkley/status/849537520534683652
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 20:03
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:A public facility installed undemocratically, using public funds for what is essentially an advertisement for a gigantic lovely corporation I don't understand this complaint. Nike advertising is already ubiquitous so branded or not, it's not likely you're seeing much more Nike advertising than before. The whole thing also didn't seem particularly undemocratic to me, unless you think these kinds of programs should be on the ballot and not handled by the city government, which I don't agree with. But I also didn't pay a lot of attention to the whole thing so I'm open to to evidence that some seriously shady poo poo went down. SyHopeful posted:For the people who can afford to live in the neighborhoods these bike stations are in. Hint: they aren't poor neighborhoods. Congrats I guess, you got Lance McTechworker to leave his Audi at his half million dollar condo for his half mile commute across the Willamette. Glad my tax dollars go to help somebody!! This one I understand a bit more. As far as factoring in displacement to gauge the environmental impact, I don't really think that makes sense. The bikes aren't a factor in why displacement is happening and I doubt they contribute in a measurable way at all. Nobody is buying a new condo on Division because it's close to a bike share set-up. I guess they're a very visible expression of the change and displacement though, so I can see why they'd become easy targets of peoples' frustration. SyHopeful posted:lol Nike stomped out other locally owned bike rental and sharing programs and steamrolled this garbage through. Sorry you're unable to differentiate between a real community bike share program and this Brand Portland (TM) bourgeois garbage. This one is really compelling to me if it's true. I guess I haven't paid enough attention to the whole thing. Do you have examples? Shifty Nipples posted:I don't like having to gimp further because I couldn't find an open spot to lock up my bike, having to pass by a bunch of unused rental bikes taking up space is just an additional "gently caress you". This I don't get at all. As far as I can tell, if they weren't there, they'd be street parking, at least the ones I've seen. It seems like this is getting pissed off just to be pissed off.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
xrunner posted:It seems like this is getting pissed off just to be pissed off. You think?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
Peachfart posted:Yes please. Washington needs an income tax, it would be good for everyone. I'm thinking something that kicks in at around 50k/year. And tie it to a sales tax reduction to help the poor. I grew up in MA. They have a small sales-tax and a small income-tax. It works great! Edit: It's also why I can't take WA's tax situation seriously except as a problem. Accretionist fucked around with this message at 20:38 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
Pacific Northwest Thread: Bikes are still a trigger word.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
xrunner posted:I don't understand this complaint. Nike advertising is already ubiquitous so branded or not, it's not likely you're seeing much more Nike advertising than before. The whole thing also didn't seem particularly undemocratic to me, unless you think these kinds of programs should be on the ballot and not handled by the city government, which I don't agree with. But I also didn't pay a lot of attention to the whole thing so I'm open to to evidence that some seriously shady poo poo went down. ElCondemn posted:You think? Yeah it's a low priority on the list of things to care about much.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
Shifty Nipples posted:Yeah it's a low priority on the list of things to care about much. https://twitter.com/portlandmercury/status/849718616887095296
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 21:42
|
|
|
When the local anarchists/leftists are celebrating the destruction of bike sharing programs, you know you are in Portland.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 21:48
|
|
|
Peachfart posted:When the local anarchists/leftists are celebrating the destruction of bike sharing programs, you know you are in Portland.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 22:06
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:I bet you loved that Pepsi commercial. no, it was dumb, mlyp 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 22:26
|
|
|
Peachfart posted:no, it was dumb, mlyp
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 22:38
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:Why do you believe one corporate advertisement in the form of milquetoast outreach targeted at young persons is different from the other? A bikeshare is entirely a corporate advertisement? It may have Nike's crap plastered all over it, but it is still a bike share, right? The Pepsi commercial was a marketing gimmick to stir up controversy and attention. Other than a corporation was involved with both, they are totally different things.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 22:44
|
|
|
Peachfart posted:A bikeshare is entirely a corporate advertisement? It may have Nike's crap plastered all over it, but it is still a bike share, right? xrunner posted:I don't understand this complaint. Nike advertising is already ubiquitous so branded or not, it's not likely you're seeing much more Nike advertising than before. The whole thing also didn't seem particularly undemocratic to me, unless you think these kinds of programs should be on the ballot and not handled by the city government, which I don't agree with. But I also didn't pay a lot of attention to the whole thing so I'm open to to evidence that some seriously shady poo poo went down. And it was made very clear at the very beginning that no one should have expected these bikes to have expanded throughout the city. They were always going to be concentrated in and around the Pearl, because there's no incentive for the company in charge of the bikes to facilitate service for poors, because the service is first and foremost intended to generate profit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
Bellevue City Councilman re: building a men's homeless shelter - “We want to make sure the scourge that is on Seattle’s doorstep does not come over here.”
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 23:41
|
|
|
Honesty's worth something, right?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wo0jHNZWvds&hd=1
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 05:04
|
|
|
Ted Wheeler is such a loving wiener. Holy poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 05:15
|
|
|
Ted is in so far over his head that he can't see sunlight.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 05:17
|
|
|
Prokhor Zakharov posted:Ted is in so far over his head that he can't see sunlight. Do you mean his head is so far up his rear end he can't see sunlight? Because that is what I think it is.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 05:50
|
|
|
Wheeler has his faults but that was a pretty reasonable and understanding response to a member of the public running up to his high profile elected official rear end.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 05:54
|
|
|
The Puppy Bowl posted:Wheeler has his faults but that was a pretty reasonable and understanding response to a member of the public running up to his high profile elected official rear end. Yeah, considering how wild these can sessions get, I understand being a bit on edge by a dude getting within arm's reach and pulling something out of his pocket.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 06:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 12:55 |
|
|
anthonypants posted:Why do you believe one corporate advertisement in the form of milquetoast outreach targeted at young persons is different from the other? Tangible goods? I mean, the bikes are useful if garish. A Pepsi is just insulting.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 16:10
|
|
