|
potatoducks posted:Yeah #1 just too selfish to care much about compared to increased ease of parking. #4 maybe but at some point there will be enough lanes to fit all the people in the world and life will be great. Maybe when flying cars come and we have sky lanes. Also, I think the title of the article is misleading. I think the study found that traffic actually stayed the same, not increased. You're providing a really good example of why the human mind can't solve distant, abstract problems like global warming. You see something you think might make your life easier right now, so how could there possibly be any consequences in the future? You wouldn't need parking if you lived in an area where the things you needed to get to were close to each other.
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 13:09 |
|
|
It pretty much is running up a giant credit card balance on a massive scale. Both figuratively (carbon emissions) and literally (the cost at a municipal and personal level of needing vehicles for everyone and the infrastructure and land to support them). BWM for sure
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 18:26
|
|
|
Yet another opportunity for me to remind everyone to read the Strong Towns blog (https://www.strongtowns.org/) which spells out in painstaking detail (math!) why you shouldn't center your urban planning around making things as convenient as possible for motorists.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 18:53
|
|
|
My city adopted pedestrian-oriented planning codes a while ago. A team of "business consultants" brought in by the commissioners just hosed it all up by advocating bigger parking lots as a solution to our declining shopping mall corridor. The shopping mall was declining along with every other mall in the country. And the surrounding businesses were suffering because they're built along a highway, and doing anything there is a huge pain in the rear end.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
ate all the Oreos posted:Some guy said if you kinda squint you can model every process in society as some kind of exponential curve. The poster then draws the dubious conclusion that as a result equality is impossible, or something. ok it's Gabaix. Not good at giving art school explanations, sorry, pick up what you'd like, this paper is for econ folks so it barely has any math in it. many things in power law land barely have any math in it lol, or have high school math http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~xgabaix/papers/pl-ar.pdf Basically, power laws (not exponential curves... integral of exponential curve is finite, integral of power law curve in certain domain is not, very often power laws are at the edge of that domain. think of the horn of Gabriel if you ever learned it in calculus class) are generally omnipresent in nature. People put forth variegated processes to explain this but because it spans like two dozen fields, they are probably all bullshit. But it's not bullshit, the claim that money itself in certain domains takes upon a power law character. MEJ Newman in his very friendly review(https://arxiv.org/abs/0706.1062) claims that you can shove most of these into two claims: positive feedback effects or universal criticality effects (sometimes self-organized sometimes not), esp in percolation phase transition. Gabaix claims positive feedback effect, along with other random phenomena. This is pretty usual in capitalism because it's called capitalism, there's a loving positive feedback effect on money, Jesus Christ noted this fact, Matthew 13:12 "For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.", the fundamental activity of capitalism is loaning money to people and getting it back with interest actual study of this is reaaaal difficult, given that poo poo starts showing up at n=20k or whatever and by definition the top category will be of super loving low cardinality. tldr: you show me an equal society wrt money, I show you a crock of poo poo. you can futz with parameters (eg: sweden is more equal than angola) but you can't change the functional form (it's still the case that one dude in sweden owns an appreciable percentage of all of the loving money) not even communism helps god is dead dehumanize, face to bloodshed curufinor fucked around with this message at 19:08 on May 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
curufinor posted:not even communism helps not kidding http://www.roiw.org/1993/23.pdf fits lognormal distribution to USSR income distribution. lognormal is similar in power law in that it's got huge loving kurtosis out the rear end and dissimilar in that mean is never literally infinite (but mean can be quite deranged wrt median, lookit that skew). discriminating betw. power law and lognormal is a difficult game. but it's definitely of the same functional form as the capitalist economies
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
Same.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
You're going to be a professor someday with how little you've attempted to simplify your explanations.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 19:14
|
|
|
Hoodwinker posted:To be fair for them I'm sure this is equivalent to me scoffing at preppers until the entire government collapses and I wish I had bought nothing but high-caliber ammunition. In their mind it makes no rational sense to distrust an establishment that served the previous generation. Play it safe, and assume that there won't be a government pension headed your way when you retire.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
Now if only I made enough money to save for retirement 
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance/comments/69cchg/buying_empty_lot_adjacent_to_my_house_to_keep_it/ Man wants to take out a second mortgage or cash out his stocks to buy an empty lot across the street and keep it empty to make sure nobody moves in. It's a nice sentiment dude, but maybe just let your son and his friends play in your backyard? quote:Buying empty lot adjacent to my house to keep it an empty lot?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
Talk about NIMBY 
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 19:32
|
|
|
Dude sounds like he has all his bases covered. Could be a lot worse.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 19:34
|
|
|
Yeah I don't think it's so bad from a money perspective, it's some of the other implications I'm not a fan of. One big lot isn't enough for my family, let's take two. It's one of those things that's fine on a small scale but if every neighborhood does it, it increases sprawl significantly.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
Ghostnuke posted:Dude sounds like he has all his bases covered. Could be a lot worse. He's got a high income and (except for a decent mortgage) not much debt. But just lol at the idea that he needs to buy a lot because he'd rather have his kid and his friends play kickball there instead of his backyard. And to try and justify it by saying that he doesn't have a lot of market exposure to real estate.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
Just gonna post the title for this one.quote:Need a vehicle for work. Credit is bad and I can't save enough for a down payment because I spend $600/month Ubering to work.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:He's got a high income and (except for a decent mortgage) not much debt. He could buy it and donate it as a park or wildlife preserve for significant tax benefits. Alternatively, without even buying it, he could lobby the city to buy it for the same purpose, but that takes considerably more effort.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance/comments/69cchg/buying_empty_lot_adjacent_to_my_house_to_keep_it/ My family sort of did this when I was a kid. There were still a few empty lots in our neighborhood, and my parents bought the one directly next to ours. We put in a sandbox, tree house, storage shed, zip-line, and tire swing. And we got to keep it wooded. It was really pretty cool. Lots were cheap there though, so it wasn't a huge investment.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:He's got a high income and (except for a decent mortgage) not much debt. 1/4 acre lot with a 2500 sq. ft. house with a 3 car garage means they probably don't have much of a yard
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
Another "How did this even happen before you turned 20?" story from the Army. https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance/comments/68xwlp/20m_leaving_army_with_nothing_but_debt/ quote:20M, leaving Army with nothing but debt. The army really needs to just let people co-habitate or ban wives from the bases. The amount of married 18-year olds is crazy. They also have a new mandated financial education class for all recruits, but it doesn't seem to be doing anything to stop these situations.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:They also have a new mandated financial education class for all recruits, but it doesn't seem to be doing anything to stop these situations.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
There are a lot of payday and rent-to-own places that prey on army bases.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 20:01
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Another "How did this even happen before you turned 20?" story from the Army. I figure when you're putting your life on your line for your job you're probably not thinking about your future (financial or otherwise) too closely, so it might be tough to fix this.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 20:03
|
|
|
In theory the Army is GWM in that you get fed and clothed and paid and poo poo, but it's actually BWM because dumb rear end 18 year olds with a secure social safety net gonna spend money they don't have on motorcycles/cars/booze/women. It should be illegal to get married until you make E-4. If you can't make E-4 you're too stupid to live.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Another "How did this even happen before you turned 20?" story from the Army. I don't want to internet detective the guy, but a quick peek shows him posting about meeting a stripper 10 months ago, married her, got her pregnant, and now this divorce mess is happening all within the same year. That's bad with life, not just money.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 20:09
|
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:I don't want to internet detective the guy, but a quick peek shows him posting about meeting a stripper 10 months ago, married her, got her pregnant, and now this divorce mess is happening all within the same year. That's bad with life, not just money. that is a tale as old as time
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:I don't want to internet detective the guy, but a quick peek shows him posting about meeting a stripper 10 months ago, married her, got her pregnant, and now this divorce mess is happening all within the same year. That's bad with life, not just money. If you remove the stripper part, then that is about 50% of all Army Marriages under the age of 21.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
Well, we wouldn't want to lose anybody of import while trying to export american exceptionalism for the benefit of our corporate overlords.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:If you remove the stripper part, then that is about 50% of all Army Marriages under the age of 21. That figure seems like a lowball imho
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
Cold on a Cob posted:I've been lead to believe if you're going to trade in every few years you should just lease instead. I don't know if that's true or not though. Lease deals vary from great to terrible, it is completely dependent on the manufacturer and your negotiating/timing. Leasing a car off the dealer lot near the end of the model year is often a fantastic deal, for example.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:Yeah I don't think it's so bad from a money perspective, it's some of the other implications I'm not a fan of. One big lot isn't enough for my family, let's take two. This is why I support Georgist land taxes. Buy all the land you want and keep it unimproved, but have property taxes based on the value of the land without taxing the improvements.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Just gonna post the title for this one. That's depressing as hell, and a very easy situation for someone to get trapped in if they live somewhere with no public transit.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 20:24
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:Yeah I don't think it's so bad from a money perspective, it's some of the other implications I'm not a fan of. One big lot isn't enough for my family, let's take two. I don't think it sounds crazy at all. It's cheap, and it might be a good investment after his kids grow up - they could build a house there and rent it out. As long as he doesn't keep bidding up and pay more than he is expecting.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:That's depressing as hell, and a very easy situation for someone to get trapped in if they live somewhere with no public transit. In the post he says that he doesn't want to uber to a bus stop because he doesn't like public transportation and that he doesn't want to bother his coworkers by asking to carpool because he just started a new shift. Also, he was rejected for a payday loan. He's in a bad situation, but his goony awkwardness and previous financial issues are stopping him from being able to be bailed out. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 20:32 on May 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
BEHOLD: MY CAPE posted:Lease deals vary from great to terrible, it is completely dependent on the manufacturer and your negotiating/timing. Leasing a car off the dealer lot near the end of the model year is often a fantastic deal, for example. Makes sense, since that's when you should buy as well.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:I don't think it sounds crazy at all. It's cheap, and it might be a good investment after his kids grow up - they could build a house there and rent it out. As long as he doesn't keep bidding up and pay more than he is expecting. Asking if you can take a mortgage out on it raises a few flags to me. Cold on a Cob posted:Makes sense, since that's when you should buy as well. A lease is really just an alternative way of financing a car. Instead of financing purchase price, you're financing the use of a certain amount of depreciation of the vehicle (hence the mileage limits). Provided you don't put money down, and you stay within mileage limits, leasing is a good financial decision if you want a new car every 24-39 mos. Of course, buying a slightly used Prius and driving it in to the ground is a better financial decision, but provided you can afford a small premium and are disciplined about your distances driven, leasing is a good idea. It is also useful if you are a business owner who uses a car for work as you can deduct the lease costs as a business expense, but this is a bit of an edge case for most.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:
 I didn't even know that was physically possible.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
paragon1 posted:
Me either. He also says that he is close enough to bike to work, but that he doesn't do it because it "is a death sentence."
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Me either. That's entirely possible though. Some streets are not meant for bikes.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 13:09 |
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:I don't think it sounds crazy at all. It's cheap, and it might be a good investment after his kids grow up - they could build a house there and rent it out. As long as he doesn't keep bidding up and pay more than he is expecting. How do you follow with this when I said "Yeah I don't think it's so bad from a money perspective?" I'm not talking about whether it's a good investment. It's bad from a social* and city-planning perspective - in my opinion, but YMMV. *talking about bigger picture, not him and the 4 or 5 families that directly benefit from his underground park.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 21:00
|
|