|
Bring more Arcologies!
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 21:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 08:49 |
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:"Suburban" (exurban) areas can't even pay for the maintenance cost of existing infrastructure, adding buses and trains on top won't improve matters. Identifying suburban areas with a potential for densification where all these people can be moved to and public transit made the primary means of transportation would be more effective both short and long term. Yeah, it's really a land-use problem rather than a matter of distance. If you look at the European countries that we all seem to agree "do this poo poo better" it's not actually because they don't have rural areas or suburbs or exurbs, and it's not because they've invented some magical form of mass transit that we could never do here. No; it's because you can perform most of the necessities of life, and a good deal of discretionary things, without any form of transit at all. It's not just density, it's the idea that bars and restaurants and shops and homes can co-exist within walking distance and society will not collapse. It's the idea that a small grocery store can be shoved in the bottom floor of a residential building, or otherwise near to people's homes. The suburbs are more town-like and the residents are less tied into the supporting city for every element of their life! And further: you can walk to transit! The few months I lived in Madrid were *awesome*. I felt much less "in the middle of a city" than I do now, and yet... 15 minutes on the Metro and you could be loving anywhere. I lived on a lovely, quiet street with a few bars and restaurants and a grocery store within two blocks or so (albeit in a low-rise apartment rather than a house, I'm not made of money), and if I wanted to cross any of the streets it felt easy and safe because they were narrow and frequently one-way. I decided to check out some of the further out exurbs with commuter train service, and you had these beautiful towns that felt like the small town I grew up in in a lot of ways, and yet... you could buy a cheap ticket to the centre of a major world-class city in half an hour. I spent that long driving to school in high school from a suburban home, and it would've been twice that if I'd taken transit. I do agree that lack of density is an issue, but the specific way that North America does a lack of density is a separate problem that needs looking at. We don't need to force everyone into a high-rise apartment to solve a lot of our current issues.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 22:29
|
|
|
Abolishing single-family zoning is probably the best first step. Get those grocery stores, restaurants, pubs etc. closer to where people live, in walkable distance.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2022 22:55
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Yeah, it's really a land-use problem rather than a matter of distance. If you look at the European countries that we all seem to agree "do this poo poo better" it's not actually because they don't have rural areas or suburbs or exurbs, and it's not because they've invented some magical form of mass transit that we could never do here. No; it's because you can perform most of the necessities of life, and a good deal of discretionary things, without any form of transit at all. It's not just density, it's the idea that bars and restaurants and shops and homes can co-exist within walking distance and society will not collapse. It's the idea that a small grocery store can be shoved in the bottom floor of a residential building, or otherwise near to people's homes. The suburbs are more town-like and the residents are less tied into the supporting city for every element of their life! And further: you can walk to transit! I'm not talking about creating high rise apartments either, just identifying areas that would serve as a great suburban core and building up a downtown of sorts that fits the scale of the community. That doesn't mean 20 story blocks, as little as two stories can do if you just design the place right by not separating them all by giant empty spaces. A Buttery Pastry fucked around with this message at 07:42 on Jan 24, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2022 07:37
|
|
|
Australia has much the same problem with exurbs and rural areas. Some places are vaguely walkable but public transport is still usually not great at best, but high-density housing is almost unknown. Same problem everywhere that developers literally won't build anything but luxury apartments and let them sit empty when no one can afford them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2022 12:14
|
|
|
AtomikKrab posted:For me: Chicken 99c per lb (unchanged but we are a major chicken producing state and it mostly comes very very fresh so makes sense) This is about right where I live, too - not an astronomic change in chicken (maybe up a little bit), but pork and steak are way up. Before the pandemic, I used to get a tray of four thiccc Costco prime ribeyes for $35-$40 and treat the fam to a steak dinner once every week or two and feel like goddamn royalty. You could also get a 2.5lb tomahawk ribeye for $30 for a special occasion. Now, there are simply no tomahawks and the same ribeye tray is $70-$80 for three very thin steaks. Most of the meals we eat are one-pots that last a few days (gumbo, curry, etc.), which is still good but I do miss the steak days.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2022 14:57
|
|
|
I had to buy some hardware from China because it's not something that exists stateside. The dude on Alibaba said $350 would cover freight to my address. I was anticipating a chunk of Trump Tariffs and customs duty, and that turned out to be $200, ok, fine. Then the freight company tosses a bill at me with over two dozen itemized fees: quote:Loading Charge: 200 USD It just keeps going! What the gently caress? It's like $600 in extra charges. Are they scamming/ransoming my poo poo or what? Are some longshoremen cackling at the club somewhere and making it rain?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 17:53
|
|
|
I assume someone looked at an econ 101 textbook and said "If shipping is the problem because there isn't enough supply, increase the price to reduce the demand until there's less supply for shipping!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 17:59
|
|
|
Zero VGS posted:Then the freight company tosses a bill at me with over two dozen itemized fees: First the longshoremen are only a really small part of handling your cargo and really have nothing to do with those fees. Those fees are everybody else. The terminal, the steamship line, the customs broker, the CFS doing the transloading, etc. All the various vendors and subcontractors and carriers the freight forwarder has to use. Yes they pass those directly onto you. Probably with a markup. Could be worse. lol it can be so much worse. Like customs could just randomly select your can, inspect at a bonded warehouse gently caress up the securing, thus gently caress up the cargo later and you get the bill for it. Or ag could find bugs and you pay for destruction, fumigation and reexport. Or the ship could catch on fire and you could have to pay a portion of that because of general average. Did you buy marine insurance? Was it a Chinese policy the shipper arranged? I mean you could have had a much much worse day.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 18:33
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:First the longshoremen are only a really small part of handling your cargo and really have nothing to do with those fees. So I should suck it up and pay it is what you're saying? I was trying to make the case that the seller should be footing some of this as they assured me the shipping fee was all-inclusive to my door. You're also saying next time, I need to buy my own insurance? In case a bunch of my inanimate carbon rods somehow burn the whole ship down?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 18:55
|
|
|
Zero VGS posted:So I should suck it up and pay it is what you're saying? I was trying to make the case that the seller should be footing some of this as they assured me the shipping fee was all-inclusive to my door. You’re not going to get anything out of the seller. I mean you can try, but I’d be stunned if it happened. Zero VGS posted:You're also saying next time, I need to buy my own insurance? In case a bunch of my inanimate carbon rods somehow burn the whole ship down? Depends on how much your stuff was worth. Depends on the particulars of the policy. And lol it don’t even have to be yours. Google general average. That’s the type of trouble you can get into without it actually being your fault. Always have marine insurance. But be aware there are situations it might not cover (like manufacturing defects or shipper sends you used poo poo instead of new). Be aware recovery against foreign shippers as a small entity is very very hard. And be aware policies originating in other countries may have very different norms and coverage than you expect.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 19:17
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:You’re not going to get anything out of the seller. I mean you can try, but I’d be stunned if it happened. Why the gently caress isn't this covered under the shipper's insurance like in literally every other industry?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 19:35
|
|
|
Marine policies cover cargo in transit. Generally they pay out the product (replacement or repair) and freight / fees. But you have to demonstrate loss of the product first. They aren’t going to pay, I just had these random fees added from the forwarder. They also tend not to pay consequential losses, my project was delayed type stuff. And what do you mean every other industry? Marine and inland marine are just about all industry for coverage in transit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 19:49
|
|
|
This is an area (marine claims) I have a great deal of knowledge in. So any questions I’d be happy to answer.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 19:54
|
|
|
Wouldn't liability be determined by contract, with a near infinite range of possibilities of who takes responsible for what things at what point in the shipping process? I remember a buddy of mine in logistics had a chart of all the possibilities, some being more common than others, but all open to negotiation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 20:04
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:Marine policies cover cargo in transit. Generally they pay out the product (replacement or repair) and freight / fees. If I ship you a pair of shoes via train and the train those shoes ended up on derailed and exploded or whatever, worst case I'm out a pair of shoes. If I cared enough, I could probably sue the operator of the train for losing my shoes and it would be a problem for their insurance policy to handle. If I ship those shoes on a boat and there happens to be a million dollar car on the same boat, why do I personally have to reimburse the owner of that car? Nothing else works that way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 20:09
|
|
|
Someone indicated that airmail avoids the port fee hassles? Is there a hard limit on weight/dimensions for airmail? The stuff I was getting was 2x2x80 inches long and 10 pounds each, twenty of them so 200 pounds total but no need to combine them as a single package. Could I have saved money airmailing it and/or splitting it up?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 20:11
|
|
|
KillHour posted:Why the gently caress isn't this covered under the shipper's insurance like in literally every other industry? Zero VGS posted:Someone indicated that airmail avoids the port fee hassles? Is there a hard limit on weight/dimensions for airmail? The stuff I was getting was 2x2x80 inches long and 10 pounds each, twenty of them so 200 pounds total but no need to combine them as a single package. Could I have saved money airmailing it and/or splitting it up?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 20:58
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Wouldn't liability be determined by contract, with a near infinite range of possibilities of who takes responsible for what things at what point in the shipping process? I remember a buddy of mine in logistics had a chart of all the possibilities, some being more common than others, but all open to negotiation. For the ocean carriers: International treaty law National law (COGAS, carriage of goods at sea) The terms of the Bill of Lading Generally in the US they have a per package limit and they consider the container a package. In Europe it’s a SDR per kg limit. Inland carriers: US law and the terms of the Bill of Lading Generally a per pound limit. Freight forwarders: House Bill of Lading terms or contract terms. Then there is what is covered by the marine policies, or freight forwarder liability policies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 21:08
|
|
|
KillHour posted:If I ship you a pair of shoes via train and the train those shoes ended up on derailed and exploded or whatever, worst case I'm out a pair of shoes. If I cared enough, I could probably sue the operator of the train for losing my shoes and it would be a problem for their insurance policy to handle. If I ship those shoes on a boat and there happens to be a million dollar car on the same boat, why do I personally have to reimburse the owner of that car? Nothing else works that way. General average is what it is. What it comes from is that sometimes there are damages or loss of cargo to save the vessel and the rest of the cargo. Or damages to the vessel to save cargo. General Average is how that risk is shared between the parties. It is a covered loss for marine policies. Lots of shippers don’t b get marine policies though. If you don’t have a policy and you want your poo poo your have to pay. Manufacturing issues / condition at origin issues are what I was saying are not covered.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 21:13
|
|
|
Foxfire_ posted:There are hard limits on size and density. Like someone at where I work screwed up designing a crate and it could only be shipped to places served by widebody jets instead of narrowbody. I don't know for sure on what is shippable. A long-and-thin might be okay since it's easier to fit around stuff. But if you're doing retail airmail (fedex/ups/dhl/etc...), they're pretty expensive. Through airlines directly is cheaper, but there's a bunch more paperwork to file upfront, customs are your problem, and you have to pick up and deliver your own crap to the freight terminal. Thanks, and last stupid question, I know China subsidizes airmail so that I can buy like, a USB thumb drive on eBay for 70 cents all-in and they'll airmail it over here (and USPS or whoever does the final delivery), but if I want to mail it back to them it's $200. When they airmail it to me are they somehow using FedEx/UPS/DHL for that, or do they have their own Chinese air fleet that I need to specify to a seller to try and use? "EMS" rings a bell too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 21:20
|
|
|
KillHour posted:If I ship you a pair of shoes via train and the train those shoes ended up on derailed and exploded or whatever, worst case I'm out a pair of shoes. If I cared enough, I could probably sue the operator of the train for losing my shoes and it would be a problem for their insurance policy to handle. If I ship those shoes on a boat and there happens to be a million dollar car on the same boat, why do I personally have to reimburse the owner of that car? Nothing else works that way. Because a train or airplane almost never has a situation where the captain and crew have to intentionally destroy (toss into the sea) some of the deliveries to save the entire transport. Meanwhile, tossing stuff overboard to save the ship is a tradition going back to ancient times. We can see versions of the general average all the way back into ancient Roman law. When the ship is in a bad spot, the crew cannot afford to hesitate and argue over the best sacrificial cargo. Hence, the general average.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 21:54
|
|
|
golden bubble posted:Because a train or airplane almost never has a situation where the captain and crew have to intentionally destroy (toss into the sea) some of the deliveries to save the entire transport. Meanwhile, tossing stuff overboard to save the ship is a tradition going back to ancient times. We can see versions of the general average all the way back into ancient Roman law. When the ship is in a bad spot, the crew cannot afford to hesitate and argue over the best sacrificial cargo. Hence, the general average. But we have modern economies and laws and don't have to do poo poo the way they did it in ancient times. You're a shipper moving goods for me. I'm not a business partner of yours putting together a rag-tag group of sailors brave enough to face the unknown so we can get opium to the new world and make bags of gold. The shipper's insurance policy should cover the event where cargo was lost to protect the whole and the cost of that should be reflected in however much it costs to ship a container. If your poo poo is worth more than whatever the general insurance cap on an individual container would be, get your own supplemental insurance. Problem solved. Like, if I'm shipping rubber erasers, I shouldn't have to worry that I ended up on the ship loaded with Bugatti's and diamonds. KillHour fucked around with this message at 22:54 on Jan 26, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 22:50
|
|
|
KillHour posted:If I ship you a pair of shoes via train and the train those shoes ended up on derailed and exploded or whatever, worst case I'm out a pair of shoes. If I cared enough, I could probably sue the operator of the train for losing my shoes and it would be a problem for their insurance policy to handle. If I ship those shoes on a boat and there happens to be a million dollar car on the same boat, why do I personally have to reimburse the owner of that car? Nothing else works that way. thats not how general average works. everyone with cargo doesn't pay an equal share of the damage, they pay a proportional share based on the value of their cargo the Ever Given, which got stuck in the Suez Canal, is an example of declaration of general average. for getting the ship stuck, the ship owners were hit with massive fines and fees by the government of Egypt. these fines and fees were spread out over everyone with goods aboard the ship. this is the old principle - that we can basically hold your cargo if necessary to help pay to repair the ship if something stupid happens. lets say for sake of argument that the GA assessment was 50%. you've got $100k worth of erasers on the ship, so if you want them back you need to pay us $50k. or, just walk away from the erasers and write it all off. someone shipping $50m of luxury condoms is going to have to give up $25m to get them back, and so on. you're not reimbursing the condom importer, the shipping line is basically holding your goods until you pay an additional assessment. this isn't too far off from how other common property assessments work, except you don't own any of the ship, you're just renting space and due to the risks and costs involved, the shipping line wants to be able to twist your arm to help cover extraordinary and unforeseen expenses. the alternative is that we price these expenses into the insurance and you simply pay higher rates, all of the time Mr. Fall Down Terror fucked around with this message at 23:08 on Jan 26, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 23:05
|
|
|
KillHour posted:But we have modern economies and laws and don't have to do poo poo the way they did it in ancient times. You're a shipper moving goods for me. I'm not a business partner of yours putting together a rag-tag group of sailors brave enough to face the unknown so we can get opium to the new world and make bags of gold. The shipper's insurance policy should cover the event where cargo was lost to protect the whole and the cost of that should be reflected in however much it costs to ship a container. If your poo poo is worth more than whatever the general insurance cap on an individual container would be, get your own supplemental insurance. Problem solved. Well it depends on the terms of the sale also who’s insurance policy covers. And sometimes shippers buy policies on behalf of consignees too. Bar Ran Dun fucked around with this message at 23:12 on Jan 26, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 23:08
|
|
|
Mr. Fall Down Terror posted:the alternative is that we price these expenses into the insurance and you simply pay higher rates, all of the time This is how everything else ever works and there shouldn't be this rare "gotcha" situation that you need a shipping expert to understand.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 23:09
|
|
|
 it makes sense to me, i get that you are personally mad and feeling ripped off but oceanic voyages have unique sets of risks as well as unique economies of scale. better to have lower rates most of the time until a kraken devours the crew or whatever and then we can figure out how much this is going to set everyone backe: i forgot to mention that if you do have insurance on your cargo, it will ususally cover GA costs unless you cheaped out. having to cough up money to get your stuff back is only if you're uninsured Mr. Fall Down Terror fucked around with this message at 23:21 on Jan 26, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 23:13
|
|
|
KillHour posted:This is how everything else ever works and there shouldn't be this rare "gotcha" situation that you need a shipping expert to understand. Actually everything else is from marine. I mean this is the origin of insurance and contracts and international law.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 23:14
|
|
|
Mr. Fall Down Terror posted:Ever Given (Also, the proper example good for Suez shipping is sex arses, not luxury condoms)
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 23:25
|
|
|
Like in some policies a vessels voyage is still literally referred to as “the adventure”
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 23:28
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:Like in some policies a vessels voyage is still literally referred to as “the adventure” This is just more evidence that your way of doing business is antiquated.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 23:31
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:Actually everything else is from marine. I mean this is the origin of insurance and contracts and international law. So like, has an average joe ever bought a $200 part like this and been bankrupted by the SS Ferrari hitting an iceberg?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 23:34
|
|
|
the thing about having all kinds of brilliant innovations about how the world should work is that they're extremely cheap and common and safely ignored, in favor of the time-tested thing which definitely does workZero VGS posted:So like, has an average joe ever bought a $200 part like this and been bankrupted by the SS Ferrari hitting an iceberg? if your entire business was riding on safe delivery of that cargo and you couldn't afford insurance, sure
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 23:34
|
|
|
Mr. Fall Down Terror posted:if your entire business was riding on safe delivery of that cargo and you couldn't afford insurance, sure Oh I misunderstood, I thought general average meant I had to split the damages with everyone else like I was on the hook for their loss. So I can't actually lose more than the value of the shipment?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 23:37
|
|
|
Zero VGS posted:Oh I misunderstood, I thought general average meant I had to split the damages with everyone else like I was on the hook for their loss. So I can't actually lose more than the value of the shipment? right. let's say Poseidon Himself tridents the ship and it needs to put into port for immediate repairs, that cost millions of dollars. the owners of the ship, seeking compensation, can invoke GA to force everyone with cargo on the ship or their insurance carrier to give up a percentage of the value of their cargo if they want to get their cargo back. you've always got the option of just giving up your cargo entirely, as i can't imagine in what scenario you'd be forced to pay more than the value of the cargo - presumably at that point the ship has been entirely destroyed and the cargo is lost anyway
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 23:43
|
|
|
Mr. Fall Down Terror posted:the thing about having all kinds of brilliant innovations about how the world should work is that they're extremely cheap and common and safely ignored, in favor of the time-tested thing which definitely does work Yeah why would I change to new and better thing when if that somehow goes bad, or even doesn't but something related goes bad, it will be blamed on me? Old thing works don't fix it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 23:54
|
|
|
Zero VGS posted:Oh I misunderstood, I thought general average meant I had to split the damages with everyone else like I was on the hook for their loss. So I can't actually lose more than the value of the shipment? I had the same misunderstanding and it makes it less ridiculous, although still weird as hell. I found this thing a law firm put together that goes over the pros and cons but then does the typical lawyer thing and says "we have no opinion" at the end, even though the cons list is like 3x the length of the pros list and the pros list basically comes down to "shippers like it because they aren't held responsible" https://maloofandbrowne.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/General-Average-in-the-21st-Century-What-are-the-Arguments.pdf
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 23:58
|
|
|
Zero VGS posted:So like, has an average joe ever bought a $200 part like this and been bankrupted by the SS Ferrari hitting an iceberg? I am personal aware of people who have been ruined by Ali Baba purchases that I cannot discuss unfortunately. Not by GA though. Zero VGS posted:So I can't actually lose more than the value of the shipment? Yes you can because the ship itself gets added to the GA pool.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2022 00:22
|
|
|
And there often end up being other costs when there is a GA more surprises lol. Edit: But it would be an extraordinary circumstance to be more
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2022 00:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 08:49 |
|
|
Yeah it’s never going away because the carriers need it. TDGAF about if the shippers like or do not like it. It’s sorta like TDGAF about all the supply chain stuff or terminal capacities.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2022 00:30
|
|