bpt3

15 ms·

271.
by bpt3 8mo ago
I ask this of basically everyone on here who posts something like this, and never get a reply, but I'll try again: Why would you expect income increases to track productivity gains?
272.
by bpt3 8mo ago
If you or anyone you care about is or will be elderly and is not financially independent, you should care. This has nothing to do with capitalism; it's a resource allocation problem. We spend inordinate amounts of money on end of life
273.
by bpt3 8mo ago
It's not an either/or choice for nearly anybody. There are plenty of volunteers at community events in my area that have prestigious jobs, and the strivers working to maximize opportunities for themselves actually seek these out a
274.
by bpt3 8mo ago
> Presumably you think it's not good for land owners of "desirable areas" because local laws create a monopoly that allows the landowners to extract wealth from others, through restriction of land use? I think individuals
275.
by bpt3 8mo ago
> This is amusing, because the usual NIMBY argument I hear is about "gentrification", i.e. it makes the neighborhood better and that's bad. Change is bad as far as existing residents are concerned, which is why external YI
276.
by bpt3 8mo ago
1. Yes, and the people who are in favor of this specific law will be completely and utterly shocked when the state government uses their power to enact and enforce a different law that takes away local decision making which they don't
277.
by bpt3 8mo ago
There is an abundance of houses in the US, just in less desirable areas than Rancho Palos Verdes. Your young children have no right to live in any specific location, and your usage of CRISIS to describe a lack of access to highly desirable
278.
by bpt3 8mo ago
Wait, I thought upzoning and increased density increased quality of living? Are you saying that's not the case? Putting that aside, no one is forcing region Y to upzone or not upzone in this scenario. They can make the choice they pr
279.
by bpt3 8mo ago
People who do own the land aren't able to collectively agree on how to manage it because of state law. That's the issue. The source of the "NIMBY pressure" mentioned in the article is local residents, who should have muc
280.
by bpt3 8mo ago
> Communities are fully in control how they manage themselves, as long as they do it within the law of the state. Yes, and my point is that continued trend of state and national laws overriding local jurisdiction over things like land us
281.
by bpt3 8mo ago
YIMBYs in my area are almost exclusively terminally online young adults who are bitter that they can't afford to live precisely where they like with their single 20-something income, and basically want to make desirable areas more affo
282.
by bpt3 8mo ago
That's a very theoretical argument, and there's nothing stopping people in region Y from building all the housing they could possibly need in region Y. If it's such a great idea, region Y will thrive and reap the rewards of t
283.
by bpt3 8mo ago
They are telling communities that they have no part of how to manage themselves. Rancho Palos Verdes should not be required to comply with the request of some random activist who probably has never even stepped foot in the town.
284.
by bpt3 8mo ago
The author needs to rename their organization to YIYBY (yes in your backyard). The nationalization of every policy on earth needs to stop.
285.
by bpt3 8mo ago
It's the less bad option, because it should lead to the end of the regime. The alternative is giving the regime more resources to continue or even expand its policies.
286.
by bpt3 8mo ago
If you actually want a response, you probably should form questions as full sentences.
287.
by bpt3 8mo ago
A regime that has antagonized the US and mistreated its subjects for decades would obtain more resources.
288.
by bpt3 8mo ago
Your "friend" wasn't paying much attention because there are more than those two countries on the list, and you should ask the residents of Cuba exactly how peaceful their government is.
289.
by bpt3 8mo ago
> we doubled down on an approach that has failed for 70+ years. I assume by "we", you mean the Cuban leaders who have clung to power and their repressive ways against the best interests of the population?
290.
by bpt3 9mo ago
If there was a union in place, the massive over hiring that led to this wouldn't have happened and the competent developers would have made less money. So how exactly does everyone come out ahead there?
291.
by bpt3 9mo ago
On top of that, AI was clearly used to write it which made it longer than necessary and harder to read.
292.
by bpt3 9mo ago
> Ends up in test environment for, what, a month.. nothing using getaddrinfo from glibc is being used to test this environment or anyone noticed that it was broken This is the part that is shocking to me. How is getaddrinfo not called in
293.
by bpt3 9mo ago
There's absolutely no benefit to using them, and there are technical and non-technical issues they can cause. I don't think you're in the minority, and even if you (we) are, you are still correct.
294.
by bpt3 9mo ago
Gen Z has been entering the professional workforce (post college age) since approximately 2020, so I don't think they're to blame. AI generated text is littered with emojis in my experience as well, often used as bullets in the li
295.
by bpt3 9mo ago
> What's a "centrist" in a "Dem/repub" context, though? A non-voter? An independent? A moderate Dem/repub? Those are two (or three) options and there are others. > Obscuring what one actually means m
296.
by bpt3 9mo ago
1. Ice cream has never been affordable to 100% of US households. 2. I strongly suspect the couple in the article could afford ice cream if they brought less beef, less name brand items, or were just more savvy shoppers. 3. I don't know
297.
by bpt3 9mo ago
They absolutely are useful terms, as defined by the vast majority of the US population. Dems = left in the US. They are interchangeable in nearly all situations, including this one where the meaning of the original comment was extraordinari
298.
by bpt3 9mo ago
> People want reasonable services from their government Yes, though the definition of "reasonable" is a real sticking point > and tighter regulation of markets This is less clear to me, but I would agree people want less fra
299.
by bpt3 9mo ago
Does ice cream need to be affordable to 100% of US households, regardless of their other budgeting decisions? That's the implication of your comment.
300.
by bpt3 9mo ago
Most households are able to afford more than the essentials and do care about the cost of entertainment. There's value in the index you described as well, but IMO it doesn't make sense to use it as the basis for the overall econom

More ›